The role of capsule endoscopy in suspected celiac disease patients with positive celiac serology

The role of videocapsule endoscopy in the diagnosis and follow-up of celiac disease: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Videocapsule endoscopy (VCE) may be a complementary tool in the diagnosis of celiac disease (CD) in cases with equivocal findings and in the follow-up of complicated cases. We aimed to summarize the literature on the utilization of VCE in CD diagnosis/follow-up.

METHODS

A computerized literature search was performed to identify pertinent articles published between January 2010 and January 2024.

RESULTS

Three studies focused on VCE in diagnosing CD, involving a total of 186 patients. VCE was performed due to small bowel atrophy with negative serology (19 patients), positive serology with negative histology (40 patients), contraindications/refusal to undergo esophagogastroduodenoscopy (6 patients), high clinical suspicion of CD despite negative serology and/or small bowel atrophy (99 patients), research purpose (22 patients). Twenty studies focused on the follow-up, involving a total of 1337 patients. VCE was performed due to positive serology despite GFD (64 patients), persistent symptoms (389 patients), known/suspected refractory CD-RCD (448 patients), not specified (436 patients). VCE revealed RCD in 243 patients, ulcerative jejunoileitis in 32, T-cell lymphoma in 18, small bowel tumor in one.

CONCLUSIONS

VCE may play a role in patients with equivocal CD diagnosis and in those with suspected complications, particularly RCD. Further studies are warranted to draw more solid conclusions.

Small Bowel Imaging in Celiac Disease: Is there a role for Small Bowel Ultrasound?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The incidence of celiac disease (CD) has increased over the last decades in part due to better disease awareness. Small bowel ultrasound (sb US) enables dynamic assessment of the bowel; although this topic has been addressed, the use of sb US in the diagnosis and in the follow-up of CD patients is limited to a few specialized tertiary referral centers. Herein, we aimed at summarizing the available literature on this topic to better define the potential clinical implications of sb US in CD, also through a comparison with other available diagnostic techniques.

RECENT FINDINGS

According to available data, sb US can be of help in confirming or excluding CD in patients with clinical suspicion; specifically, the finding of increased gall bladder volume, free abdominal fluid and enlargement of mesenteric lymph nodes reliably and accurately predicts the diagnosis of CD, whereas the absence of bowel dilatation and increased peristalsis may exclude the diagnosis. However, the place of intestinal US in the diagnostic algorithm of CD is likely to vary depending on the probability of the disease in a given population. There are only a few studies on the role of sb US in complicated CD, even if recent reports suggest a possible clinical role. There is a lack of data on follow-up of CD patients, particularly with the aim of detecting a poor diet adherence. According to current data sb US parameters have been shown to be of value in confirming and excluding the diagnosis of CD. Prospective studies with large sample size are warranted to determine whether to include sb US in the available guidelines for CD diagnosis and monitoring.

Small-bowel capsule endoscopy and device-assisted enteroscopy for diagnosis and treatment of small-bowel disorders: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Update 2022

