Use of capsule endoscopy in inflammatory bowel disease in clinical practice in Spain. Results from a national survey. / Uso de la cápsula endoscópica en enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal en práctica clínica en España. Resultados de una encuesta nacional.

INTRODUCTION: Small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) is a non-invasive diagnostic technique whose use in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has spread. A panenteric capsule, PillCam Crohn's (PCC), has recently been developed. We lack information on the availability and use of the CEID and PCC in our environment. METHODS: We conducted an electronic and anonymous survey among the members of the Grupo Español de Trabajo en Enfermedad de Crohn y Colitis Ulcerosa (GETECCU) [Spanish Working Group on Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis] and the Asociación Española de Gastroenterología (AEG) [Spanish Association of Gastroenterology], consisting of 37 multiple-choice questions. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty members participated, the majority dedicated to IBD (69.3%). 72.8% worked at centres with an IBD unit. 79% had SBCE available at their hospital, 14% referred patients to another centre; 22% had a PCC available, 9% referred patients to another centre. 79.3% of respondents with available SBCE used it in a small percentage of patients with IBD and 15.6% in the majority. The most frequent scenarios were suspicion of Crohn's disease (76.3%), assessment of inflammatory activity (54.7%) and assessment of the extent of the disease (54.7%). More than half (59.7%) preferentially used the Patency capsule to assess intestinal patency. Almost all respondents (99.3%) considered that training resources should be implemented in this technique. CONCLUSIONS: SBCE is widely available in Spanish hospitals for the management of IBD, although its use is still limited. There is an opportunity to increase training in this technique, and consequently its use.

Oral ingestion versus endoscopic delivery of endoscopic capsule in patients with previous gastrointestinal surgery (ORENCES study): A Spanish multicentre observational study.

BACKGROUND: Small Bowel Capsule Endoscopy is the first-choice technique for investigating the majority of small bowel diseases. Its most common complications are related to incomplete examinations and capsule retention. There is no consensus on how patients with previous gastrointestinal surgery should receive the capsule. OBJECTIVE: The primary endpoint was to compare the rate of complete small-bowel examinations (completion rate) between oral ingestion and endoscopic delivery of the capsule. The secondary endpoint was to compare diagnostic yield and adverse events in the two groups. METHODS: A retrospective observational study was conducted in nine hospitals in Spain. Demographic data, previous surgery, indication for capsule endoscopy, intestinal transit time, diagnosis, completion rate (percentage of capsules reaching the caecum), diagnostic yield (percentage of results compatible with indication for the exam) and adverse events were collected. RESULTS: From January 2009 to May 2019 fifty-seven patients were included (39 male, mean age 66±15 years). The most common indications for the exam were "overt" (50.9%) and "occult" (35.1%) small bowel bleeding. Previous Billroth II gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass were present in 52.6% and 17.5% of patients respectively. The capsule was swallowed in 34 patients and placed endoscopically in 23 patients. No significant differences were observed between the oral ingestion and endoscopic delivery groups in terms of completion rate (82.4% vs. 78.3%; p=0.742), diagnostic yield (41.2% vs. 52.2%; p=0.432) or small bowel transit time (301 vs. 377min, p=0.118). No capsule retention occurred. Only one severe adverse event (anastomotic perforation) was observed in the endoscopic delivery group. CONCLUSIONS: In our case series, there were no significant differences between oral ingestion and endoscopic delivery in terms of completion rate, diagnostic yield or safety. Being less invasive, oral ingestion of the capsule should be the first-choice method in patients with previous gastrointestinal surgery.

Indications and diagnostic yield of small-bowel capsule endoscopy in a real-world setting.

