Predicting inpatient mortality in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: A machine learning approach.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Data are lacking on predicting inpatient mortality (IM) in patients admitted for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). IM is a critical outcome; however, difficulty in its prediction exists due to infrequent occurrence. We assessed IM predictors and developed a predictive model for IM using machine-learning (ML). METHODS: Using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database (2005-2017), we extracted adults admitted for IBD. After ML-guided predictor selection, we trained and internally validated multiple algorithms, targeting minimum sensitivity and positive likelihood ratio (+LR) ≥ 80% and ≥ 3, respectively. Diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) compared algorithm performance. The best performing algorithm was additionally trained and validated for an IBD-related surgery sub-cohort. External validation was done using NIS 2018. RESULTS: In 398 426 adult IBD admissions, IM was 0.32% overall, and 0.87% among the surgical cohort (n = 40 784). Increasing age, ulcerative colitis, IBD-related surgery, pneumonia, chronic lung disease, acute kidney injury, malnutrition, frailty, heart failure, blood transfusion, sepsis/septic shock and thromboembolism were associated with increased IM. The QLattice algorithm, provided the highest performance model (+LR: 3.2, 95% CI 3.0-3.3; area-under-curve [AUC]:0.87, 85% sensitivity, 73% specificity), distinguishing IM patients by 15.6-fold when comparing high to low-risk patients. The surgical cohort model (+LR: 8.5, AUC: 0.94, 85% sensitivity, 90% specificity), distinguished IM patients by 49-fold. Both models performed excellently in external validation. An online calculator (https://clinicalc.ai/im-ibd/) was developed allowing bedside model predictions. CONCLUSIONS: An online prediction-model calculator captured > 80% IM cases during IBD-related admissions, with high discriminatory effectiveness. This allows for risk stratification and provides a basis for assessing interventions to reduce mortality in high-risk patients.

US Nationwide Insight Into All-cause 30-day Readmissions following Inpatient Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is associated with a high risk for morbidity, mortality, and hospital readmission. Data regarding those risks in the United States is scarce. We assessed post-ERCP 30-day readmission rates, their etiologies, and impact on the health care system using national data. METHODS: Using the National Readmission Database 2016, we identified patients who underwent inpatient ERCP from January 2016 to December 2016 using ICD-10-CM procedure codes. The primary endpoint was all-cause 30-day readmission rate. Etiologies of readmission were identified by tallying primary diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression with complex survey design was used to identify independent risk factors associated with readmission. RESULTS: A total of 130,145 patients underwent ERCP, 16,278 (12.5%) were readmitted within 30 days, with an associated cost of 268 million dollars. Nearly 40% of readmissions occurred within 7 days, and 47.9% were related to gastrointestinal etiologies. Male gender, increased comorbidities, cirrhosis, Medicare insurance, and pancreatitis or pancreatitis-related indications for ERCP were readmission risk factors. Performance of cholecystectomy on index hospitalization decreased odds of readmission by 50% (adjusted odds ratio: 0.48, 95% confidence interval: 0.45-0.52, P <0.0001). While academic and nonacademic centers had similar readmission rates, high ERCP volume centers had higher rates compared with low-volume centers (adjusted odds ratio:1.10, P =0.008). CONCLUSION: All-cause 30-day readmission rates after inpatient ERCPs are high, mostly occur shortly postdischarge, and impose a heavy health care system burden. Large, multicenter prospective studies assessing the impact of center procedure volume on complications and readmission rates are needed.

