A novel device for improving visualization in an inadequately prepared colon.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Adequate bowel preparation is crucial for a quality colonoscopy. Poor bowel preparation can result in longer procedural times, missed adenomas, earlier repeat procedures, increase costs, and decreased patient satisfaction. Pure-Vu (MOTUS GI, Tirat Carmel, Israel) is a system that facilitates intraprocedural cleaning of a poorly prepared colon during a colonoscopy by irrigating the colon and evacuating the fluid and feces. The study aims were to evaluate Pure-Vu's cleansing capabilities and its usability and safety in a live animal colon. METHODS: The Pure-Vu system was used by 4 experienced gastroenterologists in 35 Yorkshire cross swine (66% female) that received a reduced bowel preparation to ensure an inadequate bowel preparation at baseline. Before colonoscopy the Pure-Vu was attached to the colonoscope, and the baseline prep was assessed during insertion. The Pure-Vu system was then used to cleanse the colon and the prep then assessed after Pure-Vu use. RESULTS: No adverse effects and no failed or prematurely terminated cases were noted. Fourteen percent of the swine colons were adequately prepped at baseline (median Boston Bowel Preparation Scale [BBPS] score = 0 [25th percentile = 0; 75th percentile = 1; interquartile range = 1]) and improved to 100% after use of Pure-Vu (Wilcoxon signed rank test P < .001) (median BBPS score = 3 [25th percentile = 3; 75th percentile = 3; interquartile range = 0]). The physicians found Pure-Vu easy and intuitive to operate. CONCLUSIONS: The Pure-Vu system effectively cleaned inadequately prepped swine colons and proved to be easy to use. The Pure-Vu device, applied in clinical practice, may result in improved overall prep quality and a reduction in repeat examinations because of inadequately prepped colons.

Comparison of standard forward-viewing mode versus ultrawide-viewing mode of a novel colonoscopy platform: a prospective, multicenter study in the detection of simulated polyps in an in vitro colon model (with video).

BACKGROUND: Although colonoscopy is the criterion standard for detecting colorectal adenomas and cancers, a significant percentage of adenomas are missed. OBJECTIVE: To compare forward-viewing with ultrawide-viewing colonoscopy in the detection of simulated colon polyps in an in vitro colon model. DESIGN: Prospective, multicenter. SETTING: Six endoscopy units (3 in the United States and 3 in Israel). PATIENTS: In vitro colon model with simulated colon polyps (n = 21 metallic beads). INTERVENTIONS: Detection of simulated colon polyps on colonoscope withdrawal. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Incremental detection of simulated colon polyps and endoscopist evaluation of the usability, visibility, and maneuverability of ultrawide-viewing colonoscopy. RESULTS: On forward-viewing colonoscopy, the number of simulated polyps (mean ± standard deviation) detected per endoscopist was 11.1 ± 2.3 polyps, a 52.9% detection rate. Simulated polyp detection rates per colon segment were 3.0 ± 0.93 (60.0%) right colon, 2.4 ± 0.87 (48.0%) transverse colon, and 5.7 ± 1.5 (51.8%) left colon. On ultrawide-viewing colonoscopy, the simulated polyp detection rate per endoscopist significantly increased to 18.0 ± 1.98 polyps, an overall 85.7% polyp detection rate (P < .001). Simulated polyp detection rates were also significantly higher by using the ultrawide-viewing mode in each colon segment, 4.5 ± 0.65 polyps (90.0%) right colon, 4.0 ± 0.87 (80.0%) polyps transverse colon, and 9.6 ± 1.28 polyps (87.3%) left colon (all comparisons, P < .001). Importantly, the ultrawide-viewing mode detected significantly more "hidden" simulated polyps (81.9% vs 31.9%, P < .0001). LIMITATIONS: Nonrandomized design, use of a colon model, and "simulated" colon polyps. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrawide-view colonoscopy significantly improved simulated polyp detection in a colon model. Clinical studies in human subjects should be pursued to further evaluate this new endoscopic technology.

Enteroscopy: an overview.

Although the small intestine has long been considered the final frontier of endoscopy, a vast amount of progress has led to increased diagnostic and therapeutic capabilities. With the increasing prevalence of capsule endoscopy, the need for enteroscopy also continues to increase. The endoscopic options currently available include double and single balloon-assisted enteroscopy, spiral enteroscopy, and lastly, intraoperative enteroscopy. The majority of published literature has focused on double balloon enteroscopy, but further studies have to provide information on the safety and yield of the newer techniques. Although intraoperative enteroscopy may be practiced less frequently, it has a role in the management of lesions that may not be approachable by other endoscopic means and a role in the guidance of surgical management.

