2013
DOI: 10.5812/ircmj.16617
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Measurement of colonic transit time based on radio opaque markers in patients with chronic idiopathic constipation; a cross-sectional study

Abstract: Background:Constipation is one of the most common gastrointestinal disorders particularly in industrialized countries. Incidence of constipation varies from 3.4 % to 27.2% in different societies. Increase in urban population, industrialization of communities, changes in behavioral and nutritional habits and inactivity have increased the number of patients suffering from constipation.Objectives:The aim of the study was to measure colonic transit time in patients with chronic idiopathic constipation.Patients and… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(2 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…After screening 426 records for eligibility, 24 studies representing 3786 unique patients were included in the meta-analysis. 5 , 14 - 36 The most common reasons for study exclusion were attributable to absence of main outcome reporting or Rome III FC diagnosis. A flow diagram of study identification and selection is shown in Figure 1 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…After screening 426 records for eligibility, 24 studies representing 3786 unique patients were included in the meta-analysis. 5 , 14 - 36 The most common reasons for study exclusion were attributable to absence of main outcome reporting or Rome III FC diagnosis. A flow diagram of study identification and selection is shown in Figure 1 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In 10 studies with 1119 patients, 5 , 15 , 17 - 19 , 28 - 30 , 32 , 35 pooled CTT was 58 hours (95% CI: 50-65 hours) ( Figure 2 ). Publication bias was not evident (Egger P = .51).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%