MR1: ESGE recommends small-bowel capsule endoscopy as the first-line examination, before consideration of other endoscopic and radiological diagnostic tests for suspected small-bowel bleeding, given the excellent safety profile of capsule endoscopy, its patient tolerability, and its potential to visualize the entire small-bowel mucosa.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. MR2: ESGE recommends small-bowel capsule endoscopy in patients with overt suspected small-bowel bleeding as soon as possible after the bleeding episode, ideally within 48 hours, to maximize the diagnostic and subsequent therapeutic yield.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. MR3: ESGE does not recommend routine second-look endoscopy prior to small-bowel capsule endoscopy in patients with suspected small-bowel bleeding or iron-deficiency anemia.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. MR4: ESGE recommends conservative management in those patients with suspected small-bowel bleeding and high quality negative small-bowel capsule endoscopy.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. MR5: ESGE recommends device-assisted enteroscopy to confirm and possibly treat lesions identified by small-bowel capsule endoscopy.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. MR6: ESGE recommends the performance of small-bowel capsule endoscopy as a first-line examination in patients with iron-deficiency anemia when small bowel evaluation is indicated.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. MR7: ESGE recommends small-bowel capsule endoscopy in patients with suspected Crohn's disease and negative ileocolonoscopy findings as the initial diagnostic modality for investigating the small bowel, in the absence of obstructive symptoms or known bowel stenosis.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. MR8: ESGE recommends, in patients with unremarkable or nondiagnostic findings from dedicated small-bowel cross-sectional imaging, small-bowel capsule endoscopy as a subsequent investigation if deemed likely to influence patient management.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. MR9: ESGE recommends, in patients with established Crohn's disease, the use of a patency capsule before small-bowel capsule endoscopy to decrease the capsule retention rate.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. MR10: ESGE recommends device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE) as an alternative to surgery for foreign bodies retained in the small bowel requiring retrieval in patients without acute intestinal obstruction.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. MR11: ESGE recommends DAE-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (DAE-ERCP) as a first-line endoscopic approach to treat pancreaticobiliary diseases in patients with surgically altered anatomy (except for Billroth II patients).Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.

Assessment of disease severity on capsule endoscopy in patients with small bowel villous atrophy

BACKGROUND AND AIM

There is a lack of uniformity of reporting on features of celiac disease (CD) on small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE). This makes determining extent of disease and comparison of severity of disease challenging.

METHODS

De-identified SBCEs of 300 patients (78 CD [26%], 18 serology negative villous atrophy [6%], and 204 controls with normal duodenal histology [68%]) were included. Videos were reviewed by two experts. All patients had duodenal histology taken within 2 weeks of SBCE. The degree of agreement in CD features and extent of disease was then determined. The resulting score for each factor was used to determine overall severity of disease.

RESULTS

There was substantial agreement in the kappa coefficient for the detection of CD features between reviewers (0.67). Agreement for extent of affected small bowel (SB) mucosa was high (0.97). On multiple regression analysis, several features of CD correlated with extent of affected SB mucosa for both reviewers. The odds ratios derived from this analysis were then used to score features of CD, enabling scores of severity to be calculated for each patient. The median overall scores for patients increased significantly according to the independent classification of severity by the capsule reviewers: mild (20, 0-79), moderate (45, 25-123), and severe (89, 65-130) (P = 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The good correlation of CD scores between expert reviewers confirms the validity of features of CD on SBCE. An objective score of CD features in the SB is useful in the follow up of patients with CD and serology negative villous atrophy.

What is the role of small bowel capsule endoscopy in established coeliac disease?

INTRODUCTION

Patients with established coeliac disease (CD) can present with signs and symptoms requiring small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) to assess for persistent disease beyond the duodenum and to rule out complications. There is paucity of data on extent of disease on SBCE in relation to histology, clinical and serological parameters. The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between symptoms, CD serology and Marsh classification of disease and extent of disease on SBCE in patients with established CD.

METHODS

Hundred patients with established CD and 200 controls underwent a SBCE. SBCEs were reviewed by expert reviewers. Extent of disease on SBCE, CD findings and small bowel transit were recorded.

RESULTS

Considering duodenal histology (D2; Marsh 3a or above) as the gold standard for diagnosing CD activity, the sensitivity of SBCE to delineate active disease was 87.2%. The specificity was 89.0%. Age at SBCE (P=0.006), albumin (P=0.004) and haemoglobin (P=0.0001), Marsh score of histology from the duodenal bulb (D1) (P=0.0001) and the second part of the duodenum (P=0.0001), refractory CD (P=0.007) on histology correlated with extent of affected small bowel (SB) mucosa on univariate analysis. On multiple regression analysis, albumin (P=0.036) and Marsh score of histology (D1) (P=0.019), vitamin B12 (P=0.001) and folate levels (P=0.008) were statistically significant. Extent of affected SB mucosa (11.0% vs 1.35%) was greater in patients with complications including those with refractory CD (P=0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study showing correlation between extent of disease and severity of duodenal histology, markers of malabsorption such as folate levels and vitamin B12 and complications of CD.