Improved Mortality But Increased Economic Burden of Disease in Compensated and Decompensated Cirrhosis: A US National Perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Cirrhosis remains a major burden on the health care system despite substantial advances in therapy and care. Studies simultaneously examining mortality, readmission, and cost of care are not available. Here, we hypothesized that improved patient care in the last decade might have led to improved outcomes and reduced costs in patients with cirrhosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified compensated cirrhosis (CC) and decompensated cirrhosis (DC) patients using carefully chosen ICD-9/ICD-10 codes from the Nationwide Readmission Database (NRD) (years 2010 to 2016). We evaluated trends of 30-day all-cause mortality, 30-day readmission, and inflation-adjusted index hospitalization and readmission costs. Factors associated with mortality and readmission were identified using regression analyses. RESULTS: A total of 3,374,038 patients with cirrhosis were identified, of whom nearly 50% had a decompensating event on initial admission. The 30-day inpatient mortality rate for both CC and DC patients decreased from 2010 to 2016. The 30-day readmission rate remained stable for DC and declined for CC. Over the study period, 30-day readmission costs increased for DC and remained unchanged for CC. The median cost for index hospitalization remained nearly unchanged, but the cost of readmission increased for both CC and DC groups. Gastrointestinal diseases and infections were the leading cause of readmission in CC and DC patient groups. CONCLUSION: Inpatient mortality has decreased for CC and DC patients. Readmission has declined for CC patients and remained stable for DC patients. However, the economic burden of cirrhosis is rising.

The impact of red blood cell transfusion practices on inpatient mortality in variceal and non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding patients: a 20-year US nationwide retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies in upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding have reported inconsistent outcomes about packed red blood cell (PRBC) transfusion practices. AIM: To assess whether PRBC transfusion is more likely to be dangerous in variceal bleeding than in non-variceal bleeding due to concern of over-transfusion leading to elevated portal pressure. METHODS: We used the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (1999-2018). We identified patients with upper GI bleeding using an algorithmic approach, categorising bleeding from non-variceal or variceal sources. Our primary outcome was all-cause inpatient mortality. To control for the severity of bleeding, we performed propensity matching of baseline features, including age, gender, the presence of shock, the need for ICU care and co-morbidities. We also examined PRBC transfusion, inpatient mortality and hospitalisation rates for both populations. RESULTS: We included 10,228,524 upper GI bleeding discharges; 755,135 patients had variceal bleeding. After propensity matching, PRBC transfusion in variceal bleeders was associated with a 22% increase in inpatient mortality, whereas non-variceal bleeders had a 9% increase in inpatient mortality. Compared to non-variceal bleeders receiving blood transfusion, variceal bleeders had nearly four-fold higher odds of inpatient mortality (propensity-matched OR: 3.8; 95% CI: 3.7-3.8; p < 0.001). Notably, PRBC transfusion rates in both groups have declined since 2011, although it has remained higher in variceal bleeders. Mortality for upper GI bleeding has been declining since 1999. CONCLUSIONS: Although decreased over the last decade, PRBC transfusion rates remain high for variceal bleeders. In addition, PRBC transfusion appears to be more detrimental in variceal bleeders than in non-variceal bleeders.

Efficacy of Combining Aggressive Hydration With Rectal Indomethacin in Preventing Post-ERCP Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

Postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP) is the most common complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (ERCP). No randomized controlled trial (RCT) has compared the efficacy of the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy recommended interventions for PEP prevention. We assessed the effectiveness of these interventions using network meta-analysis. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched to identify RCTs investigating guideline-recommended interventions and their combinations [rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs): indomethacin or diclofenac, pancreatic stent (PS), aggressive hydration (AH), sublingual nitrate) for PEP prevention. We performed direct and Bayesian network meta-analysis, and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve to rank interventions. Subgroup network meta-analysis for high-risk populations was also performed. We identified a total of 38 RCTs with 10 different interventions. Each intervention was protective against PEP on direct and network meta-analysis compared with controls. Except AH+diclofenac and NSAIDs+ sublingual nitrate, AH+indomethacin was associated with a significant reduction in risk of PEP compared with PS [odds ratio (OR), 0.09; credible interval (CrI), 0.003-0.71], indomethcin+PS (OR, 0.09; CrI, 0.003-0.85), diclofenac (OR, 0.09; CrI, 0.003-0.65), AH (OR, 0.09; CrI, 0.003-0.65), sublingual nitrate (OR, 0.07; CrI, 0.002-0.63), and indomethacin (OR, 0.06; CrI, 0.002-0.43). AH with either rectal NSAIDs or sublingual nitrate had similar efficacy. AH+indomethacin was the best intervention for preventing PEP with 95.3% probability of being ranked first. For high-risk patients, although the efficacy of PS and indomethacin were comparable, PS had an 80.8% probability of being ranked first. AH+indomethacin seems the best intervention for preventing PEP. For high-risk patients, PS seems the most effective strategy. The potential of combination of interventions need to be explored further.

