ArticleJournal of gastroenterology and hepatology2026
Concordance Between Pan-Intestinal Capsule Endoscopy and Colonoscopy for the Detection and Characterization of Colonic Lesions: Post Hoc Analysis on the Impact of Colonic Transit Time.
Article in Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04782986 (Pan-intestinal Capsule Endoscopy Versus Conventional Colonoscopy in Iron Deficiency Anemia or Overt GI Bleeding), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Pan-intestinal Capsule Endoscopy Versus Conventional Colonoscopy in Iron Deficiency Anemia or Overt GI Bleeding: a Prospective Cohort Study
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPan-intestinal capsule endoscopy (PCE) is increasingly used as a minimally invasive alternative to colonoscopy in the evaluation of mid- and lower gastrointestinal bleeding (MLGIB). However, the impact of colonic transit time (CTT) on diagnostic performance remains insufficiently characterized. This study aims to assess the concordance between PCE and colonoscopy for colorectal lesions and to determine whether CTT influences diagnostic accuracy.
methodsThis post hoc analysis of a prospective single-center trial included patients with suspected MLGIB who underwent PCE followed by same-day colonoscopy. Only complete examinations were analyzed (n = 76). CTT was evaluated using predefined thresholds (≤ 60, ≤ 90, ≤ 120, and > 120 min). Diagnostic performance for vascular polypoid lesions and clinically significant polyps (≥ 6 mm; ≥ 10 mm) was calculated using colonoscopy as the reference standard.
resultsOverall agreement between PCE and colonoscopy was moderate for vascular lesions (κ = 0.56) and polypoid lesions (κ = 0.51), substantial for polyps ≥ 6 mm (κ = 0.67), and near perfect for polyps ≥ 10 mm (κ = 0.88). Longer CTT was consistently associated with improved detection of polypoid lesions. Sensitivity for polyps ≥ 6 mm increased from 33.3% (CTT ≤ 90 min) to 83.3% (CTT > 90 min), with corresponding κ values rising from 0.34 to 0.81. Detection of vascular lesions remained relatively stable across CTT subgroups. All ≥ 10-mm lesions were identified in CTT > 90 min and were detected by PCE.
conclusionIn patients with suspected MLGIB, PCE demonstrates good overall diagnostic performance, with excellent accuracy for clinically significant polyps. CTT is a critical determinant of diagnostic reliability, particularly for polypoid lesions. Rapid colonic transit (< 90 min) warrants cautious interpretation of negative PCE examinations.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04782986.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.