Capsule endoscopy for the study of small bowel disorders: Experience at a private institution in Mexico

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

Capsule endoscopy has revolutionized the study of small bowel disorders. Its diagnostic yield, reasons for referral, and frequency of significant endoscopic findings at our institution are unknown. The aims of our study were to describe the reasons for referral, the frequency of significant endoscopic findings, and the diagnostic yield of capsule endoscopy in patients that underwent the procedure for the study of small bowel disorders.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted that included all patients that underwent capsule endoscopy for small bowel disorder evaluation at our institution. The diagnostic yield for significant endoscopic findings, the frequency of significant endoscopic findings, and the reasons for referral for capsule endoscopy were determined.

RESULTS

A total of 134 patients were included in the study and 143 capsule endoscopies were performed. Women made up 48.5% of the sample and the mean patient age was 63 years (18.7 standard deviation). The main reasons for referral were suspicion of overt small bowel bleeding (55.9%) and suspicion of occult small bowel bleeding (28.6%). The overall diagnostic yield was 66.4%. The most common significant findings were small bowel angioectasias (52.6%) and small bowel ulcers (38.9%). There were two adverse events (1.3%): one capsule retention that required enteroscopic removal and one asymptomatic bronchoaspiration of the capsule that resolved spontaneously.

CONCLUSIONS

The frequency of significant endoscopic findings with capsule endoscopy at our institution was different from that reported in other Mexican studies, but the reasons for referral and the diagnostic yield were similar.

A comprehensive review on the utility of capsule endoscopy in coeliac disease: From computational analysis to the bedside

Small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) can identify macroscopic changes of coeliac disease and assess the extent of disease in the small bowel beyond the duodenum. SBCE has a good sensitivity for the detection of coeliac disease in comparison to histology owing to several ideal features such as a high magnification. It also plays a useful role in detecting complications in patients with refractory coeliac disease. Several studies have been carried out on transforming images obtained from small bowel capsule endoscopy to enable the automated detection of features related to coeliac disease. This review discusses the current roles played by small bowel capsule endoscopy in coeliac disease. It identifies future potential roles of this technique and describes in great detail the role of computational analysis in the detection of coeliac disease and how it can be adapted to current available technology.

Capsule endoscopy for patients with coeliac disease

Coeliac disease is an autoimmune mediated condition in response to gluten. A combination of innate and adaptive immune responses results in villous shortening in the small bowel (SB) that can be morphologically picked up on capsule endoscopy. It is the only imaging modality that can provide mucosal views of the entire SB, while histology is generally limited to the proximal SB. Radiological modalities are not designed to pick up changes in villous morphology. Areas covered: In this review, we provide a comprehensive analysis on the justified use of small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) in the assessment of patients with coeliac disease; compare SBCE to histology, serology, and symptomatology; and provide an overview on automated quantitative analysis for the detection of coeliac disease. We also provide insight into future work on SBCE in relation to coeliac disease. Expert commentary: SBCE has opened up new avenues for the diagnosis and monitoring of patients with coeliac disease. However, larger studies with new and established coeliac disease patients and with greater emphasis on morphological features on SBCE are required to better define the role of SBCE in the setting of coeliac disease.

Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of Video Capsule Endoscopy

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Video capsule endoscopy (CE) provides a noninvasive option to assess the small intestine, but its use with respect to endoscopic procedures and cross-sectional imaging varies widely. The aim of this consensus was to provide guidance on the appropriate use of CE in clinical practice.

