Predictive value of patency capsule and magnetic resonance enterography for capsule endoscopy retention in patients with established Crohn's disease.

INTRODUCTION: retention is the most common adverse event of the small bowel capsule endoscopy procedure. Patency capsule (Medtronic, Dublin, Ireland) and magnetic resonance enterography are two diagnostic methods that can prevent small bowel capsule endoscopy retention. The aim of this study was to evaluate the predictive value of these two diagnostic methods. MATERIAL AND METHODS: a prospective, comparative and observational study was performed in patients with established Crohn's disease. All patients had undergone magnetic resonance enterography and patency capsule procedures. If the patency capsule was not retained, the patient underwent a small bowel capsule endoscopy; otherwise, double balloon enteroscopy was performed to locate the stenosis. Magnetic resonance enterography predictive criteria for retention were analyzed in all cases. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of the patency capsule and magnetic resonance enterography compared to small bowel capsule endoscopy or double balloon enteroscopy were calculated. RESULTS: forty patients were included (24 female, 55 ± 13 years old). Retention criteria with capsule endoscopy or double balloon enteroscopy were found in six patients, agreeing in five cases with patency capsule and in three cases with magnetic resonance enterography. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and Kappa coefficient for predicting retention with the patency capsule were 83 %, 100 %, 100 % and 97 %, respectively, and 50 %, 91 %, 50 % and 91 %, respectively, with magnetic resonance enterography. CONCLUSIONS: patency capsule has a higher sensitivity and positive predictive value than magnetic resonance enterography for preventing small bowel capsule endoscopy retention in Crohn's disease patients.

Predictive value of patency capsule and magnetic resonance enterography for capsule endoscopy retention in patients with established Crohn’s disease

Introduction: retention is the most common adverse event of the small bowel capsule endoscopy procedure. Patency capsule (Medtronic, Dublin, Ireland) and magnetic resonance enterography are two diagnostic methods that can prevent small bowel capsule endoscopy retention. The aim of this study was to evaluate the predictive value of these two diagnostic methods. Material and methods: a prospective, comparative and observational study was performed in patients with established Crohn’s disease. All patients had undergone magnetic resonance enterography and patency capsule procedures. If the patency capsule was not retained, the patient underwent a small bowel capsule endoscopy; otherwise, double balloon enteroscopy was performed to locate the stenosis. Magnetic resonance enterography predictive criteria for retention were analyzed in all cases. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of the patency capsule and magnetic resonance enterography compared to small bowel capsule endoscopy or double balloon enteroscopy were calculated. Results: forty patients were included (24 female, 55 ± 13 years old). Retention criteria with capsule endoscopy or double balloon enteroscopy were found in six patients, agreeing in five cases with patency capsule and in three cases with magnetic resonance enterography. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and Kappa coefficient for predicting retention with the patency capsule were 83 %, 100 %, 100 % and 97 %, respectively, and 50 %, 91 %, 50 % and 91 %, respectively, with magnetic resonance enterography. Conclusions: patency capsule has a higher sensitivity and positive predictive value than magnetic resonance enterography for preventing small bowel capsule endoscopy retention in Crohn’s disease patients (AU)

Assessment of the Role of a Second Evaluation of Capsule Endoscopy Recordings to Improve Diagnostic Yield and Patient Management.

Introduction: The diagnostic yield (DY) of small-bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) varies considerably according to its indication. Some strategies have been used to increase DY with varying results. The intention of this study was to identify whether evaluation of the SBCE recordings by a second reviewer can increase DY and change patient management. Methods: One hundred SBCEs with different indications, already read by an endoscopist were read by a second blinded endoscopist. When the results of the 2 readings were different, the images were discussed by the endoscopists; if no consensus was reached, they took the opinion of a third endoscopist into account. All the participating endoscopists had experience in reading SBCEs (i.e., >50 per year). The SBCE findings were divided into positive (vascular lesions, ulcers, and tumors), equivocal (erosions or red spots), and negative. The interobserver agreement and the increase in DY were assessed as well as the percentage of false-negatives (FNs) in the first evaluation. Results: The indications for SBCE were small-bowel bleeding (SBB) in 48 cases, Crohn's disease (CD) in 30, and other causes (iron-deficiency anemia, small-bowel tumors, and diarrhea) in 22. There was substantial interobserver agreement between evaluations (κ = 0.79). The findings in the first evaluation were positive in 60%, equivocal in 20% and, negative in 20%. In the second evaluation, 66% were positive, 18% were equivocal, and 16% were negative. The increase in DY with the second reading was 6% (p = 0.380), i.e., 6.3% for SBB, 4.4% for CD and 9.2% for other indications, resulting in a change in management of 4% of the patients. FNs in the first SBCE reading were found in 4% of the SBCEs. Discussion: A second evaluation of the SBCE recordings identified significant pathology that the first evaluation had missed, resulting in a nonsignificant 6% increase in DY and a change in the management of 4% of the patients.

