A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Retention associated with video capsule endoscopy: systematic review and meta-analysis. | LitMetric

Retention associated with video capsule endoscopy: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Gastrointest Endosc

Division of Gastroenterology, California Pacific Medical Center, San Francisco, California, USA; Division of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.

Published: June 2017

Background And Aims: Video capsule endoscopy (VCE) has become a major diagnostic tool for small-bowel evaluation. However, retention of the video capsule endoscope remains a major concern.

Methods: We performed a systematic review of VCE retention rates by using Pubmed and SCOPUS (1995-2015). We included studies that enrolled at least 10 patients, included VCE retention rates, and separated retention rates by indication. We used Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (Version 3.0) to calculate pooled prevalence rates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and assessed heterogeneity by using the Cochran Q statistic.

Results: We included 25 studies (N = 5876) for patients undergoing VCE for evaluation of potential small-bowel bleeding, 9 studies (N = 968) for patients with suspected inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), 11 studies (N = 558) for patients with established IBD, and 8 studies for patients (N = 111) undergoing VCE for evaluation of abdominal pain and/or diarrhea. We used a random effects model and found that the pooled retention rate was 2.1% for patients with suspected small-bowel bleeding (95% CI, 1.5%-2.8%). Retention rates were 3.6% (95% CI, 1.7%-8.6%) for suspected IBD, 8.2% (95% CI, 6.0%-11.0%) for established IBD, and 2.2% (95% CI, 0.9%-5.0%) for abdominal pain and/or diarrhea. Based on subgroup analysis, subsequent VCE completion rates after performance of a patency capsule or CT enterography in patients with IBD to exclude retentions due to strictures was 2.7% (95% CI, 1.1%-6.4%). Reasons for retention were provided in 60 (77%) studies. The most common reasons for retention were small-bowel strictures, although etiology was not provided in all studies.

Conclusion: VCE retention occurs in approximately 2% of patients undergoing evaluation for small-bowel bleeding and is most likely due to small-bowel strictures. Retention rates in patients with suspected or known IBD were approximately 4% and 8%, based on our meta-analysis. These rates decreased by half in those studies that used either a patency capsule or CT enterography to assess patency before performing VCE.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2016.12.024DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

retention rates
20
video capsule
12
vce retention
12
studies n =
12
small-bowel bleeding
12
patients suspected
12
retention
11
patients
9
capsule endoscopy
8
systematic review
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!