METHODS

A systematic literature search identified studies on the use of CE in patients with Crohn's disease, celiac disease, gastrointestinal bleeding, and anemia. The quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated using the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

RESULTS

The consensus includes 21 statements focused on the use of small-bowel CE and colon capsule endoscopy. CE was recommended for patients with suspected, known, or relapsed Crohn's disease when ileocolonoscopy and imaging studies were negative if it was imperative to know whether active Crohn's disease was present in the small bowel. It was not recommended in patients with chronic abdominal pain or diarrhea, in whom there was no evidence of abnormal biomarkers typically associated with Crohn's disease. CE was recommended to assess patients with celiac disease who have unexplained symptoms despite appropriate treatment, but not to make the diagnosis. In patients with overt gastrointestinal bleeding, and negative findings on esophagogastroduodenoscopy and colonoscopy, CE should be performed as soon as possible. CE was recommended only in selected patients with unexplained, mild, chronic iron-deficiency anemia. CE was suggested for surveillance in patients with polyposis syndromes or other small-bowel cancers, who required small-bowel studies. Colon capsule endoscopy should not be substituted routinely for colonoscopy. Patients should be made aware of the potential risks of CE including a failed procedure, capsule retention, or a missed lesion. Finally, standardized criteria for training and reporting in CE should be defined.

CONCLUSIONS

CE generally should be considered a complementary test in patients with gastrointestinal bleeding, Crohn's disease, or celiac disease, who have had negative or inconclusive endoscopic or imaging studies.

Small bowel villous atrophy: celiac disease and beyond

Small bowel villous atrophy can represent a diagnostic challenge for gastroenterologists and pathologists. In Western countries small bowel atrophy and mild non-atrophic alterations are frequently caused by celiac disease. However, other pathology can mimic celiac disease microscopically, widening the differential diagnosis. The several novelties on this topic and the introduction of the device-assisted enteroscopy in the diagnostic flowchart make an update of the literature necessary. Areas covered: In this review, a description of the different clinical scenarios when facing with small bowel mucosal damage, particularly small bowel atrophy, is described. The published literature on this subject has been summarized and reviewed. Expert commentary: When an intestinal mucosal alteration is histologically demonstrated, the pathology report forms part of a more complex workup including serological data, clinical presentation and clinical history. A multidisciplinary team, including pathologists and enteroscopy-devoted endoscopists, is frequently required to manage patients with small bowel alterations, especially in cases of severe malabsorption syndrome.

Current status and future perspectives of capsule endoscopy

Small bowel capsule endoscopy (CE) was first introduced 15 years ago, and a large amount of literature has since been produced, focused on its indication, diagnostic yields, and safety. Guidelines that have made CE the primary diagnostic tool for small bowel disease have been created. Since its initial use in the small bowel, CE has been used for the esophagus, stomach, and colon. The primary indications for small bowel CE are obscure gastrointestinal bleeding, unexplained iron deficiency anemia, suspected Crohn's disease, small bowel tumors, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug enteropathy, portal hypertensive enteropathy, celiac disease, etc. Colon CE provides an alternative to conventional colonoscopy, with possible use in colorectal cancer screening. Guidelines for optimal bowel preparation of CE have been suggested. The main challenges in CE are the development of new devices with the ability to provide therapy, air inflation for better visualization of the small bowel, biopsy sampling systems attached to the capsule, and the possibility of guiding and moving the capsule by an external motion controller. We review the current status and future directions of CE, and address all aspects of clinical practice, including the role of CE and long-term clinical outcomes.

Videocapsule endoscopy in celiac disease: indications and timing

BACKGROUND

Because of its technical characteristics (i.e. 8-fold magnification, capability to inspect the entire small bowel) and minimal invasiveness, videocapsule endoscopy (VCE) has been proposed as a useful tool for managing patients with celiac disease (CD).

KEY MESSAGES

Although VCE has been found to be highly sensitive and specific in identifying CD endoscopic markers, it is still inadequate to replace esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) with biopsies in the diagnosis of CD. Nevertheless, it represents a reliable alternative in patients unable or unwilling to undergo EGD. Up to now, available studies have failed to identify any correlation between the length of small bowel involvement and the severity of symptoms. The available evidence on the use of VCE in diagnosing CD in equivocal cases (patients with positive serology and negative or nonspecific histology or those with negative serology and histologically proven villous atrophy) is limited, and its role is still under discussion. In CD patients not improving on gluten-free diet, a complete workup is necessary. In patients with nonresponsive (NRCD) or refractory CD (RCD), VCE has been shown to be able not only to detect significant findings, driving further management, but also to rule out major complications. Nevertheless, in this setting, the inability of VCE to take tissue samples and the risk of capsule retention can represent major limitations.

