A130 VIDEOCAPSULE ENDOSCOPY VERSUS DOUBLE-BALLOON ENTEROSCOPY: WHICH ONE WINS?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Videocapsule endoscopy (VCE) and double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE) are two endoscopic exams that permit the investigation of the small intestinal mucosa. There exists few studies that compare the diagnostic performance and results between these two diagnostic modalities. Aims To compare the diagnostic performance between VCE and DBE. Methods Retrospective study between 2016 and 2019. All patients at a tertiary care centre undergoing both VCE and DBE were recruited. Clinical and endoscopic information was compiled from patients’ medical charts as well as the indications and results of the two endoscopic exams. The patients with an incomplete endoscopy report or who were unable to complete both VCE and DBE were excluded. The results of both VCE and DBE were compared using univariate analysis. Results In total, 126 patients underwent VCE. Of those patients, 15 further underwent DBE (average age: 69±17, 53% female). In total, 11 patients underwent upper DBE, 3 patients underwent lower DBE, and one patient underwent both upper and lower DBE. The indications for endoscopy were: gastrointestinal bleeding (47%), iron deficient anemia (40%), and other (13%). The VCE findings were: angiodysplasia (35%), inflammation (35%), polyp/neoplasia (20%), and other (10%). The DBE findings were: angiodysplasia (41%), normal (35%), polyp/neoplasia (12%), stenosis (6%) and other (6%). In 53% of cases there was at least one finding concordant between VCE and DBE. In only 20% of cases, DBE found a new lesion that was not seen by VCE. In comparison, 33% of DBE exams were normal despite a positive findings by VCE. The discordance between exams was possibly due to the delay between both exams (average 125 days). Conclusions In over half of cases, there is at least one lesion consistent between both endoscopic modalities. DBE finds a new lesion that was not seen by VCE in only 20% of cases. Therefore, VCE should be the first choice in the investigation of the small intestine mucosa even though both exams seem to be complementary. Funding Agencies None
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.025 | 0.046 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".