Impact of Chronic Kidney Disease on Revascularization and Outcomes in Patients with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction.

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is associated with worse outcomes. We assessed the impact of CKD on guideline directed coronary revascularization and outcomes among STEMI patients. The Nationwide Inpatient Sample dataset from 2012-2014 was used to identify patients with STEMI using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes. Patients were categorized as non-CKD, CKD without dialysis, and CKD with dialysis (CKD-HD). Outcomes were revascularization, death and acute renal failure requiring dialysis (ARFD). A total of 534,845 were included (88.9% non-CKD; 9.6% CKD without dialysis, and 1.5% CKD-HD). PCI was performed in 77.4% non-CKD, 56.2% CKD without dialysis, and 48% CKD-HD patients (p < 0.0001). In-hospital mortality and ARFD were significantly higher in CKD patients (16.5% and 40.6%) compared with non-CKD patients (7.12% and 7.17%) (p < 0.0001). In-hospital mortality was significantly lower in patients treated revascularization compared with patients treated medically (non-CKD: adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.280, p < 0.0001; CKD without dialysis: aOR 0.39, p < 0.0001; CKD-HD: aOR 0.48, p < 0.0001). CKD was associated with higher length of hospital stay and cost (5.86 ± 13.97, 7.57 ± 26.06 and 3.99 ± 11.09 days; p < 0.0001; $25,696 ± $63,024, $35,666 ± $104,940 and $23,264 ± $49,712; p < 0.0001 in non-CKD, CKD without dialysis and CKD-HD patients respectively). In conclusion, CKD patients with STEMI receive significantly less PCI compared with patients without CKD. Coronary revascularization for STEMI in CKD patients was associated with lower mortality compared to medical management. The presence of CKD in patients with STEMI is associated with higher mortality and ARFD, prolonged hospital stay and higher hospital cost.

Correction to: Navigating Through Right Career Choice After Gastroenterology and Hepatology Fellowship.

[This corrects the article on p. e00484 in vol. 7, PMID: 33365350.].

Major gastrointestinal bleeding risk with direct oral anticoagulants: Does type and dose matter? - A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

The relative risk of major gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) among different direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) is debatable. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DOACs with each other are lacking. We performed network meta-analysis to assess whether the risk of major GIB differs based on type and dose of DOAC. Literature search of PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases from inception to August 2019, limited to English publications, was conducted to identify RCTs comparing DOACs with warfarin or enoxaparin for any indication. Primary outcome of interest was major GIB risk. We used frequentist network meta-analysis through the random-effects model to compare DOACs with each other and DOACs by dose to isolate the impact on major GIB. Twenty-eight RCTs, including 139 587 patients receiving six anticoagulants, were selected. The risk of major GIB for DOACs was equal to warfarin. Comparison of DOACs with each other did not show risk differences. After accounting for dose, rivaroxaban 20 mg, dabigatran 300 mg and edoxaban 60 mg daily had 47, 40 and 22% higher rates of major GIB versus warfarin, respectively. Apixaban 5 mg twice daily had lower major GIB compared to dabigatran 300 mg (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.44-0.88) and rivaroxaban 20 mg (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.43-0.83) daily. Heterogeneity was low, and the model was consistent without publication bias (Egger's test: P = 0.079). All RCTs were high-quality with low risk of bias. DOACs at standard dose, except apixaban, had a higher risk of major GIB compared to warfarin. Apixaban had a lower rate of major GIB compared to dabigatran and rivaroxaban.

Gastroduodenal Fistula: A Rare Finding With an Atypical Presentation.

Gastroduodenal fistula (GDF) or double pylorus is a rare, often asymptomatic condition with a prevalence of approximately 0.02-0.08%. The reported cases have been mainly in Asian countries and more prevalent in males than females. Although the etiology is unclear, Helicobacter pylori and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use have been associated with the formation of GDF. We present the case of a 65-year-old female with alcoholic cirrhosis and recurrent vomiting who was found to have an antral ulcer. The case includes the serial endoscopic examinations over the period of 7 years and shows the antral ulcer which fistulized into the duodenal bulb creating double pylorus.

