ArticleFrontline gastroenterology2018
Do non-targeted gastric biopsies affect the management of patients, and can a simple protocol and education reduce the rate?
Article in Frontline gastroenterology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validation of a Gastric-Juice-Analysis-Based Approach toDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- UEG Week 2019 Poster Presentations.United European gastroenterology journal · 2019Article
- Orthopraxy, not orthodoxy.Frontline gastroenterology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine whether development of localised protocol could reduce the number of non-targeted gastric biopsies taken at endoscopy, without risking harm from non-detection of malignant conditions.
designRetrospective analysis of patient records over a 3-month period in 2013, repeated in 2015 following intervention.
settingTwo UK teaching hospitals. PATIENTS: Patient record data on indication for endoscopy, endoscopy findings, histopathology results and patient outcome.
interventionsGuidance on upper gastrointestinal biopsy in the form of a new trust-wide protocol, as well as lecture-based education.
main outcome measuresRates of non-targeted and targeted biopsies before and after intervention, and differences between grade of endoscopist.
resultsBetween 2013 and 2015, there was a 36% reduction in non-targeted biopsies (10.4% vs 6.7%, p=0.001), predominantly within registrar and nurse endoscopist groups, with reduction in non-targeted biopsies of 9.5% and 64%, respectively. Percentage of targeted biopsies remained relatively static, 7.9% and 8.2%. In 2013, 92% of non-targeted biopsies had no management change based on histology; in 2015 this was 90%. Of patients with alteration to management, only 0.4% and 0.7% were due to malignancy, in known high-risk patients. Reduction in non-targeted biopsies resulted in estimated annual savings in this trust of £36,000.
conclusionDevelopment of local protocol reduces the numbers of non-targeted biopsies taken, without risk of harm from non-detection of malignant conditions, enabling a significant reduction in workload within busy histopathology services, with significant cost savings. Localised protocols are adaptable to local population demographics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.