ArticleOral radiology2026
Safety and efficacy of a nonionic water-soluble iodinated contrast medium for videofluoroscopic swallowing studies.
Article in Oral radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study evaluated the safety and efficacy of an iodinated contrast agent for videofluoroscopic swallowing studies (VFSS) in patients with swallowing disorders, compared with barium sulfate contrast agents.
methodsThe study included 20 patients who underwent VFSS at Hiroshima University Hospital in 2025 for dysphagia evaluation. Iodixanol (Visipaque 270®; GE Healthcare Pharma Co., Ltd., Chicago, Illinois) was used as the iodinated contrast agent. For comparison, VFSS images obtained with Barytester® (FUSHIMI Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Kagawa, Japan) in the same patients served as barium sulfate controls. The frequency of adverse events associated with oral Visipaque 270® administration was assessed. VFSS images obtained with Barytester® and Visipaque 270® in the same patients were compared to evaluate imaging performance. To determine whether image evaluation outcomes were equivalent between Visipaque 270® and Barytester®, an equivalence test was performed using the two one-sided tests procedure.
resultsVisipaque 270® was associated with no adverse events, including gastrointestinal or other adverse events. Image evaluations using Visipaque 270® and Barytester® were statistically equivalent.
conclusionsVFSS was performed using the iodinated contrast agent Visipaque 270®. No adverse events related to oral Visipaque 270® administration were observed, and contrast enhancement on VFSS images was comparable to that achieved with Barytester®.
trial registrationJapan Registry of Clinical Trials, jRCTs061240040; registered 26 July, 2024.
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.