Introdução: O rendimento diagnóstico (DY) da enteroscopia por cápsula (SBCE) varia consideravelmente de acordo com as suas indicações. Foram estudadas algumas estratégias para melhorar o DY, com resultados variados. O objetivo deste estudo é avaliar se uma segunda leitura de registos de enteroscopia por cápsula por um segundo endoscopista pode melhorar o DY e alterar o manejo dos doentes. Métodos: 100 SBCE realizadas por indicações variadas, previamente avaliadas por um endoscopista, foram reavaliadas por um segundo endoscopista cego para a primeira leitura. Na presença de resultados discordantes nas 2 leituras, as imagens foram discutidas pelos 2 endoscopistas, e por um terceiro na ausência de consenso entre os 2 primeiros. Todos os endoscopistas são experientes na leitura de SBCE (>50 SBCE/ano). Os achados foram categorizados em positivos (lesões vasculares, úlceras e tumores), equívocos (erosões e pontos vermelhos) e negativos. Foi avaliada a concordância inter-observador e o aumento do DY, bem como a percentagem de falsos negativos da primeira avaliação. Resultados: As indicações para SBCE foram hemorragia do intestino delgado (SBB) em 48 casos, doença de Crohn (CD) em 30 e outras causas (anemia por défice de ferro, pesquisa de tumores do intestino delgado e diarreia) em 22. A concordância inter-observador foi substancial (k = 0.79). Os achados da primeira avaliação foram positivos em 60%, equívocos em 20% e negativos em 20%, enquanto na segunda avaliação foram positivos em 66%, equívocos em 18% e negativos em 16%. O aumento de DY foi de 6% com a segunda leitura (p = 0.38), sendo 6.3% para SBB, 4.4% para CD e 9.2% para outras indicações, resultando numa alteração no manejo de 4% dos doentes. Foram identificados falsos negativos na primeira avaliação em 4% das SBCE. Conclusão: A segunda avaliação dos registos de SBCE identificou patologia significativa previamente não identificada, resultando num aumento não significativo de 6% do DY e numa alteração no manejo de 4% dos doentes.

Adherence to recommendations for endoscopy practice during COVID-19 pandemic in Latin America: how are we doing it?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Digestive endoscopy is considered a high-risk procedure for COVID-19. Recommendations have been made for its practice during the pandemic. This study was conducted to determine adherence to recommendations for endoscopy practice during the COVID-19 pandemic in Latin America (LA). METHODS: A survey was conducted of endoscopists from LA consisting of 43 questions for the evaluation of four items: general and sociodemographic features, and preprocedure, intraprocedure and postprocedure aspects. RESULTS: A response was obtained from 338 endoscopists (response rate 34.5%) across 15 countries in LA. In preprocedure aspects (hand washing, use of face masks for patients, respiratory triage area, training for the placement/removal of personal protective equipment (PPE) and availability of specific area for the placement/removal of PPE), there was adherence in <75%. Regarding postprocedure aspects, 77% (261/338) had reused PPE, mainly the N95 respirator or higher, and this was with a standardised decontamination procedure only in 32% (108/338) of the time. Postprocedure room decontamination was carried out by 47% on >75% of occasions. In relationship to intraprocedure aspects (knowledge of risk and type of endoscopic procedures, use of PPE, airway management in patients and infrastructure), there was adherence in >75% for all the parameters and 78% of endoscopists only performed emergencies or time-sensitive procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to the recommendations for endoscopy practice during the COVID-19 pandemic is adequate in the intraprocedure aspect. However, it is deficient in the preprocedure and postprocedure aspects.