BACKGROUND: Indications and diagnostic yield of small-bowel video capsule endoscopy (SB-VCE) are communicated in recent clinical academic guidelines. However, guidelines are based mainly on relatively few, small, selection-biased studies at experienced centers, and thus we lack information on indications and diagnostic yield of SB-VCE in the real-world community setting. The aim of the study was to evaluate indications and diagnostic yield of SB-VCE in the real-world community setting. METHODS: Our local VCE clinical database was used to identify patients undergoing SB-VCE procedures over a 7-year period (2011-2018). Patients were broadly referred and underwent SB-VCE using PillCam™ SB 2 and SB 3 capsule systems. Procedures were reviewed by local endoscopists, who had undergone similar formal SB-VCE review training. Medical reports of the procedures were composed as such. We retrospectively reviewed all reports and gathered data regarding indications and findings. Diagnostic yield was considered positive if SB-VCE visualized any type of clinically significant pathological finding. RESULTS: 536 SB-VCE procedures in 516 patients were included in final assessment. Patient mean (± SD) age was 50 ± 20 years with approximately even female/male ratio (275:241). The overall proportion of positive findings was 42% (225/536). The two main indications were obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (occult/anemia or overt/active, OGIB) of 46% (246/536) and definite/suspected Crohn's disease (CD) of 39% (210/536). Positive SB-VCE findings were obtained in 44% (108/246) of procedures with indication of OGIB and in 50% (104/210) of procedures with indication of CD. CONCLUSIONS: The indications for SB-VCE are largely consistent with guidelines but with an apparently relatively low diagnostic yield in our real-world community setting.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-induced enteropathy as a major risk factor for small bowel bleeding: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Small bowel (SB) bleeding accounts for 5% of all gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding cases and 80% of obscure GI bleeding cases. Although angioectasia is the common etiology of SB bleeding, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-induced SB lesions are also reported as a major cause in studies from Eastern countries. Herein, we assessed the frequency of occurrence of NSAID-induced SB lesions in Korean patients with obscure GI bleeding. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed medical records of all consecutive patients aged ≥18 years who underwent capsule endoscopy from March 2018 to February 2019 at Ulsan University Hospital and Kosin University Gospel Hospital. RESULTS: Of the 83 subjects (all Korean; mean age ± standard deviation: 59 ± 18 years; age range: 18-84 years; men: n = 52; women: n = 31), 55 (66.2%) had stool with clear blood and 28 (33.8%) had normal stool with iron deficiency anemia. The detection rate of SB bleeding and lesions using capsule endoscopy was 72.3% (60 of 83 patients). A significantly higher frequency (40 of 51) of ulcerative/erosive lesions than other causes was observed in patients with inactive bleeding but visible SB lesions. As a result, NSAID-induced enteropathy accounted for 30.1% of 83 patients with obscure GI bleeding (25 of the all 60 SB bleeding cases). CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to what is reported for patients in Western countries, this study in Korean patients showed an improved diagnostic yield of capsule endoscopy for obscure GI bleeding and that NSAID-induced enteropathy was the most common etiology of SB bleeding. Aggressive small intestine examination is required for patients with unexplained GI bleeding.

Improving Diagnostic Yield of Capsule Endoscopy in Coeliac Disease: Can Flexible Spectral Imaging Colour Enhancement Play a Role?

INTRODUCTION: Flexible spectral imaging colour enhancement (FICE) is a form of virtual chromoendoscopy that is incorporated in the capsule reading software and that can be used by reviewers to enhance the delineation of lesions in the small bowel. This has been shown to be useful in the detection of pigmented (ulcers, angioectasias) lesions. However, its application to coeliac disease (CD) images from small bowel capsule endoscopies (SBCEs) has rarely been studied. METHODS: This was a European, multicentre study that included 5 expert capsule reviewers who were asked to evaluate a number of normal and abnormal de-identified images from SBCEs of patients with CD to determine whether the use of FICE and blue light can improve the detection of CD-related changes. RESULTS: Sensitivity and specificity of conventional white light in the delineation of CD-related changes were 100%. The next best image modification was FICE 1 with a sensitivity of 80% and a specificity of 100%. There was no difference between conventional white light, FICE and blue light for the identification of CD-related changes. There was a low agreement (Fleiss kappa 0.107; p = 0.147) between expert reviewers in selecting the best image modification that detected CD-related changes. CONCLUSIONS: FICE and blue light were not found to be superior to conventional white light in the delineation of macroscopic changes related to CD on SBCEs.