CONCLUSIONS

At the present time, for diagnostic purposes, VCE can be proposed only in patients unable or unwilling to undergo EGD, whereas it could be useful in some equivocal cases. Conversely, there is no room for VCE either to estimate the length of the small bowel affected by villous atrophy or to follow up patients improving on gluten-free diet. In patients with NRCD or RCD, VCE can play a role, but it should be combined with other diagnostic techniques.

Video capsule endoscopy: perspectives of a revolutionary technique

Video capsule endoscopy (VCE) was launched in 2000 and has revolutionized direct endoscopic imaging of the gut. VCE is now a first-line procedure for exploring the small bowel in cases of obscure digestive bleeding and is also indicated in some patients with Crohn's disease, celiac disease, and polyposis syndrome. A video capsule has also been designed for visualizing the esophagus in order to detect Barrett's esophagus or esophageal varices. Different capsules are now available and differ with regard to dimensions, image acquisition rate, battery life, field of view, and possible optical enhancements. More recently, the use of VCE has been extended to exploring the colon. Within the last 5 years, tremendous developments have been made toward increasing the capabilities of the colon capsule. Although colon capsule cannot be proposed as a first-line colorectal cancer screening procedure, colon capsule may be used in patients with incomplete colonoscopy or in patients who are unwilling to undergo colonoscopy. In the near future, new technological developments will improve the diagnostic yield of VCE and broaden its therapeutic capabilities.

Endoscopic tools for the diagnosis and evaluation of celiac disease

Celiac disease (CD) is an autoimmune disease of the small bowel induced by ingestion of wheat, rye and barley. Current guidelines indicate histological analysis on at least four duodenal biopsies as the only way to diagnose CD. These indications are based on the conception of the inability of standard endoscopy to make diagnosis of CD and/or to drive biopsy sampling. Over the last years, technology development of endoscopic devices has greatly ameliorated the accuracy of macroscopic evaluation of duodenal villous pattern, increasing the diagnostic power of endoscopy of CD. The aim of this paper is to review the new endoscopic tools and procedures proved to be useful in the diagnosis of CD, such as chromoendoscopy, Fujinon Intelligent Chromo Endoscopy, Narrow Band Imaging, Optical Coherence Tomography, Water-Immersion Technique, confocal laser endomicroscopy, high-resolution magnification endoscopy, capsule endoscopy and I-Scan technology.

The importance of disease prevalence in assessing the diagnostic value of a test: endoscopic markers in celiac disease

BACKGROUND/AIMS

We evaluated the diagnostic variability and reproducibility of endoscopic signs in two populations with a different pretest likelihood of celiac disease (CD).

METHODS

We recruited 289 CD patients (both adults and children) in a multicenter prospective study. Group 1 (high risk) included 111 patients referred for positive serology. Group 2 (low risk) included 178 unselected patients. Mosaic pattern, reduction/loss of Kerckring's folds, scalloping of the valvulae conniventes and a nodular pattern were the endoscopic findings looked for in the duodenum.

RESULTS

In group 1, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of endoscopic findings were 100, 84.6, 94.2 and 100% in adults, and 86.8, 9.1, 82.1 and 12.5% in children. In group 2, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of endoscopic findings were 33.3, 91.4, 7.7 and 98.5% in adults, and noncalculable, 78.3, 0.0 and 100% in children. Comparing group 1 and group 2, there was a statistically significant difference in sensitivity and PPV in adults, and in specificity, PPV and NPV in children. Concerning the reproducibility of endoscopic findings, a wide variability of κ values was found.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic signs have low reproducibility for CD, and their diagnostic value in selecting patients for multiple intestinal biopsies is unacceptable, especially in populations with low disease prevalence.