Comparison in the Diagnostic Yield between "Pillcam SB3" Capsule Endoscopy and "OMOM Smart Capsule 2" in Small Bowel Bleeding: A Randomized Head-to-Head Study.

INTRODUCTION: Capsule endoscopy (CE) is the first-line tool for diagnosis of small bowel bleeding. There are some studies that have compared different types of CE. OMOM CE is one of the newest in the market and has not been compared with other types of CE. The objective of this study was to compare the diagnostic yield of the Pillcam SB3 and OMOM CE in small bowel bleeding. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a prospective, comparative, randomized, and blinded study. Patients with suspected small bowel bleeding were included. All the patients were given both types of CE in random order. Diagnostic yield and functionality between the 2 types of CE were analyzed. RESULTS: We included 44 patients, 54.5% were female with a median age of 63.5 years. Battery time was significantly longer with SB3 (816.5 vs. 700.5 min, p < 0.001), and the download time was shorter with OMOM (33 vs. 132 min, p < 0.001). Both CEs presented 1 failure. The cause of the bleeding was identified in 39 SB3 (88.6%) and in 34 OMOM CE (77.3%) (p = 0.256). P2 lesions were observed in 32 SB3 (72.7%) and in 29 OMOM CE (65.9%) (p = 0.784). The agreement between both CEs for P2 lesions was moderate (κ = 0.628). CONCLUSIONS: Pillcam SB3 and OMOM devices are safe procedures and have a similar diagnostic yield. Significant differences were observed in the battery life and download time with both CEs.

Clinical feasibility of a new antireflux ablation therapy on gastroesophageal reflux disease (with video).

BACKGROUNDS AND AIMS: New mucosal resective and ablative endoscopic procedures based on gastric cardiac remodeling to prevent reflux have appeared. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility of a new ablative technique named antireflux ablation therapy (ARAT) for control of GERD in patients without hiatal hernia. METHODS: Patients with proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-refractory GERD without hiatal hernia underwent ARAT between January 2016 and October 2019. Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease-Health-Related Quality of Life (GERD-HRQL), upper endoscopy, 24-hour pH monitoring, and PPI use were documented at 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months after ARAT. RESULTS: One hundred eight patients were included (61 men [56.5%]; median age, 36.5 years; range, 18-78 years). ARAT was performed on all patients. At the 36-month evaluation, 84 patients had completed the protocol. Median ARAT time was 35.5 minutes (range, 22-51 minutes), and median circumference ablation was 300° (range, 270°-320°). No major adverse events occurred, and 14 of 108 patients (12.9%) presented with stenosis that was responsive to balloon dilation (<5 sessions). At the 3-month evaluation, the acid exposure time (AET), DeMeester score, and GERD-HRQL score had decreased from 18.8% to 2.8% (P = .001), 42.5 to 9.1 (P = .001), and 36.5 to 10 (P = .02), respectively, and these values were maintained up to 36 months. Success (AET <4%) was achieved in 89% and 72.2% at 3 and 36 months, respectively. Related factors at 36 months were as follows: pre-ARAT Hill type II (odds ratio [OR], 3.212; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.431-5.951; P = .033), post-ARAT 3-month Hill type I (OR, 4.101; 95% CI, 1.812-9.121; P = .042), and AET <4% at 3 months (OR, 5.512; 95% CI, 1.451-7.621; P = .021). CONCLUSIONS: ARAT is a feasible, safe, and effective therapy for early and mid-term treatment of GERD in patients without a sliding hiatal hernia. However, longer follow-up evaluations and randomized comparative studies are needed to clarify its real role. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03548298.).