Diagnostic Yield of Colon Capsule Endoscopy in Detection of Superficial Colorectal Lesions.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of second-generation PillCam -COLON2 capsule endoscopy (CCE2) in detecting colorectal superficial lesions remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine the diagnostic yield of CCE2 in the detection of colorectal superficial lesions. METHODS: We performed CCE2 in 60 consecutive patients between April 2011 and -December 2017. Lesions ≥6 mm in size were detected in 34 patients (25 males, average age: 60.5 years). We performed endoscopic resection and histopathological analysis of all resected lesions within 3 months after CCE2. We considered the optical colonoscopy (OC) findings as the gold standard and evaluated CCE2 sensitivity. RESULTS: Sixty-seven lesions (≥6 mm) were detected via OC, with 27 colorectal superficial lesions and 40 protruded lesions. CCE2 sensitivity for ≥6-mm-sized, superficial, and protruded lesions was 84, 78, and 88%, respectively. No significant intergroup differences were observed. CCE2 false-negative colorectal superficial lesions accounted for 31% of right-sided colon lesions and 50% of sessile serrated adenomas/polyps (SSA/Ps). The CCE2 false-negative protruded lesions accounted for 17% of right-sided colon lesions. CONCLUSION: CCE2 sensitivities for colorectal superficial and protruded lesions were not significantly different. However, flat-type SSA/Ps in the right colon, especially when the transit time is fast, have a risk of demonstrating CCE2 false-negative results.

Clinical Factors Associated with Missing Colorectal Polyp on Colon Capsule Endoscopy.

BACKGROUND: There are a number of reports that demonstrate the high diagnostic accuracy of colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) for polyp detection. However, some colorectal polyps are missed on CCE, and the clinical factors influencing those missed polyps are still unknown. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to elucidate the clinical factors related to missing colorectal polyp on CCE by using per-polyp analysis. METHODS: We performed a retrospective multi-center study of 53 consecutive patients who underwent both CCE and colonoscopy (CS) within 3 months from January 2014 to -December 2017. Of those patients, we analyzed 151 polyps detected on CCE, and 149 polyps detected on CS diagnosed as neoplasm according to histopathological result. RESULTS: The capsule excretion rate was 81%. One hundred three polyps were detected on both CS and CCE, 46 polyps (31%) were missed on CCE, and 48 polyps were considered false positive on CCE when CS result was considered as the gold standard. Per-polyp sensitivity and positive predictive value on CCE were 69.1 and 68%. On multiple logistic analysis, only the segmental transit time on CCE was identified as the independent factor influencing missed polyp on CCE. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical factor related to missing colorectal polyp on CCE was the segmental transit time.

Capsule Endoscopy after Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Can Predict Transplant-Related Mortality.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Allogenic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT) is a curative therapy for hematological malignancies, but transplant-related mortality (TRM) remains a concern. This study aimed to determine the efficacy of capsule endoscopy (CE) by evaluating the correlation between inflammatory findings on CE and TRM. METHODS: The data of patients after allo-SCT were retrospectively collected. The association between findings on CE and TRM at 100 days from the CE was evaluated. RESULTS: Of the 94 patients included in the study, 47 showed inflammatory findings on CE. The findings were diagnosed as graft-versus-host disease (GVHD; n = 17), cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection (n = 14), and GVHD with CMV infection (n = 16). Of the 47 patients, 13 (28%) had TRM. Endoscopic diagnoses of these TRM cases were GVHD (n = 4), CMV infection (n = 0), and GVHD with CMV infection (n = 9). In contrast, in the remaining 47 patients who showed no inflammatory findings on CE, 2 patients (4%) had TRM. The proportion of TRM was higher in patients with inflammatory findings than in those without it (28 vs. 4%, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: CE may predict TRM in patients who developed gastrointestinal symptoms after allo-SCT.

Colon Capsule Endoscopy versus CT Colonography in Patients with Large Non-Polypoid Tumours: A Multicentre Prospective Comparative Study (4CN Study).

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Non-polypoid colon lesions compared with polypoid lesions has a high malignant potential. The diagnostic performance of colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) and CT colonography (CTC) for large colorectal non-polypoid tumours, that is, laterally spreading tumours is still unclear. The aim of this study is to evaluate the performance of CCE and CTC for the diagnosis of large non-polypoid tumours. METHODS: Thirty patients referred for endoscopic submucosal dissection of non-polypoid tumours measuring ≥20 mm were enrolled. Patients first underwent CCE, then colonoscopy (without resection) and CTC on the same day. An experienced gastroenterologist in a third hospital evaluated the CCE and recorded the location, size and morphology of all lesions detected, blinded to the colonoscopic findings. An experienced radiologist read the CTC under the same conditions. Colonoscopic findings were defined as the reference. RESULTS: A total of 30 lesions (T1 cancer: 3, Tis cancer: 7, adenoma: 14, sessile serrated adenoma/polyp: 6) in 27 patients were observed for evaluation. The capsule excretion rate within 8 h was 85% (23/27), and all capsules went beyond the target lesions. Non-polypoid tumours tend to be depicted as polypoid on CCE. Per patient sensitivities were 0.89 (24/27) by CCE and 0.70 (19/27) by CTC (p = 0.0253, McNemar), and per lesion sensitivities were 0.87 (26/30) and 0.67 (20/30) respectively (p = 0.0143). Most lesions missed by both modalities were located in the proximal colon. CONCLUSION: Eighty-seven per cent of non-polypoid tumours were detected by CCE, and the sensitivity using CCE was higher than that obtained using CTC (UMIN0000014772).