Expanding role of capsule endoscopy in inflammatory bowel disease.

Capsule endoscopy has been shown to detect small bowel inflammatory changes better than any other imaging modality. Selection criteria have been optimized to increase the yield of capsule endoscopy in patients suspected to have Crohn's disease. Capsule endoscopy allows for earlier diagnosis of Crohn's disease of the small bowel and improved diagnosis of colitis in patients where it is unclear if they suffer from Crohn's or ulcerative colitis. A test capsule is available to assess for small bowel strictures and thus avoid capsule retention. A common language has been developed and a new scoring index will be added to capsule software. It is envisioned that the manner in which we treat Crohn's disease in the future will change, based on earlier diagnosis and treatment aimed at mucosal healing rather than symptom improvement.

Capsule endoscopy retention: is it a complication?

BACKGROUND: Capsule endoscopy has been found superior to barium x-rays and push enteroscopy in the investigation of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding and in the evaluation of suspected Crohn's disease. Currently, small bowel obstruction and strictures are considered by many physicians to be a contraindication to capsule endoscopy for fear of capsule retention or impaction. The goal of this study was to reassess this conventional wisdom that capsule endoscopy is contraindicated in small bowel obstruction and to determine the safety and efficacy of capsule endoscopy in the evaluation of patients with suspected stricture or small bowel obstruction. STUDY: A retrospective chart review was performed using a database of 568 capsule endoscopy cases performed between August 2001 and November 2003. Cases of suspected small bowel obstruction were selected and reviewed. RESULTS: Nineteen cases were identified in which capsule endoscopy was used in the setting of suspected small bowel obstruction. The diagnosis of suspected small bowel obstruction was based on symptoms alone in 8 cases and on symptoms plus abnormal radiographs in the remaining 11 cases. Capsule endoscopy made a definitive diagnosis in 5 of the 19 cases (26%): 2 Crohn's strictures, 1 radiation induced stricture, 1 nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug induced stricture, and 1 MALT lymphoma. The capsule was retained proximal to a stricture in 4 cases, in which the obstructing lesions were electively resected without complications. There was no case in which administration of the capsule led to an acute small bowel obstruction. CONCLUSIONS: Capsule endoscopy can be safely used to help identify the etiology and site of a small bowel obstruction. Retention of the capsule may indicate the presence of a lesion requiring surgery, but small bowel obstruction or strictures are not in themselves contraindications to the procedure. It is understood, however, that retention may lead to surgery in a patient who otherwise may have been treated medically without surgery for the same illness (eg, Crohn's disease and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug enteropathy).

The risk of retention of the capsule endoscope in patients with known or suspected Crohn's disease.

OBJECTIVES: Capsule endoscopy (CE) allows visualization of the mucosa of the entire small bowel and is therefore a potentially important tool in the evaluation of patients with known or suspected Crohn's disease (CD). However, small bowel strictures, which are not uncommon in Crohn's, are considered to be a contraindication to CE for fear of capsule retention. Our goal was to determine the risk of capsule retention in patients with suspected or known CD. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of 983 CE cases performed at three private gastroenterology practices between December 2000 and December 2003, and selected those with suspected or proven Crohn's. RESULTS: A total of 102 cases were identified in which CE was used in patients with suspected (N = 64) or known (N = 38) CD. Only one of 64 patients (1.6%) with suspected CD had a retained capsule. However, in five of 38 (13%) patients with known Crohn's, the capsule was retained proximal to a stricture. Of the five cases of retained capsules, three strictures were previously unknown. In four cases, the obstructing lesions were resected without complications, leading to complete resolution of the patient's underlying symptoms. One patient chose not to undergo surgery and has remained without an episode of small bowel obstruction for over 38 months. CONCLUSIONS: Capsule retention occurred in 13% (95% CI 5.6%-28%) of patients with known CD, but only in 1.6% (95% CI 0.2%-10%) with suspected Crohn's. A retained capsule may indicate unsuspected strictures in Crohn's that may require an unexpected, but therapeutic, surgical intervention. Patients and physicians should be aware of these potential risks when using CE in CD.

Increased diagnostic yield of small bowel tumors with capsule endoscopy.