Colonoscopy videos on YouTube: Are they a good source of patient education?

Background and study aims Colonoscopy is an effective tool to prevent colorectal cancer. Social media has emerged as a source of medical information for patients.YouTube (a video sharing website) is the most popular video informative source. Therefore, we aimed to assess the educational quality of colonoscopy videos available on YouTube. Methods We performed a YouTube search using the keyword "colonoscopy" yielded 429 videos, of which 255 met the inclusion criteria. Colonoscopy Data Quality Score (C-DQS) was created to rate the quality of the videos (-10 to +40 points) based on a colonoscopy education video available on the Ameican Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) website. Each video was scored by six blinded reviewers independently using C-DQS. The Global Quality Score (GQS) was used for score validation. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to assess the similarity of the scores among reviewers. Results Professional societies had the highest number of videos (44.3 %). Videos from professional societies (6.94) and media (6.87) had significantly higher mean C-DQS compared to those from alternative medicine providers (1.19), companies (1.16), and patients (2.60) ( P  < 0.05). Mean C-DQS score of videos from healthcare providers (4.40) was not statistically different than other sources. There was a high degree of agreement among reviewers for the videos from all sources (ICC = 0.934; P  < 0.001). Discussion YouTube videos are a poor source of information on colonoscopy. Professional societies and media are better sources of quality information for patient education on colonoscopy. The medical community may need to engage actively in enriching the quality of educational material available on YouTube.

Clinical efficacy and safety of mucosal incision-assisted biopsy for the diagnosis of upper gastrointestinal subepithelial tumors: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration and biopsy (EUS-FNA/FNB) has been traditionally used for making a tissue diagnosis. Several newer techniques are emerging as a viable alternative to EUS-FNA/FNB, including mucosal incision-assisted biopsy (MIAB), with a view to increasing the diagnostic yield for upper gastrointestinal (GI) subepithelial tumors (SETs). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to describe the overall diagnostic yield of MIAB for upper GI SETs. METHODS: Multiple electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and Google Scholar) and conference abstracts were comprehensively searched. The primary outcome of our meta-analysis was the overall diagnostic yield of the MIAB. The secondary outcome was to study complications in terms of perforation and clinically significant bleeding. The meta-analysis was performed using a DerSimonian and Laird random-effect model. RESULTS: Seven studies were included in the final meta-analysis, reporting a total of 159 patients (male 86, female 73) with a mean age of 58 years. The overall pooled diagnostic yield of MIAB was 89% (95% confidence interval [CI] 82.65-93.51, I 2=0.00). Histologically, GI stromal tumor was the reported diagnosis in 38.62% (95%CI 22.29-56.24, I 2=77.51%) of tumors, followed by leiomyoma 25% (95%CI 18.02-32.62, I 2=4.42%). The overall rate of clinically significant bleeding following the procedure was 5.03% (95%CI 0.36-12.86, I 2=57.43%) and no perforations were reported. CONCLUSIONS: MIAB is a safe and effective technique for the diagnosis of upper GI SETs and can be considered as a viable alternative to EUS-FNA/FNB. MIAB can be performed during routine endoscopy and no advanced equipment is required.

Inpatient Mortality Benefit with Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt for Hospitalized Hepatorenal Syndrome Patients.

BACKGROUND: It has been reported that transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunting (TIPS) might be utilized as a salvage option for hepatorenal syndrome (HRS), while randomized controlled trials are pending and real-world contemporary data on inpatient mortality is lacking. METHODS: We conducted an observational retrospective cohort study from the National Inpatient Sample from 2005 to 2014. We included all adult patients admitted with HRS and cirrhosis, using ICD 9-CM codes. We excluded cases with variceal bleeding, Budd-Chiari, end-stage renal disease, liver transplant and transfers to acute-care facilities. TIPS' association with inpatient mortality was assessed using multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression, as well as exact-matching, thus mitigating for TIPS selection bias. The exact-matched analysis was repeated among TIPS-only versus dialysis-only patients. RESULTS: A total of 79,354 patients were included. Nine hundred eighteen (1.2%) underwent TIPS. Between TIPS and non-TIPS groups, mean age (58 years) and gender (65% males) were similar. Overall mortality was 18% in TIPS and 48% in dialysis-only cases (n = 10,379; 13.1%). Ninety six (10.5%) TIPS patients underwent dialysis. In-hospital mortality in TIPS patients was twice less likely than in non-TIPS patients (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.43, 95% CI 0.30-0.62; p < 0.001), with similar results in matched analysis [exact-matched (em) OR = 0.39, 95% CI 0.17-0.89; p < 0.024; groups = 96; unweighted n = 463]. Head-to-head comparison showed that TIPS-only patients were 3.3 times less likely to succumb inpatient versus dialysis-only patients (contrast aOR = 0.31, 95% CI 0.20-0.46; p < 0.001), with similar findings post-matching (emOR = 0.22, 95% CI 0.15-0.33; p < 0.001; groups = 54, unweighted n = 1457). CONCLUSIONS: Contemporary, real-world data reveal that TIPS on its own, and when compared to dialysis, is associated with decreased inpatient mortality when utilized in non-bleeders-HRS patients. Further randomized studies are needed to establish the long-term benefit of TIPS in these patients.

Opioid Use Disorder Increases 30-Day Readmission Risk in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Hospitalizations: a Nationwide Matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The opioid epidemic has become increasingly concerning, with the ever-increasing prescribing of opioid medications in recent years, especially in inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] patients with chronic pain. We aimed to isolate the effect of opioid use disorder [OUD] on 30-day readmission risk after an IBD-related hospitalization. METHODS: We retrospectively extracted IBD-related adult hospitalizations and 30-day, any-cause, readmissions from the National Readmissions Database [period 2010-2014]. OUD and 30-day readmission trends were calculated. Conventional and exact-matched [EM] logistic regression and time-to-event analyses were conducted among patients who did not undergo surgery during the index hospitalization, to estimate the effect of OUD on 30-day readmission risk. RESULTS: In total, 487 728 cases were identified: 6633 [1.4%] had documented OUD And 308 845 patients [63.3%] had Crohn's disease. Mean age was 44.8 ± 0.1 years, and 54.3% were women. Overall, 30-day readmission rate was 19.4% [n = 94,546], being higher in OUD patients [32.6% vs 19.2%; p < 0.001]. OUD cases have been increasing [1.1% to 1.7%; p-trend < 0.001], while 30-day readmission rates were stable [p-trend = 0.191]. In time-to-event EM analysis, OUD patients were 47% more likely (hazard ratio 1.47; 95% confidence interval [CI]:1.28-1.69; p < 0.001) to be readmitted, on average being readmitted 32% earlier [time ratio 0.68; 95% CI: 0.59-0.78; p < 0.001]. CONCLUSION: OUD prevalence has been increasing in hospitalized IBD patients from 2010 to 2014. On average, one in five patients will be readmitted within 30 days, with up to one in three among the OUD subgroup. OUD is significantly associated with increased 30-day readmission risk in IBD patients and further measures relating to closer post-discharge outpatient follow-up and pain management should be considered to minimize 30-day readmission risk.

Opioid use disorder in admissions for acute exacerbations of chronic pancreatitis and 30-day readmission risk: A nationwide matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: The opioid epidemic in the United States has been on the rise. Acute exacerbations of chronic pancreatitis (AECP) patients are at higher risk for Opioid Use Disorder (OUD). Evidence on OUD's impact on healthcare utilization, especially hospital re-admissions is scarce. We measured the impact of OUD on 30-day readmissions, in patients admitted with AECP from 2010 to 2014. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study which included patients with concurrently documented CP and acute pancreatitis as first two diagnoses, from the National Readmissions Database (NRD). Pancreatic cancer patients and those who left against medical advice were excluded. We compared the 30-day readmission risk between OUD-vs.-non-OUD, while adjusting for other confounders, using multivariable exact-matched [(EM); 18 confounders; n = 28,389] and non-EM regression/time-to-event analyses. RESULTS: 189,585 patients were identified. 6589 (3.5%) had OUD. Mean age was 48.7 years and 57.5% were men. Length-of-stay (4.4 vs 3.9 days) and mean index hospitalization costs ($10,251 vs. $9174) were significantly higher in OUD-compared to non-OUD-patients (p < 0.001). The overall mean 30-day readmission rate was 27.3% (n = 51,806; 35.3% in OUD vs. 27.0% in non-OUD; p < 0.001). OUD patients were 25% more likely to be re-admitted during a 30-day period (EM-HR: 1.25; 95%CI: 1.16-1.36; p < 0.001), Majority of readmissions were pancreas-related (60%), especially AP. OUD cases' aggregate readmissions costs were $23.3 ± 1.5 million USD (n = 2289). CONCLUSION: OUD contributes significantly to increased readmission risk in patients with AECP, with significant downstream healthcare costs. Measures against OUD in these patients, such as alternative pain-control therapies, may potentially alleviate such increase in health-care resource utilization.