Colon capsule endoscopy for colonic surveillance.

AIM: Resources used in surveillance colonoscopies are taking up an increasing proportion of colonoscopy capacity. Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) is a promising technique for noninvasive investigation of the colon. We aimed to investigate CCE as a possible filter in colonic surveillance with the primary outcome of reducing the number of colonoscopies. METHOD: Patients scheduled for follow-up colonoscopy were subjected to a primary CCE and only supplemental conventional endoscopy if significant pathology was detected or if the CCE examination was incomplete. Significant pathology was defined as more than two small polyps, or one polyp greater than 9 mm or any polyp in patients with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Supplemental endoscopy was carried out to the extent needed to resect the detected polyps and investigate the parts of the colon that were not sufficiently visualized by the capsule. RESULTS: A total of 180 patients were included. Seventy-seven patients (43%) had a complete CCE with no significant findings. A complete colonoscopy was carried out in 67 patients (37%) and 36 patients (20%) underwent a sigmoidoscopy. In the 103 patients undergoing endoscopy, 59 (57%) had no adenomas detected, 33 (32%) had 'low-risk' adenomas and 11 (11%) had 'high-risk' adenomas. CONCLUSION: The introduction of CCE as filter test in colonic surveillance reduced colonoscopies by 43%, but this implies that untreated polyps are left behind and is not cost-effective. The CCE completion rate must be improved.

Small bowel transit time of capsule endoscopy as a factor for the detection of lesions in potential small bowel bleeding.

BACKGROUND: the relationship between small bowel transit time (SBTT) of the capsule endoscopy (CE) and the diagnosis of small bowel bleeding (SBB) is controversial. OBJECTIVE: to evaluate the relationship between SBTT and CE and the identification of SBB. MATERIAL AND METHODS: CE was divided according to SBTT into < 4 hours and ≥ 4 hours. RESULTS: CE with SBTT ≥ 4 hours identified more angioectasias (p = 0.023), single lesions (p = 0.029) and jejunal lesions (p = 0.001) with an OR of 3.13 (95% CI, 1.61-6.10, p = 0.001) to identify the cause of SBB. CONCLUSIONS: CE SBTT of ≥ 4 hours increases the diagnosis of SBB.

Nonisolated Small Bowel Gastrointestinal Angiodysplasias are Associated With Higher Rebleeding Rates When Compared With Isolated Small Bowel Gastrointestinal Angiodysplasia on Video Capsule Endoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal angiodysplasias (GIAD) are commonly diagnosed in the small bowel but can be located in other areas of the gastrointestinal tract. About half of patients diagnosed with GIAD have more than 1 lesion and 20% of patients have GIAD in both the small bowel and a source outside of the small bowel (nonisolated to small bowel GIAD or NISGIAD). The remaining patients with GIAD have lesions isolated to the small bowel (ISGIAD). Complications including rebleeding, hospitalization and mortality rates have not been previously analyzed between these 2 groups. AIM: To compare rebleeding, hospitalization and mortality rates between ISGIAD and NISGIAD. The secondary goals were to evaluate comorbidities that may be associated with ISGIAD and/or NISGIAD, and to determine if any of these comorbidities are associated with a higher risk of rebleeding from GIAD. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective study that included 425 patients who underwent video capsule endoscopy between 2006 and 2013. Patients underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy and colonoscopy before video capsule endoscopy. The primary indications for workup included obscure gastrointestinal bleeding. After exclusion criteria, 87 patients diagnosed with GIAD remained, 57 patients with ISGIAD and 30 with NISGIAD. Categorical variables were compared by the Fisher exact test or χ test and continuous data were compared using the Student T test. RESULTS: Risk factors associated with rebleeding rates included coronary artery disease, chronic kidney disease, and congestive heart failure on multivariate analysis. Odds ratios for rebleeding was found in patients with NISGIAD (odds ratio, 4.222; P=0.036). There was no difference in hospitalization rates between patients with ISGIAD and NISGIAD. There was no statistically significant difference in mortality from any cause at 30, 60, and 90 days in patients with ISGIAD and NISGIAD. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective analysis of GIAD at a single institution, patients with NISGIAD compared with ISGIAD had a 4 times odds of rebleeding within 1 year after capsule endoscopy. This is a novel study, as the distribution of GIAD has not been previously described as being a risk factor for rebleeding.

