Table 2. The different modalities’ diagnostic accuracies and yields in the diagnosis of Meckel’s diverticulum in patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding.

	n	Certain or presumptive MD	Other significant findings*	Non-diagnostic	Diagnostic accuracy (95% CI)	P	Diagnostic yield (95% CI)	p
Meckel’s scan	14	3	0	11	21.4 (5.7–51.2)	referent	21.4 (5.7–51.2)	referent
Capsule endoscopy	14	5	6¶	3	35.7 (14.0–64.4)	0.675	78.6 (48.8–94.3)	0.008
Balloon-assisted enteroscopy	20	17	2∫	1	85.0 (61.1–96.0)	0.001	95.0 (73.1–99.7)	<0.001
Mesenteric angiography	2	0	1§	1	0.0 (0.0–80.2)	0.808	50.0 (2.7–97.3)	0.999
CT of the abdomen and pelvis	22	7	6†	9	31.8 (14.7–54.9)	0.766	59.1 (36.7–78.5)	0.061
Small bowel follow-through	8	5	1‡	2	62.5 (25.9–90.0)	0.142	75.0 (35.6–95.5)	0.045
RBC scan	4	0	0	4	0.0 (0.0–60.4)	0.801	0.0 (0.0–60.4)	0.801

Abbreviation: MD, Meckel’s diverticulum; Meckel’s scan, Technetium-99m pertechnetate scintigraphy; CT, computed tomography; RBC scan, Technetium-99m red blood cell scintigraphy.

* provided grounds to pursue further evaluation, but insufficient to diagnose to MD

^†ileal wall thickening of unknown origin (n = 3), enteritis of unknown cause (n = 1), focal stricture (n = 1), obstruction (n = 1)

^‡ulcers with pseudosacculation in the proximal ileum (n = 1)

^§active bleeding from ileal branches of SMA (n = 1)

^¶blood in lumen (n = 3), ulcerative lesions on the ileum (n = 2), Dieulafoy lesion (n = 1)

^∫blood in lumen (n = 1), several ulcers in terminal ileum (n = 1)