Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros








Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Rev Esp Enferm Dig ; 115(3): 110-114, 2023 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35656921

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: retention is the most common adverse event of the small bowel capsule endoscopy procedure. Patency capsule (Medtronic, Dublin, Ireland) and magnetic resonance enterography are two diagnostic methods that can prevent small bowel capsule endoscopy retention. The aim of this study was to evaluate the predictive value of these two diagnostic methods. MATERIAL AND METHODS: a prospective, comparative and observational study was performed in patients with established Crohn's disease. All patients had undergone magnetic resonance enterography and patency capsule procedures. If the patency capsule was not retained, the patient underwent a small bowel capsule endoscopy; otherwise, double balloon enteroscopy was performed to locate the stenosis. Magnetic resonance enterography predictive criteria for retention were analyzed in all cases. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of the patency capsule and magnetic resonance enterography compared to small bowel capsule endoscopy or double balloon enteroscopy were calculated. RESULTS: forty patients were included (24 female, 55 ± 13 years old). Retention criteria with capsule endoscopy or double balloon enteroscopy were found in six patients, agreeing in five cases with patency capsule and in three cases with magnetic resonance enterography. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and Kappa coefficient for predicting retention with the patency capsule were 83 %, 100 %, 100 % and 97 %, respectively, and 50 %, 91 %, 50 % and 91 %, respectively, with magnetic resonance enterography. CONCLUSIONS: patency capsule has a higher sensitivity and positive predictive value than magnetic resonance enterography for preventing small bowel capsule endoscopy retention in Crohn's disease patients.


Assuntos
Endoscopia por Cápsula , Doença de Crohn , Humanos , Feminino , Adulto , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Doença de Crohn/diagnóstico , Endoscopia por Cápsula/métodos , Estudos Prospectivos , Intestino Delgado/diagnóstico por imagem , Intestino Delgado/patologia , Espectroscopia de Ressonância Magnética
2.
GE Port J Gastroenterol ; 29(2): 106-110, 2022 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35497672

RESUMO

Introduction: The diagnostic yield (DY) of small-bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) varies considerably according to its indication. Some strategies have been used to increase DY with varying results. The intention of this study was to identify whether evaluation of the SBCE recordings by a second reviewer can increase DY and change patient management. Methods: One hundred SBCEs with different indications, already read by an endoscopist were read by a second blinded endoscopist. When the results of the 2 readings were different, the images were discussed by the endoscopists; if no consensus was reached, they took the opinion of a third endoscopist into account. All the participating endoscopists had experience in reading SBCEs (i.e., >50 per year). The SBCE findings were divided into positive (vascular lesions, ulcers, and tumors), equivocal (erosions or red spots), and negative. The interobserver agreement and the increase in DY were assessed as well as the percentage of false-negatives (FNs) in the first evaluation. Results: The indications for SBCE were small-bowel bleeding (SBB) in 48 cases, Crohn's disease (CD) in 30, and other causes (iron-deficiency anemia, small-bowel tumors, and diarrhea) in 22. There was substantial interobserver agreement between evaluations (κ = 0.79). The findings in the first evaluation were positive in 60%, equivocal in 20% and, negative in 20%. In the second evaluation, 66% were positive, 18% were equivocal, and 16% were negative. The increase in DY with the second reading was 6% (p = 0.380), i.e., 6.3% for SBB, 4.4% for CD and 9.2% for other indications, resulting in a change in management of 4% of the patients. FNs in the first SBCE reading were found in 4% of the SBCEs. Discussion: A second evaluation of the SBCE recordings identified significant pathology that the first evaluation had missed, resulting in a nonsignificant 6% increase in DY and a change in the management of 4% of the patients.


Introdução: O rendimento diagnóstico (DY) da enteroscopia por cápsula (SBCE) varia consideravelmente de acordo com as suas indicações. Foram estudadas algumas estratégias para melhorar o DY, com resultados variados. O objetivo deste estudo é avaliar se uma segunda leitura de registos de enteroscopia por cápsula por um segundo endoscopista pode melhorar o DY e alterar o manejo dos doentes. Métodos: 100 SBCE realizadas por indicações variadas, previamente avaliadas por um endoscopista, foram reavaliadas por um segundo endoscopista cego para a primeira leitura. Na presença de resultados discordantes nas 2 leituras, as imagens foram discutidas pelos 2 endoscopistas, e por um terceiro na ausência de consenso entre os 2 primeiros. Todos os endoscopistas são experientes na leitura de SBCE (>50 SBCE/ano). Os achados foram categorizados em positivos (lesões vasculares, úlceras e tumores), equívocos (erosões e pontos vermelhos) e negativos. Foi avaliada a concordância inter-observador e o aumento do DY, bem como a percentagem de falsos negativos da primeira avaliação. Resultados: As indicações para SBCE foram hemorragia do intestino delgado (SBB) em 48 casos, doença de Crohn (CD) em 30 e outras causas (anemia por défice de ferro, pesquisa de tumores do intestino delgado e diarreia) em 22. A concordância inter-observador foi substancial (k = 0.79). Os achados da primeira avaliação foram positivos em 60%, equívocos em 20% e negativos em 20%, enquanto na segunda avaliação foram positivos em 66%, equívocos em 18% e negativos em 16%. O aumento de DY foi de 6% com a segunda leitura (p = 0.38), sendo 6.3% para SBB, 4.4% para CD e 9.2% para outras indicações, resultando numa alteração no manejo de 4% dos doentes. Foram identificados falsos negativos na primeira avaliação em 4% das SBCE. Conclusão: A segunda avaliação dos registos de SBCE identificou patologia significativa previamente não identificada, resultando num aumento não significativo de 6% do DY e numa alteração no manejo de 4% dos doentes.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA