Comparison of magnetic resonance enteroclysis and capsule endoscopy with balloon-assisted enteroscopy in patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: New modalities are available for visualization of the small bowel in patients with possible obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB), but their performance requires further comparison. This study compared the diagnostic yield of magnetic resonance enteroclysis (MRE) and capsule endoscopy in patients with OGIB, using balloon-assisted enteroscopy (BAE) as the reference standard. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive consenting patients who were referred for evaluation of OGIB were prospectively included. Patients underwent MRE followed by capsule endoscopy and BAE. Patients with high grade stenosis at MRE did not undergo capsule endoscopy. The reference standard was BAE findings in visualized small-bowel segments and expert panel consensus for segments not visualized during BAE. RESULTS: Over a period of 26 months, 38 patients were included (20 female [53 %]; mean age 58 years, range 28 - 75 years). Four patients (11 %) did not undergo capsule endoscopy due to high grade small-bowel stenosis at MRE (n = 3; 8 %) or timing issues (n = 1; 3 %). Capsule endoscopy was non-diagnostic in one patient. The reference standard identified abnormal findings in 20 patients (53 %). MRE had sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios of 21 %, 100 %, infinity, and 0.79, respectively. The corresponding values for capsule endoscopy were 61 %, 85 %, 4.1, and 0.46. The reference standard and capsule endoscopy did not differ in percent positive findings (P = 0.34), but MRE differed significantly from the reference BAE (P < 0.001). Capsule endoscopy was superior to MRE for detecting abnormalities (P = 0.0015). CONCLUSION: Capsule endoscopy performed better than MRE in the detection of small-bowel abnormality in patients with OGIB. MRE may be considered as an alternative for the initial examination in patients with clinical suspicion of small-bowel stenosis.

Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreaticography as a diagnostic tool for common bile duct stones: a comparison with ERCP and clinical follow-up.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The diagnostic potential of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreaticography (MRCP) has improved as a result of evolving technique. MRCP has the advantage of negligible morbidity and mortality in contrast to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). This study was performed to evaluate MRCP as a replacement for diagnostic ERCP for the suspicion of common bile duct (CBD) stones. METHODS: From 1998 to 2001, MRCP was performed in 202 patients with a suspicion of CBD stones based on medical history (MH), cholestatic liver function tests (CL), both MH and CL or other reasons. ERCP was performed in all patients where MRCP indicated the presence of CBD stones and in those patients with a persistent strong clinical suspicion for CBD stones despite a negative MRCP. RESULTS: In 25 patients, MRCP suggested CBD stones which were proven with ERCP in 24 patients. Despite a negative MRCP, 27 patients had a subsequent ERCP. None of these patients appeared to have CBD stones. In this group, MRCP resulted in 100% sensitivity and 96% specificity in detecting CBD stones. Follow-up of all patients revealed 5 more patients with persistent clinical suspicion or cholestatic liver function values. Assuming CBD stones in these patients, MRCP had a sensitivity of 83 % and a specificity of 99% for this diagnosis. CONCLUSION: In the case of CBD stone suspicion, MRCP should be the diagnostic procedure of choice.