Peri-Procedural Aggressive Hydration for Post Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) Pancreatitis Prophylaxsis: Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Periprocedural intravenous hydration is suggested to decrease the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). However, quality of evidence supporting this suggestion remains poor. Here we hypothesized that aggressive hydration(AH) could be an effective preventive measure. METHODS: Pubmed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Google Scholar, Clinical Trials. gov, Clinical Key, International Standard Randomized Trial Number registry as well as secondary sources were searched through January 2019 to identify randomized controlled studies comparing AH to standard hydration (SH) for prevention of PEP. Pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the random-effects model. RevMan 5.3 was used for analysis. RESULTS: A total of 9 RCTs, with 2094 patients, were included in the meta-analysis. AH reduced incidence of PEP by 56% compared to SH (OR = 0.44, CI:0.28-0.69; p = 0.0004). The incidence of post-ERCP hyperamylasemia also decreased with AH compared to SH (OR = 0.51; p = 0.001). Length of stay decreased by 1 day with AH (Mean Difference (MD): -0.89 d; p = 0.00002). There was no significant difference in adverse events related to fluid overload between two groups (OR:1.29; p = 0.81) and post-ERCP abdominal pain (OR:0.35; p = 0.17). Numbers of patient to be treated with AH to prevent one episode of PEP was 17. Final results of the meta-analysis were not affected by alternative effect measures or statistical models of heterogeneity. CONCLUSION: Aggressive hydration is associated with a significantly lower incidence of PEP and it appears to be an effective and safe strategy for the prevention of Post ERCP pancreatitis.

No significant difference in clinically relevant findings between Pillcam® SB3 and Pillcam® SB2 capsules in a United States veteran population.

BACKGROUND: Capsule endoscopy (CE) allows for a non-invasive small bowel evaluation for a wide range of gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms and diseases. Capsule technology has been rapidly advancing over recent years, often improving image frequency and quality. The Pillcam® SB3 (SB3) capsule is one such technology that offers an adaptive frame rate advantage over the previous versions of the capsule the Pillcam® SB2 (SB2). Some have proposed that this improvement in capsule technology may lead to increased diagnostic yields; however, real world clinical data is currently lacking. AIM: To evaluate the clinically relevant findings of SB3 and SB2 capsules in a population of United States veterans. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 260 consecutive CE studies was performed including 130 SB3 and 130 SB2 capsule studies. Recorded variables included: age, gender, type of capsule, body mass index, exam completion, inpatient status, opioid use, diabetes, quality of preparation, gastric transit time, small bowel transit time, indication, finding, and if the exam resulted in a change in clinical management. The primary outcome measured was the detection of clinically relevant findings between SB3 and SB2 capsules. RESULTS: Mean age of the study population was 67.1 ± 10.4 years and 94.2% of patients were male. Of these 28.1% were on opioid users. The most common indications for capsule procedure were occult GI bleeding (74.6%) and overt GI bleeding (14.6%). Rates of incomplete exam were similar between SB3 and SB2 groups (16.9% vs 9.2%, P = 0.066). The overall rate of clinically relevant finding was 48.9% in our study. No significant difference was observed in SB3 vs SB2 capsules for clinically relevant findings (46.2% vs 51.5%, P = 0.385) or change in clinical management (40.8% vs 50.0%, P = 0.135). CONCLUSION: Our study found no significant difference in clinically relevant findings between SB3 and SB2 capsules.