GI endoscopes.

The ASGE Technology Committee provides reviews of existing, new, or emerging endoscopic technologies that have an impact on the practice of GI endoscopy. Evidence-based methodology is used, performing a MEDLINE literature search to identify pertinent clinical studies on the topic and a MAUDE (U.S. Food and Drug Administration Center for Devices and Radiological Health) database search to identify the reported complications of a given technology. Both are supplemented by accessing the "related articles" feature of PubMed and by scrutinizing pertinent references cited by the identified studies. Controlled clinical trials are emphasized, but in many cases data from randomized, controlled trials are lacking. In such cases, large case series, preliminary clinical studies, and expert opinions are used. Technical data are gathered from traditional and Web-based publications, proprietary publications, and informal communications with pertinent vendors. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are drafted by 1 or 2 members of the ASGE Technology Committee, reviewed and edited by the Committee as a whole, and approved by the Governing Board of the ASGE. When financial guidance is indicated, the most recent coding data and list prices at the time of publication are provided. For this review, the MEDLINE database was searched through September 2010 for articles related to endoscopy by using the key words "gastroscope," "colonoscope," "echoendoscope," "duodenoscope," "choledochoscope," "ultraslim endoscope," "variable stiffness colonoscope," and "wide-angle colonoscope." Technology Status Evaluation Reports are scientific reviews provided solely for educational and informational purposes. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are not rules and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment or payment for such treatment.

In vivo microrobots for natural orifice transluminal surgery. Current status and future perspectives.

The possibility to operate inside the peritoneal cavity through small holes performed in hollow organs that is presented by Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery (NOTES) represents a major paradigm shift in general surgery. While this new approach seems very appealing from patients' perspectives because it eliminates completely abdominal wall aggression and promises to reduce postoperative pain, it is very challenging for surgeons because of the major constraints imposed by both the mode of access and the limited technology currently available. For this reason NOTES applications at the present time are performed by only a few surgeons and mainly to perform non-complex procedures. While new devices are under development, many of them are trying mainly to simply improve current endoscopic platforms and seem not to offer breakthrough solutions. The numerous challenges introduced by natural orifice approaches require a radical shift in the conception of new technologies in order to make this emerging operative access safe and reproducible. The convergence of several enabling technologies in the field of miniaturization, communication and micro-mechatronics brings the possibility to realize on a large scale the revolutionary concept of miniature in vivo co-operative robots. These robots provide vision and task assistance without the constraints of the entry incision and have been shown in experimental settings to possess many qualities that could be ideal to partner with Natural Orifice Surgery. This article explores the current status of microrobotics as well as presents potential future scenarios of their applications in NOTES.

Advances in pediatric gastroenterology: introducing video camera capsule endoscopy.

The video camera capsule endoscope is a gastrointestinal endoscope approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 2001 for use in diagnosing gastrointestinal disorders in adults. In 2003, the agency approved the device for use in children ages 10 and older, and the endoscope is currently in use at Arkansas Children's Hospital. A capsule camera, lens, battery, transmitter and antenna together record images of the small intestine as the endoscope makes its way through the bowel. The instrument is used with minimal risk to the patient while offering a high degree of accuracy in diagnosing small intestine disorders.

The economics of PillCam.

Evaluation of the economics of PillCam technology is in its infancy. Most studies of the use of the PillCam, both small bowel and esophageal, have focused only on the capsules' diagnostic characteristics. Although the results have compared favorably with other more invasive and sometimes less accurate modalities, the true cost effectiveness of PillCam is not yet fully known. The few cost-effectiveness assessments performed suggest that PillCam compares favorably with traditional diagnostic methods in Crohn's disease and in screening for complications of GERD and for esophageal varices. The data included in these models are quite limited, however. Sensitivity analyses can permit assessment of a wide range of possibilities regarding cost and diagnostic efficacy. Still, these models need to be anchored by robust and reproducible data input. Large-scale studies with long-term follow-up are needed. Capture of both direct and indirect medical costs accrued by using PillCam or other diagnostic tests in these studies will permit more robust economic analyses. As data accrue,they may give clinicians more confidence that PillCam use will realize economic savings and improve patient outcomes.

The role of video capsule endoscopy in the diagnosis of digestive diseases: a review of current possibilities.

Video capsule endoscopy represents a significant advance in the investigation of intestinal diseases. The performance of the procedure and indications are reviewed here in order to establish guidelines for its use, in accordance with current knowledge from the published literature. Capsule endoscopy is performed in patients who have fasted for 12 h, but who are allowed to drink 2 h after and to eat 4 h after ingesting the capsule. Software features highlighting suspected blood and allowing simultaneous viewing of two images reduce the time required to review the findings, as well as improving the diagnostic yield. Pacemakers and other electrical medical devices are no longer a contraindication to the procedure. Indications that have been validated include obscure digestive bleeding, intestinal lesions related to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and familial polyposis. Capsule endoscopy frequently detects intestinal lesions in patients with Crohn's disease and could become the first-choice examination in patients with suspected Crohn's disease after conventional endoscopic investigations. Other indications currently under evaluation include celiac disease, pediatric indications, and examination of other parts of the gastrointestinal tract.

[Video capsule endoscopy in a group of networked users: effective and cost saving]. / Videokapselendoskopie im Anwenderverbund: effektiv und kostensparend.