Lower Endoscopic Diagnostic Yields Observed in Non-hematemesis Gastrointestinal Bleeding Patients.

BACKGROUND: Location of bleeding can present a diagnostic challenge in patients without hematemesis more so than those with hematemesis. AIM: To describe endoscopic diagnostic yields in both hematemesis and non-hematemesis gastrointestinal bleeding patient populations. METHODS: A retrospective analysis on a cohort of 343 consecutively identified gastrointestinal bleeding patients admitted to a tertiary care center emergency department with hematemesis and non-hematemesis over a 12-month period. Data obtained included presenting symptoms, diagnostic lesions, procedure types with diagnostic yields, and hours to diagnosis. RESULTS: The hematemesis group (n = 105) took on average 15.6 h to reach a diagnosis versus 30.0 h in the non-hematemesis group (n = 231), (p = 0.005). In the non-hematemesis group, the first procedure was diagnostic only 53% of the time versus 71% in the hematemesis group (p = 0.02). 25% of patients in the non-hematemesis group required multiple procedures versus 10% in the hematemesis group (p = 0.004). Diagnostic yield for a primary esophagogastroduodenoscopy was 71% for the hematemesis group versus 50% for the non-hematemesis group (p = 0.01). Primary colonoscopies were diagnostic in 54% of patients and 12.5% as a secondary procedure in the non-hematemesis group. A primary video capsule endoscopy yielded a diagnosis in 79% of non-hematemesis patients (n = 14) and had a 70% overall diagnostic rate (n = 33). CONCLUSION: Non-hematemesis gastrointestinal bleeding patients undergo multiple non-diagnostic tests and have longer times to diagnosis and then compared those with hematemesis. The high yield of video capsule endoscopy in the non-hematemesis group suggests a role for this device in this context and warrants further investigation.

[Description of capsule endoscopy use in a pediatric public hospital]. / Descripción del uso de cápsula endoscópica en un hospital público pediátrico.

INTRODUCTION: Capsule endoscopy (CE) is a non-invasive technique that allows visualization of small intestine mucosa. It is used for diagnosis of lesions not accessible with other tests. Our goal was to describe the experience using CE in a pediatric public hospital in Chile. PATIENTS AND METHOD: A retrospective study was carried out to review the cases in which CE was used at Dr. Luis Calvo Mac- kenna Hospital from 2010 to date. Demographic and clinical data, findings, complications, diagnosis and treatment were recorded. RESULTS: Twenty procedures were performed in 16 patients, 11 men (69%), median age 12 years (range 3 to 15 years). Indications included polyposis study (60%), sus pected Crohn disease (20%), obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (15%) and undiagnosed anemia (5%). Seventeen studies were altered (85%) and 11 led to a diagnosis or clinical behavior change (55%). There were no complications. CONCLUSIONS: CE is a useful and safe technique in children, feasible to perform in a pediatric public hospital.