Seguridad y eficacia de la enteroscopia con intercambio de agua en comparación con la enteroscopia con dióxido de carbono / No disponible

INTRODUCCIÓN: la insuflación de dióxido de carbono (CO2) durante la enteroscopia reduce el tiempo del procedimiento y los síntomas posteriores al mismo e incrementa la profundidad de inserción comparado con aire ambiente. En colonoscopia, la técnica de intercambio de agua (IA) se asocia a menor dolor en comparación con la insuflación de CO2. La técnica IA no está bien estudiada en enteroscopia. El objetivo de este estudio es comparar la seguridad y eficacia de la enteroscopia con IA y la enteroscopia con CO2. MÉTODOS: estudio prospectivo, comparativo y observacional, que incluyó enteroscopias de doble balón (EDB) que fueron aleatorizadas en dos grupos: el primero con IA y el segundo con insuflación de CO2. Los datos recopilados se evaluaron mediante análisis univariado y una regresión logística múltiple (variables con p ≤ 0.10 en análisis univariado). RESULTADOS: se incluyeron 46 EDB (23 por brazo; mediana de edad 63,5 años, 37% mujeres). No hubo diferencias estadísticas en la vía de acceso, los hallazgos, la terapéutica y las complicaciones entre grupos. Cuatro pacientes (20%) en el grupo de CO2 tuvieron eventos adversos (distensión abdominal y dolor) y uno en el grupo IA (náuseas) sin diferencia estadística. La mediana de profundidad de inserción fue mayor en el grupo de CO2 (260 cm vs. 160 cm; p = 0,048). La regresión logística múltiple mostró una diferencia estadística en la profundidad de inserción utilizando insuflación de CO2 (OR 1,009, 1,001-1,017; p = 0,034). CONCLUSIONES: las EDB con técnica de insuflación de CO2 y con IA son seguras con una mayor profundidad de inserción con CO2

No disponible

Predictores para identificar lesiones en intestino delgado por enteroscopia posterior a una cápsula endoscópica positiva / No disponible

INTRODUCCIÓN Y OBJETIVO: estudios han evaluado la concordancia entre la cápsula endoscópica y la enteroscopia doble-balón con resultados diversos. El objetivo de este estudio es identificar factores que predicen la visualización de las lesiones en el intestino delgado por enteroscopia doble-balón después de una cápsula endoscópica positiva. MÉTODOS: estudio retrospectivo, observacional y comparativo que evaluó a pacientes con enteroscopia doble balón después de un cápsula endoscópica positiva entre enero de 2017 y agosto de 2019. Los datos estudiados fueron demográficos, indicaciones, comorbilidades y resultados de cápsula endoscópica y enteroscopia doble-balón. Se evaluaron mediante una regresión logística múltiple. RESULTADOS: se incluyeron 91 pacientes (edad 58 ± 16,5 años, 53 mujeres). Sesenta y dos enteroscopia doble-balón (68,1 %) encontraron las mismas lesiones que la cápsula endoscópica. Los factores predictivos para enteroscopia doble-balón positiva fueron lesiones múltiples (OR 8,10, 1,50-43,78; p = 0,015) y < 15 días ambos estudios (OR 5,31, 1,19-23,66; p = 0,029). En el subgrupo de pacientes con hemorragia de intestino delgado (70 pacientes), 46 enteroscopia doble-balón (65,7 %) coincidieron con la cápsula endoscópica. Los factores predictivos en este grupo fueron lesiones múltiples (OR 10,42, 1,37-79,30; p = 0,024), < 15 días entre ambos estudios (OR 13,51, 1,78-102,22; p = 0,012), > 60 años (OR 7,45, 1,51-36,75; p = 0,014) y úlceras (OR 4,67, 1,08-20,22; p = 0,039). CONCLUSIONES: los factores predictivos para enteroscopia doble-balón positiva después de cápsula endoscópica positiva son lesiones múltiples y < 15 días entre ambos procedimientos. En pacientes con hemorragia de intestino delgado, edad mayor a 60 años y presencia de úlceras también son

No disponible

Predictors for finding lesions in the small bowel by enteroscopy after a positive capsule endoscopy.