BACKGROUND: It is believed that cancers of the small intestine represent <2% of all malignant tumors of the gastrointestinal tract, although the accuracy of this estimate is unknown, because the current methodologies for examining the small bowel have proved inadequate. Capsule endoscopy allows a more detailed inspection of the small intestine and may improve the ability to diagnose small bowel tumors. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of capsule endoscopy in diagnosing small bowel tumors and to help establish the true incidence of tumors in obscure gastrointestinal bleeding. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the charts of 562 patients who underwent capsule endoscopy from August 2001 to November 2003 for a variety of indications was performed. The indication for the procedure was bleeding (alone or in addition to another indication, such as abnormal imaging) in 443 patients. RESULTS: A diagnosis was made by capsule endoscopy in 277 patients (49.3%). Of 562 patients who were included in the study, 50 patients (8.9%) were diagnosed with small bowel tumors. The types of tumor diagnosed by capsule endoscopy included 8 adenocarcinomas (1.4%), 10 carcinoids (1.8%), 4 gastrointestinal stromal tumors (0.7%), 5 lymphomas (0.9%), 3 inflammatory polyps, 1 lymphangioma, 1 lymphangioectasia,1 hemangioma, 1 hamartoma, and 1 tubular adenoma. Of the tumors diagnosed, 48% were malignant. It was observed that 9 of 67 patients (13%) younger than age 50 years who underwent capsule endoscopy for obscure bleeding had small bowel tumors. The pathology results were not available for 10 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Capsule endoscopy diagnosed small bowel tumors in 8.9% of patients who underwent the procedure for a variety of reasons, establishing it as an effective diagnostic modality. This incidence of small bowel tumors suggests an important role for capsule endoscopy in the algorithm for the diagnostic work-up of patients with suspected small bowel lesions. Capsule endoscopy may lead to earlier detection and treatment of small bowel tumors and an improved prognosis for patients with these neoplasms.

A prospective study of the diagnostic accuracy of PillCam ESO esophageal capsule endoscopy versus conventional upper endoscopy in patients with chronic gastroesophageal reflux diseases.

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopy is commonly performed to evaluate for suspected or established esophageal diseases including gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and its complications. The newly developed PillCam ESO Esophageal Capsule offers an alternative approach to visualize the esophagus and to evaluate patients with suspected esophageal disease. AIM: Compare the accuracy (specificity, sensitivity, positive predictive value [PPV], and negative predictive value [NPV]) of esophageal capsule endoscopy (ECE) compared with esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in evaluating patients with GERD. METHODS: A multicenter pivotal trial was conducted at seven sites. The PillCam ESO esophageal capsule is similar to the standard capsule endoscope used for the small bowel but acquires video images from both ends of the device at 2 frames/second/end. A total of 106 patients (93 GERD; 13 Barrett) underwent ECE followed by EGD. ECE videos were evaluated by an investigator blinded to EGD findings. A blinded adjudication committee reviewed all discrepant findings between ECE and EGD. RESULTS: Sixty-six of 106 patients had positive esophageal findings, ECE identified esophageal abnormalities in 61 (sensitivity, 92%; specificity, 95%). The per-protocol sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of ECE for Barrett esophagus were 97%, 99%, 97%, and 99%, respectively, and for esophagitis 89%, 99%, 97%, and 94%, respectively. ECE was preferred over EGD by all patients. There were no adverse events related to ECE. CONCLUSIONS: ECE is a convenient and sensitive method for visualization of esophageal mucosal pathology and may provide an effective method to evaluate patients for esophageal disease.

Video capsule endoscopy in inflammatory bowel disease: past, present, and future.

In this paper, we critically review the rationale, technical issues, and diagnostic findings, difficulties in interpretation, complications, potential clinical uses, and practical obstacles for capsule endoscopy in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We will review the currently limited data on its use in IBD and discuss future areas of investigation required to evaluate critically its potential utility in these patients.

Capsule endoscopy in the evaluation of patients with suspected small intestinal bleeding: Results of a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: A video capsule has been developed to acquire photographic images of the small intestine during normal peristaltic motion. METHODS: Patients between 21 and 80 years of age referred for enteroscopy because of obscure GI bleeding were offered entry into a trial in which they would undergo both capsule endoscopy and subsequent push enteroscopy. Results of capsule examinations were compared with push enteroscopy findings. Capsule endoscopy was performed with the Given M2A video capsule system. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients (12 women, 9 men, average age 61 years) were enrolled, all of whom completed the study. A bleeding site was found in 11 of 20 patients during capsule endoscopy. No additional intestinal diagnoses were made by enteroscopy. The yield of push enteroscopy in the evaluation of obscure bleeding was 30% (6/20), the yield of capsule endoscopy 55% (11/20). This difference did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.0625). Capsule endoscopy found a distal source of bleeding in 5 of 14 patients who had normal push enteroscopic examinations. Patients preferred capsule endoscopy to enteroscopy. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study demonstrates that capsule endoscopy provides excellent visualization of the small intestine, is well tolerated by patients, and is safe. Capsule endoscopy identified small intestinal bleeding sites beyond the range of push enteroscopy.