Feasibility of a colon capsule overnight procedure followed by colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Due to limited acceptance of colonoscopy as diagnostic and screening test alternatives are warranted. Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) has been shown to be a possible filter test, but because of logistical issues a second bowel preparation is usually required, if consecutive colonoscopy is needed. We therefore evaluated the feasibility of a single bowel preparation for both overnight CCE and (therapeutical) colonoscopy thereafter. METHODS: Patients from two university hospitals referred to undergo colonoscopy were prospectively included in a dual centre feasibility study. A polyethylene glycol (PEG) based bowel preparation-schedule with ingestion of a colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) at 10pm and subsequent colonoscopy at about 12am on the next day was investigated. The first generation PillCam colon capsule was used with 4 different preparation protocols containing several prokinetics in different compositions (i. e. metoclopramide, erythromycin, sennosoides). The main endpoint was the proportion of patients who completed both CCE and colonoscopy; secondary endpoints were capsule transit times, amount of colon seen on CCE, bowel cleanliness, sensitivity and specifity of CCE and patients' acceptance. RESULTS: 50 patients between 18 and 75 years were included. The sequence of overnight colon capsule endoscopy and colonoscopy was successfully completed in all but one (one refused colonoscopy). The capsule was excreted during recording time in 86 % of examinations, visualization of the complete colon was possible in 60 %, but adequate colon preparation was achieved in only 45 % irrespective of the regimen used. The preparation regimen consisting of a PEG-solution, erythromycin as prokinetic drug followed by PEG-solution as boost showed the largest proportion of adequate preparations. Overall sensitivity and specificity of CCE for polyps of any size were 65 % and 76 %, respectively. 26 of 30 patients (86.7 %) returned the subjective assessment questionnaire. 23 patients (88 %) reported mild to no discomfort or embarrassment during CCE, whereas 15 patients (58 %) did during the preparation procedure. Drinking the purgative solution was the most inconvenient step in 84 % of cases, drinking the boosts during CCE the second inconvenient step (60 %). CONCLUSION: Overnight CCE-procedure followed by direct capsule-reading is feasible and safe and might avoid repetitive bowel preparation for subsequent colonoscopy. The bowel preparation needs to be improved.

Video capsule endoscopy as the initial examination for overt obscure gastrointestinal bleeding can efficiently identify patients who require double-balloon enteroscopy.

BACKGROUND: Both double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE) and video capsule endoscopy (VCE) have similar diagnostic yields for patients with overt obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB). However, the choice of initial modality is still controversial. The aim of this study was to show the clinical outcome of the strategy of initial VCE, followed by DBE. METHODS: Eighty-nine consecutive overt OGIB patients who had undergone VCE as the initial examination were analyzed. The interpreters of VCE evaluated the necessity of performing DBE, and the antegrade or retrograde route was chosen, depending on the transit time of the capsule. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients (42 %) underwent DBE depending on the findings of VCE. Of these, bleeding sites in the small bowel were identified in 29 patients with the initially selected route (21 antegrade and 8 retrograde). The remaining 8 later underwent DBE by the other route, but 7 had no bleeding lesion, which was confirmed by second-look VCE. One remaining patient had a jejunal varix found by VCE, but DBE from either side could not reach the lesion. The sensitivity and negative predictive value of VCE were 100 %, both for the presence of small bowel lesions and the requirement of hemostasis in the small bowel; this indicated that VCE never misses relevant findings in the small bowel, and that negative VCE findings correspond to the lack of necessity for further examination. CONCLUSIONS: VCE as the initial examination can efficiently identify overt OGIB patients who require DBE. The strategy of initial VCE for overt OGIB appears to be reasonable.

Is small-bowel capsule endoscopy effective for diagnosis of esophagogastric lesions related to portal hypertension?

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Effectiveness of capsule endoscopy (CE) for screening the small bowel in patients with portal hypertension (PHT) has been reported. However, few reports discuss CE detection of specific esophagogastric lesions related to PHT. Thus, we assessed whether CE is useful for detecting such lesions. METHODS: One hundred nineteen consecutive patients with PHT comprised the study group. All had undergone esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) prior to CE. The diagnostic yield of CE for esophageal varices (EVs), gastric varices (GVs), and portal hypertensive gastropathy (PHG) was evaluated. In addition, diagnostic yield in relation to form, location of the varices, grade, and extent of PHG was evaluated. RESULTS: EVs were found by EGD in 71 patients. The overall diagnostic yield of CE for EVs was 72% (51/71). The diagnostic yield was significantly greater for F2/F3 EVs than for F1 EVs (87% vs 61%, P = 0.03). The diagnostic yield was significantly greater for Lm/Ls EVs than for Li EVs (85% vs 55%, P = 0.01). The diagnostic yield was significantly greater for locus superior/locus medialis EVs than for locus inferior EVs (85% vs 55%, P = 0.01). GVs were found by EGD in 29 patients. Only one case was detected by CE. PHG was found by EGD in 35 patients. The diagnostic yield of CE for PHG was 69% (24/35). There was no difference in diagnostic yield between cases of severe and mild PHG (82% vs 63%, P = 0.44). Diagnostic yield of CE for PHG in the gastric body was significantly greater than that in the fundus (100% vs 48%, P = 0.0009). CONCLUSION: CE is reliable for diagnosis of F2/F3 and/or Lm/Ls EVs and of PHG in the gastric body.