BACKGROUND: At present extensive application of video capsule endoscopy (VCE) as the most innovative diagnostic tool for small bowel diseases is limited by its high costs. The present study describes the first experience in the mobile use of VCE in a cooperation of associated gastroenterology departments in different hospitals. METHODS: The VCE device was bought by a centrally located hospital. In the case of a need for VCE elsewhere the mobile equipment was brought to the respective hospital. The examination was done on site by local physicians, who additionally were responsible for the procedure itself. The evaluation of the VCE pictures was carried out exclusively by the Ophysicians of the central hospital. RESULTS: Within 15 months VCE was performed in 40 patients (19 male, 21 female; age 61 +/- 14 years). Ten examinations were performed in the central hospital, 30 in the associated gastroenterology departments of other hospitals. Indications for VCE were obscure GI bleeding (65 %), chronic diarrhea and Crohn's disease (17.5 %) or suspected small bowel neoplasms (17.5 %). Clinically relevant pathological abnormalities were detected in 62.5 % of the patients, mainly ulcerations and erosions. Complications were non-spontaneous capsule passage in one patient. Compared to a single hospital, the multicenter use of VCE increased the frequency of investigations four times and reduced expenses to almost 30 %. CONCLUSIONS: The mobile use of VCE makes this innovative technique available for every patient while remaining in his local gastroenterology department. Additionally, this concept accelerates amortization and improves the quality of evaluation by focusing experience.

New outpatient option for GERD offers some unique advantages.

A new approach to treating GERD may offer cost advantages. While most patients suffering from gastroesophageal reflux disease get at least some relief from pharmaceutical therapy, some individuals must consider more aggressive action to achieve relief. Many of these patients opt for surgery, but now there is a new endoscopic procedure available that has had good success in alleviating symptoms. Further, some experts suggest the quick, outpatient procedure offers some unique advantages over other treatment options.

The cost of an upper gastroduodenal endoscopy: an activity-based approach.

The cost of medical procedures is often unknown, but is nevertheless crucial for setting reimbursement and health care policies. The cost of an upper gastroduodenal endoscopy was investigated in ambulatory adults in a large academic hospital in the province of Quebec, from the perspective of the hospital. An activity-based costing methodology was used to break down the procedure into a number of priory tasks, to which resources used at the department level (labour, equipment, materials) were allocated. The direct cost of performing an endoscopy ranged from $62 for an unsedated, unbiopsied patient to $89 for a sedated, biopsied patient. Not included in this amount were separate reimbursement fees of $15 for biopsy analysis and the $50 professional fee for the performing physician, which are charged directly to the Ministry of Health. Incorporating overall, general hospital fixed overhead costs raises the cost of the procedure substantially, by $41, as does the use of nonreusable biopsy forceps, which adds about $63 to the total cost of the procedure. Given the high proportion of overall, hospital-wide, overhead costs in the total cost of the procedure, allocation methods of these overhead costs in current hospital accounting systems should be improved to obtain a more precise estimate of the full cost of upper gastroduodenal endoscopy.

Reutilization of accessories in gastrointestinal endoscopic practice.

The key issues that determine the decision between reusable versus disposable accessories are cost and functionality. In most health-care systems the availability and dissemination of endoscopic services relates directly to the resources (i.e. budget) of that system. Given the limitations of health-care budgets, access to endoscopic services will depend upon the cost efficiency of endoscopic practice. The onus on endoscopists and health-care providers, therefore, is to meticulously evaluate the necessary steps for safe reutilization of accessories. This paper addresses the principles of reuse, quality assurance and particularly disinfection practices. Any change to a more costly disposable accessory policy must bear the responsibility of denied access to endoscopic services in a system with finite resources.

Advantages of reusable accessories.

Despite scant evidence supporting the use of disposable accessories, these devices have been widely disseminated. Manufacturers and governmental regulators, the most devout proponents of one-time use accessories, have framed the issue in economic terms-parsimonious practitioners reusing disposable accessories at the risk of cross-contamination, mechanical failure and product liability. This simplistic view represents revisionist history and ignores the long tradition of reusing these devices. This article reviews the numerous studies that support the safe and cost effective reuse of disposable and reusable accessories.

Third-party reprocessing of endoscopic accessories.

Third-party reprocessing of medical devices labeled for single use is a safe, FDA regulated practice that helps hospitals reduce costs without compromising patient care. Simply because a device is labeled as single use does not mean it cannot be safely reprocessed. To the contrary, the single use label is chosen by the manufacturer, sometimes for economic gain, as there are no formal FDA regulations or standards to distinguish between reusable and single use devices. The current FDA regulatory framework for third-party reprocessors, which emphasizes compliance with FDA quality assurance requirements, is presently under review, and the agency is in the process of developing a new regulatory scheme for reprocessing.

Therapeutic upper endoscopy.

Endoscopy continues to evolve now and in the future with advances in diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. Advances in therapeutic procedures consist of cheaper and more effective instrumentation, the use of novel biologicals for site-specific therapy, and the introduction of bold new approaches such as endoscopic transluminal interventions. The invention and implementation of these changes, however, is dependent on improvements in technology and the creation of an enlightened cadre of endoscopists with the knowledge and ability to be effective translational scientists.