ACG clinical guidelines: diagnosis and management of celiac disease

This guideline presents recommendations for the diagnosis and management of patients with celiac disease. Celiac disease is an immune-based reaction to dietary gluten (storage protein for wheat, barley, and rye) that primarily affects the small intestine in those with a genetic predisposition and resolves with exclusion of gluten from the diet. There has been a substantial increase in the prevalence of celiac disease over the last 50 years and an increase in the rate of diagnosis in the last 10 years. Celiac disease can present with many symptoms, including typical gastrointestinal symptoms (e.g., diarrhea, steatorrhea, weight loss, bloating, flatulence, abdominal pain) and also non-gastrointestinal abnormalities (e.g., abnormal liver function tests, iron deficiency anemia, bone disease, skin disorders, and many other protean manifestations). Indeed, many individuals with celiac disease may have no symptoms at all. Celiac disease is usually detected by serologic testing of celiac-specific antibodies. The diagnosis is confirmed by duodenal mucosal biopsies. Both serology and biopsy should be performed on a gluten-containing diet. The treatment for celiac disease is primarily a gluten-free diet (GFD), which requires significant patient education, motivation, and follow-up. Non-responsive celiac disease occurs frequently, particularly in those diagnosed in adulthood. Persistent or recurring symptoms should lead to a review of the patient's original diagnosis to exclude alternative diagnoses, a review of the GFD to ensure there is no obvious gluten contamination, and serologic testing to confirm adherence with the GFD. In addition, evaluation for disorders associated with celiac disease that could cause persistent symptoms, such as microscopic colitis, pancreatic exocrine dysfunction, and complications of celiac disease, such as enteropathy-associated lymphoma or refractory celiac disease, should be entertained. Newer therapeutic modalities are being studied in clinical trials, but are not yet approved for use in practice. Given the incomplete response of many patients to a GFD-free diet as well as the difficulty of adherence to the GFD over the long term, development of new effective therapies for symptom control and reversal of inflammation and organ damage are needed. The prevalence of celiac disease is increasing worldwide and many patients with celiac disease remain undiagnosed, highlighting the need for improved strategies in the future for the optimal detection of patients.

Capsule endoscopy in adult celiac disease: a potential role in equivocal cases of celiac disease?

BACKGROUND

There have been limited studies evaluating capsule endoscopy (CE) in equivocal celiac disease (CD).

OBJECTIVE

To determine the role CE may have in equivocal CD cases, compared with patients with biopsy-proven and serology-proven CD who have persisting symptoms.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

University hospital.

PATIENTS

A total of 62 patients with equivocal CD and 69 patients with nonresponsive CD.

INTERVENTION

CE.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Diagnostic yield of CE in equivocal cases and accuracy of mucosal abnormality detection in patients with nonresponsive CD.

RESULTS

Equivocal cases (n = 62) were divided into two subgroups: group A (antibody-negative villous atrophy, n = 32) and group B (Marsh 1-2 changes, n = 30). In group A, CE secured a diagnosis of CD or Crohn's disease in 28% (9/32), significantly higher than the diagnostic yield in group B (7%; P = .044). In patients with CD with persisting symptoms, significant CE findings were identified in 12% (8/69), including 2 cases of enteropathy-associated lymphoma, 4 type 1 refractory disease cases, 1 polypoidal mass histologically confirmed to be a fibroepithelial polyp, and 1 case of ulcerative jejunitis. This outcome was significantly lower than the diagnostic yield of CE in antibody-negative villous atrophy (P = .048).

LIMITATIONS

Single center.

CONCLUSION

There have been no previous reports systematically evaluating equivocal CD by using CE. The diagnostic yield of CE in patients with antibody-negative villous atrophy is better than that of CE in patients with CD with persisting symptoms. We advocate the use of CE in equivocal cases, particularly in patients with antibody-negative villous atrophy.