INTRODUCTION: studies have examined the agreement between capsule endoscopy and double-balloon enteroscopy, with varying results. The aim of this study was to identify factors that predict the visualization of lesions in the small bowel by double-balloon enteroscopy after a positive capsule endoscopy. METHODS: a retrospective, observational and comparative study was performed that evaluated patients that underwent double-balloon enteroscopy after a positive capsule endoscopy, between January 2017 and August 2019. The data studied included demographics, indications, comorbidities and the results of capsule endoscopy and double-balloon enteroscopy, which were evaluated by multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: 91 patients were included (age 58 ± 16.5 years, 53 female). Sixty-two double-balloon enteroscopy (68.1 %) found the same lesions as capsule endoscopy. Predictive factors for a positive double-balloon enteroscopy were multiple lesions (OR 8.10, 1.50-43.78; p = 0.015) and < 15 days between both studies (OR 5.31, 1.19-23.66; p=0.029). In the subgroup of patients with small bowel bleeding (70 patients), the results of 46 double-balloon enteroscopies (65.7 %) agreed with the capsule endoscopy. Predictive factors in this group were multiple lesions (OR 13.51, 1.78-102.22; p = 0.012), < 15 days between both studies (OR 13.51, 1.78-102.22; p = 0.012), > 60 years of age (OR 7.45, 1.51-36.75; p = 0.014) and ulcers (OR 4.67, 1.08-20.22; p = 0.039). CONCLUSIONS: predictive factors for a positive double-balloon enteroscopy after a positive capsule endoscopy were multiple lesions and < 15 days between both procedures. In patients with small bowel bleeding, age over 60 years and the presence of ulcers were also predictive factors.

Efficacy and safety of water-exchange enteroscopy compared to carbon dioxide insufflation during enteroscopy.

INTRODUCTION: carbon dioxide (CO2) insufflation during enteroscopy reduces procedure time and subsequent symptoms and increases the insertion depth compared with room air. In colonoscopy, the water-exchange (WE) technique is associated with less pain compared with CO2 insufflation. The WE technique is not well studied in enteroscopy. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of enteroscopy with WE and CO2. METHODS: a prospective, comparative and observational study was performed of double balloon enteroscopies (DBE) that were randomized in two groups. The first group used WE while the second group used CO2 insufflation. The data collected was evaluated via univariate analysis and multiple logistic regression (variables with p ≤ 0.10 according to the univariate analysis). RESULTS: forty-six DBE were included; 23 in each arm. The median age of cases was 63.5 years and 37% were female. There were no statistical differences between the groups with regard to the access route, findings, therapy and complications. Four patients (20%) in the CO2 group had adverse events (abdominal distension and pain) and one in the WE group (nausea), which was not statistically significant. The median insertion depth was greater in the CO2 group; 260 cm vs 160 cm (p = 0.048). Multiple logistic regression showed a statistically significant difference in the insertion depth using CO2 insufflation (OR 1.009, 1.001-1.017; p = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS: DBE with a CO2 insufflation technique and WE are safe with a greater insertion depth with CO2.

Detección de pólipos en intestino delgado en pacientes con acromegalia mediante cápsula endoscópica / No disponible

ANTECEDENTES: se desconoce la prevalencia de pólipos en intestino delgado (ID) en pacientes acromegálicos. OBJETIVO: evaluar la prevalencia de pólipos/tumores en ID en pacientes acromegálicos. Material: estudio prospectivo observacional que compara la prevalencia de pólipos/tumores utilizando cápsula endoscópica con un protocolo estandarizado en pacientes asintomáticos con acromegalia y pacientes no acromegálicos con dolor abdominal, diarrea o anemia. RESULTADOS: se incluyeron 183 casos (61 acromegálicos y 122 no acromegálicos). Se encontraron seis (9,8%) y tres (2,5%) pólipos respectivamente (RR: 4 [IC 95%, 1,03-15,45; p = 0,038]). Sin diferencias en tumores (n = 4, 6,6% vs. n = 7, 5,7%). CONCLUSIONES: la acromegalia puede asociar más pólipos en ID

No disponible

Detection of polyps in the small bowel of patients with acromegaly via capsule endoscopy.