[Capsule endoscopy in a supra-regional network corporation: experience in more than 1000 cases]. / Moderne medizinische Versorgungsstrukturen am Beispiel der Videokapselendoskopie: Erfahrungen aus über 1000 Untersuchungen in einem überregionalen Netzwerk.

INTRODUCTION: Capsule endoscopy (CE) is firmly established as a standard procedure in the diagnostic algorithm of mid gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. Despite its excellent diagnostic yield, missing expertise, reading time and financial expenditure limit an area-wide availability. A multicentric cooperation might compensate these disadvantages. METHODS: The CE device was bought by a centrally located hospital (CH). CE-equipment is transported to the network partner (NP) on request and the procedure performed at the spot. Video reading is exclusively done in the CH. RESULTS: Between January 2002 and July 2013, 1026 CE (548 m, 478f; 64 ±â€Š16, 13 - 93 yrs.) were performed within the network. 744/1026 (73 %) CE were done at 17 NP, 282/1026 (27 %) in the CH. Between 2002 (n = 39) and 2012 (n = 136) the annual number of CE increased threefold. Leading indication for CE was suspected mid GI-bleeding (80 %). Mean latencies between requested date and actual examination were less than 24 h and 2 days between CE performance and report. 95 % of the capital investment in each cooperating hospital could be avoided by sharing one workstation within the network. CONCLUSION: The experience from more than 1000 CE show that long-term multicentric utilization of CE equipment is feasible. Such a network runs at stable procedural quality levels similar to an in-house supply, allows an economic as well as area-wide availability of CE and improves reading expertise by centralized video evaluation.

Effects of colon capsule endoscopy on medical decision making in patients with incomplete colonoscopies.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) is an orally ingested colon imaging tool used to evaluate patients with colonic disease. We evaluated the efficacy of CCE in helping physicians make decisions about patients with incomplete conventional colonoscopies (ICCs). METHODS: In a prospective study, we analyzed data from 34 patients with nonocclusive ICC who were eligible for CCE between May 2010 and April 2011; patients with colectomy, occlusive lesions, or inadequate bowel cleansing for the colonoscopy were excluded. Two experienced observers who were blinded to colonoscopy findings analyzed the CCE data. Four months later, medical records were reviewed to determine the effects of CCE on medical decision making. CCE was considered conclusive when the findings facilitated a medical decision. RESULTS: Bowel cleanliness was good or excellent for 22 patients (64.7%). CCE exceeded the most proximal point reached by conventional colonoscopy in 29 patients (85.3%). CCE findings allowed formulation of a specific medical plan for 20 patients (58.8%); 12 (35.2%) had irrelevant or no lesions, so the study was concluded; 7 (20.5%) underwent polypectomy or surgery for advanced colorectal neoplasia; and 1 (3%) was treated for Crohn's disease. Inconclusive CCEs resulted from poor preparation of the bowel (n = 12) and excessively slow (n = 1) or rapid (n = 1) capsule transit. CONCLUSIONS: CCE might be an alternative procedure to complete colon examination in patients with nonocclusive ICC.

Frequency of rebleeding events in obscure gastrointestinal bleeding with negative capsule endoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Although capsule endoscopy (CE) is widely used as a first-line diagnostic modality for obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB), the rebleeding rate after negative CE varies according to different studies. We tried to elucidate the outcomes after negative CE for OGIB and to determine the risk factors associated with rebleeding. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed data from 125 patients who had received CE for OGIB. RESULTS: PillCam SB capsules were used for 92 patients (73.6%) and SB2 capsules for the other 33 (26.4%). The complete visualization of the small bowel was achieved in 93 patients (74.4%). Of the 63 patients (50.4%) who showed negative CE results, 60 patients did not receive any further specific treatment for OGIB, and were analyzed for the rebleeding rate and risk factors for rebleeding. Of the 60 patients, rebleeding episodes were observed in 16 patients (26.7%), and the cumulative rebleeding rates after 6, 12, 24, and 36 months were 12.4%, 14.3%, 28.7%, and 35.9%, respectively. Substantial rebleeding events were observed with similar frequency both after negative CE without subsequent treatment (26.7%) and after positive CE without specific treatment (21.2%) (P = 0.496). CONCLUSIONS: Considerable rebleeding episodes were observed after negative CE result for OGIB. Further complementary diagnostic work-ups and close follow-up are needed to be considered for patients with OGIB and negative CE results.