Video capsule endoscopy in celiac disease

Video capsule endoscopy (VCE) provides a safe, non-invasive way to visualize the small intestine and is helpful in celiac disease patients in select situations. VCE can be performed in patients who are unable or unwilling to undergo conventional endoscopy, those with positive celiac serology with normal duodenal biopsies, and also in those who develop alarm symptoms. VCE has limitations including subjective interpretation. Techniques are being developed to standardize assessment of VCE images in patients with known or suspected celiac disease. Pilot studies using computer-based quantification methods have shown promise in examining the 3-dimensional mucosal structure and motility.

Is enteroscopy necessary for diagnosis of celiac disease?

Celiac disease (CD) is an autoimmune inflammatory disease of the small intestine as a result of reaction to wheat protein, gluten. Exclusion of dietary gluten is the mainstay of the treatment that necessitates a precise diagnosis of the disease. Serological screening may aid in identifying patients with suspected CD, which should be confirmed by intestinal biopsy. It has been shown that duodenal biopsies are good for detection of the disease in most patients. However, there is a group of patients with positive serology and inconclusive pathology. As a result of the widespread use of serology, many patients with equivocal findings grow quickly. Unfortunately current endoscopic methods can only diagnose villous atrophy, which can be present in the later grades of disease (i.e., Marsh III). To diagnose CD correctly, going deeper in the intestine may be necessary. Enteroscopy can reveal changes in CD in the intestinal mucosa in 10%-17% of cases that have negative histology at initial workup. Invasiveness of the method limits its use. Capsule endoscopy may be a good substitute for enteroscopy. However, both techniques should be reserved for patients with suspected diagnosis of complications. This paper reviews the current literature in terms of the value of enteroscopy for diagnosis of CD.

Diagnosing celiac disease by video capsule endoscopy (VCE) when esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and biopsy is unable to provide a diagnosis: a case series

Background

Video capsule endoscopy (VCE) is mainly used to evaluate patients with celiac disease in whom their course after diagnosis has been unfavorable and the diagnosis of adenocarcinoma, lymphoma or refractory celiac disease is entertained, but it has been suggested that VCE could replace esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and biopsy under certain circumstances.

Methods

We report a single center case series of 8 patients with suspected celiac disease who were diagnosed by VCE.

Results

EGD and biopsy had been performed in 4 patients resulting in a negative biopsy, declined by 2, and contraindicated in 2 due to hemophilia and von Willebrand disease. In all patients, mucosal changes of scalloping, mucosal mosaicism and reduced folds were seen in either the duodenum or jejunum on VCE. Follow-up in 7 patients demonstrated improvement in either their serological abnormalities or their presenting clinical features on a gluten-free diet.

Conclusions

Our case series demonstrates that VCE and the visualization of the characteristic mucosal changes of villous atrophy may replace biopsy as the mode of diagnosis when EGD is either declined or contraindicated, or when duodenal biopsies are negative and there remains a high index of suspicion. Further study is needed to clarify the role and cost of diagnosing celiac disease with VCE.

The role of video capsule endoscopy in the diagnosis of celiac disease: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Video capsule endoscopy (VCE) is an attractive and patient friendly tool that provides high quality images of the small bowel. The reported yield of VCE in diagnosing celiac disease (CD) has shown variable results.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of VCE by pooling data of existing trials.

DESIGN

Meta-analysis. The fixed-effects or random-effects model was used as appropriate, based on whether homogeneity or heterogeneity, respectively, was indicated by the Cochran Q-test.

PATIENTS

Studies that estimated the accuracy of VCE were identified. The two investigators independently conducted the search and data extraction. A total of 166 individuals were included in this meta-analysis.

METHODS

An extensive literature search was performed and studies that estimated the accuracy of VCE in CD were identified. The two investigators independently conducted the search and data extraction. Data from the eligible studies were collected and pooled; sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, and diagnostic odds ratios were computed. In addition, the results of the individual studies were displayed in a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) space to illustrate the distribution of sensitivities and specificities. A weighted symmetric summary ROC curve was computed and the area under the curve (AUC) was calculated, with perfect tests having an AUC of 1 and poor tests having an AUC close to 0.5.