BACKGROUND: the prevalence of small bowel (SB) polyps is unknown in acromegaly patients. OBJECTIVE: to evaluate the prevalence of polyps/tumors in SB of acromegaly patients. MATERIAL: this was a prospective and observational study that compared the prevalence of polyps/tumors using capsule endoscopy with a standard protocol in asymptomatic acromegaly patients and non-acromegaly patients, with abdominal pain, diarrhea or anemia. RESULTS: one hundred and eighty-three cases were included (61 acromegaly and 122 non-acromegaly). Polyps were found in six (9.8%) and three (2.5%) patients, respectively (RR: 4 [95% CI, 1.03-15.45; p = 0.038]). There were no differences in the tumors (n = 4, 6.6% vs n = 7, 5.7%). CONCLUSIONS: acromegaly may be associated with more polyps in SB.

Feasibility of the peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) procedure with a new small-caliber endoscope (thin-POEM) in patients with achalasia.

BACKGROUND: Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is a recognized technique for patients with achalasia. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility of using a small-caliber endoscope (thin-POEM) to perform POEM in patients with achalasia. METHODS: Naïve or previously treated patients were included between February 2016 and April 2018. A small-caliber (5.9 mm) nasoendoscope was used, with a modified closure method using cyanoacrylate. Strict follow-up was performed. RESULTS: 45 patients were included, aged 45.5 years (interquartile range [IQR] 22 - 69); 53 % (24/45) had type II achalasia. Median total time for thin-POEM was 54 minutes (IQR 37 - 77) and median myotomy length was 13.5 cm (IQR 6 - 20). Results pre-procedure and 3 months post were Eckardt score 10 vs. 1 (P < 0.001), integrated relaxation pressure (IRP) 25.3 vs. 8.5 mmHg (P < 0.001), and timed barium esophagram (TBE) 100 % severely delayed vs. 86 % normal (P < 0.001), respectively. Type III patients had the longest thin-POEM times (median 58 minutes [IQR 52 - 77]). Reflux was confirmed at 3 months clinically in 17 % of patients, endoscopically in 20 %, and on pH monitoring in 53 %. At 6 months and 12 months, 40 % and 33 % of patients remained positive on pH monitoring and were medically managed. CONCLUSIONS: Thin-POEM seems to be a safe, effective, and efficient procedure for POEM in patients with achalasia, with good short-term follow-up results.

Per-oral Endoscopic Myotomy (POEM): A safe and effective treatment for achalasia in geriatric patients / Miotomía endoscópica a través de la boca (POEM): una alternativa endoscópica segura y efectiva para el tratamiento de la acalasia en pacientes geriátricos

Background: Esophageal achalasia is a primary motor disorder of the esophagus characterized by impair relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter and absent of esophageal peristalsis. Per-oral endoscopic myotomy is an alternative treatment to surgical Heller myotomy in patients over 65 years old. The aim of this paper was to describe the results of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) or the treatment of achalasia in geriatric patients. Methods: We included patients over 65 years old with POEM, from retrospective cohort review, in which POEM was performed with a standardized technique in our department. Results: 12 patients were included, the procedure was successful in 98% of patients, minor adverse events occurred without mortality. Conclusions: POEM is a safe and effective technique for the treatment of achalasia, the results of the study are similar to those reported in the literature.

Introducción: La acalasia es un trastorno motor primario del esófago caracterizado por falla en la relajación del esfínter esofágico inferior y ausencia de peristalsis esofágica sin una causa identificable de obstrucción en el esófago distal. La miotomía endoscópica a través de la boca es un tratamiento alternativo a la cardiomiotomía de Heller laparoscópica en pacientes mayores de 65 años. El objetivo de este trabajo fue describir los resultados la miotomía endoscópica a través de la boca (POEM), en pacientes mayores de 65 años. Métodos: Estudio retrospectivo con diagnóstico manométrico de acalasia, de pacientes mayores de 65 años de edad. Resultados: Se incluyeron 12 pacientes, se consideró tratamiento exitoso cuando el paciente alcanza un índice de Eckardt < 3. El procedimiento fue exitoso en el 98% de los pacientes, se presentaron eventos adversos menores en la mayoría de los pacientes. Conclusiones: La miotomía endoscópica a través de la boca es una técnica segura y efectiva para el tratamiento de acalasia en adultos mayores, los resultados del estudio son similares a los reportados en la literatura.