RESULTS

Out of 461 titles initially generated by the literature searches, six studies met the inclusion criteria and were eligible for meta-analysis. The overall pooled VCE sensitivity was 89% [95% confidence interval (82-94%)] and specificity was 95% [95% confidence interval (89-98%)]. The AUC under the weighted symmetric summary ROC was 0.9584.

CONCLUSION

The results of this meta-analysis mean that VCE, although it is not as accurate as pathology, could be a reasonable alternative method of diagnosing CD. Hopefully, this method will expand the portfolio of diagnostic methods available, especially in patients unwilling to undergo gastroscopy because of its perceived inconvenience and discomfort. However, larger, multicenter, and well-designed trials are needed to further establish the role of VCE in the diagnosis of CD.

Capsule endoscopy in celiac disease

Capsule endoscopy (CE) has been increasingly used for diagnosing disease of the small bowel. It is an attractive technique for assessing celiac disease (CD) because it is noninvasive and provides a close and magnified view of the mucosa of the entire small bowel. The aim of this paper is to update the current data on the use of CE for diagnosing villous atrophy and complications of CD.

Update on celiac disease - etiology, differential diagnosis, drug targets, and management advances

Celiac disease (CD) is an immune-mediated enteropathy triggered by exposure to wheat gluten and similar proteins found in rye and barley that affects genetically susceptible persons. This immune-mediated enteropathy is characterized by villous atrophy, intraepithelial lymphocytosis, and crypt hyperplasia. Once thought a disease that largely presented with malnourished children, the wide spectrum of disease activity is now better recognized and this has resulted in a shift in the presenting symptoms of most patients with CD. New advances in testing, both serologic and endoscopic, have dramatically increased the detection and diagnosis of CD. While the gluten-free diet is still the only treatment for CD, recent investigations have explored alternative approaches, including the use of altered nonimmunogenic wheat variants, enzymatic degradation of gluten, tissue transglutaminase inhibitors, induction of tolerance, and peptides to restore integrity to intestinal tight junctions.

Capsule endoscopy: a valuable tool in the follow-up of people with celiac disease on a gluten-free diet

OBJECTIVES:

Traditional celiac disease guidelines recommend follow-up endoscopy and duodenal biopsies at 6–12 months after commencing a gluten-free diet (GFD). However, histology may remain abnormal even 1–2 years later. We evaluated the role of capsule endoscopy in patients with celiac disease after treatment with a GFD.

METHODS:

Twelve adult patients with newly diagnosed celiac disease were prospectively enrolled. All patients had baseline symptom assessment, celiac serology (tissue transglutaminase antibody, tTG), and capsule endoscopy. Twelve months after commencing a GFD, patients underwent repeat symptom assessment, celiac serology, upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, and capsule endoscopy.

RESULTS:

At baseline, capsule endoscopy detected endoscopic markers of villous atrophy in the duodenum and extending to a variable distance along the small intestine. On the basis of small bowel transit time, the mean±s.e.m. percentage of small intestine with villous atrophy was 18.2±3.7%. After 12 months on a GFD, repeat capsule endoscopy demonstrated mucosal healing from a distal to proximal direction, and the percentage of small intestine with villous atrophy was significantly reduced to 3.4±1.2% (P=0.0014) and this correlated with improvement in the symptom score (correlation 0.69, P=0.01). There was a significant improvement in symptom score (5.2±1.0 vs. 1.7±0.4, P=0.0012) and reduction in immunoglobulin A–tTG levels (81.5±10.6 vs. 17.5±8.2, P=0.0005). However, 42% of subjects demonstrated persistent villous abnormality as assessed by duodenal histology.

CONCLUSIONS:

After 12 months on a GFD, patients with celiac disease demonstrate an improvement in symptoms, celiac serology, and the extent of disease as measured by capsule endoscopy. Mucosal healing occurs in a distal to proximal direction. The extent of mucosal healing correlates with improvement in symptoms. Duodenal histology does not reflect the healing that has occurred more distally.