Is a 2-liter PEG preparation useful before capsule endoscopy?

Endoscope Capsules: The Present Situation and Future Outlooks

This paper presents new perspectives on photonic technologies for capsule endoscopy. It first presents a review of conventional endoscopy (upper endoscopy and colonoscopy), followed by capsule endoscopy (CE), as well as their techniques, advantages, and drawbacks. The technologies for CEs presented in this paper include integration with the existing endoscopic systems that are commercially available. Such technologies include narrow-band imaging (NBI), photodynamic therapy (PDT), confocal laser endomicroscopy (CLE), optical coherence tomography (OCT), and spectroscopy in order to improve the performance of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract examination. In the context of NBI, two optical filters were designed and fabricated for integration into endoscopic capsules, allowing for the visualization of light centered at the 415 nm and 540 nm wavelengths. These optical filters are based on the principle of Fabry-Perot and were made of thin films of titanium dioxide (TiO2) and silicon dioxide (SiO2). Moreover, strategies and solutions for the adaptation of ECs for PDT are also discussed.

Small bowel cleansing for capsule endoscopy, systematic review and meta- analysis: Timing is the real issue

BACKGROUND

The optimal small bowel preparation modality before capsule endoscopy (SBCE) is still uncertain, regarding preparation type, dose and timing of administration.

AIM

The aim of the study is to evaluate the small bowel cleansing in patients undergoing small bowel capsule endoscopy after fasting alone or active treatment with purgative solutions.

METHODS

We searched 4 major scientific databases from inception to December 2021 for studies evaluating small bowel preparation before SBCE. Different preparation efficacy was compared using fasting as reference. Main variables evaluated in the current study were: preparation type, administration schedule and timing.

RESULTS

17 studies (27 treatment arms) with 2372 patients (male 47,4%) were included, mean age 54 years. Fasting alone VS overall purgative preparations pooled rate difference (RD) was 0.15 I2=81.5% p: 0.000. Sub-analysis for preparation schedule (day-before, split and same-day) and the time lapse showed that administration of PEG after the ingestion of capsule had the highest rate of adequate small bowel cleansing with a RD 0.33, administration between 1 and 6 h before SBCE had a RD 0.28, 6 to 12 h had a RD 0.21 and ≥12 h had a RD 0.05.

CONCLUSIONS

Timing of ingestion was found to be critical for bowel cleansing; the shorter time laps between the ingestion last dose of laxative and SBCE, the better was the mucosal visualization.

Fecal Calprotectin for Small Bowel Crohn's Disease: Is It a Cutoff Issue?

(1) Background: Fecal calprotectin (FC) correlates well with colonic inflammatory activity of Crohn’s disease (CD); data about relation of FC and small bowel (SB) lesions are still contradictory. The main aim was to analyze the relationship between FC levels and SB inflammatory activity in patients with established or suspected Crohn’s disease, assessed by small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) or magnetic resonance enterography (MRE). (2) Methods: Two cohorts of patients were included: 1. Prospective data were collected from patients with established or suspected CD who underwent SBCE and FC (Cohort A); 2. A retrospective cohort of patients who underwent MRE and FC determination (Cohort B). Different cutoffs for FC were tested in both cohorts. (3) Results: 83 patients were included and 66 were finally analyzed. A total of 69.6% had SB lesions seen by SBCE (n = 25) or MRE (n = 21). FC mean levels were 605.74 + 607.07 μg/g (IQ range: 99.00−878.75), being significantly higher in patients with SB lesions compared to patients without lesions (735.91 + 639.70 μg/g (IQ range: 107.75−1366.25) vs. 306.35 + 395.26 μg/g (IQ range: 78.25−411.0), p < 0.005). For cohort A, 25 out of 35 patients had SB lesions and a significant correlation between Lewis Score and FC levels was achieved (R2: 0.34; p = 0.04). FC sensitivity (S), specificity (E), positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive values (NPV) for predicting SB lesions were 80%, 50%, 80%, and 50%, respectively, for FC > 100 µg/g. For cohort B, inflammatory SB activity, measured by MaRIA score, was detected in 21 out of 31 patients (67.7%). Patients with positive findings in MRE had significantly higher values of FC than those with no lesions (944.9 + 672.1 µg/g vs. 221 + 212.2 µg/g, p < 0.05). S, E, PPV, and NPV of FC were 89%, 50%, 77.2%, and 71.4% for FC levels > 100 µg/g. The higher sensitivity and specificity of the FC levels for the detection of SB lesions with SBCE and MRE was obtained for an FC cutoff >265 μg/g and >430 μg/g, respectively. (4) Conclusions: FC has a good correlation with the presence of SB lesions, assessed by SBCE and MRE, in patients with established or suspected Crohn’s disease. However, the ideal cutoff is here proven to be higher than previously reported. Multicenter and large prospective studies are needed in order to establish definitive FC cutoff levels.

Endoscopic Delivery Method Using a Retrieval Net for Patients with Small-Bowel Capsule Endoscopy Stagnation in the Stomach

With the increasing use of capsule endoscopy (CE), screening tests for the small bowel can be performed with minimal invasiveness. However, occasionally, the entire small bowel cannot be observed because of decreased peristalsis of the stomach. For such cases, we perform delivery of CE by an endoscope. We retrospectively examined the usefulness of the endoscopic delivery method using a retrieval net for patients with CE stagnation in the stomach. From 2,270 patients who underwent small-bowel CE at Hiroshima University Hospital from January 2013 to January 2020, 29 consecutive patients (1.3% of the total number) in whom the small bowel could not be observed due to CE stagnation in the stomach at the time of the initial CE underwent the endoscopic delivery method using a retrieval net for secondary small-bowel CE. This study included 16 male (55%) and 13 female (45%) patients with a mean age of 69.2 ± 13.2 years. 11 patients (38%) had a history of gastrointestinal surgical resection. The entire small bowel could be observed in 19 patients (66%), and CE reached the terminal ileum in the remaining patients. A history of gastrointestinal surgical resection was significantly more frequent in the group where the entire small bowel could not be observed. The rate of small-bowel lesion detection was 55% (16/29). There were no adverse events associated with our endoscopic delivery method. Thus, the endoscopic delivery method using a retrieval net for patients with initial CE stagnation in the stomach may be safe and useful for the detection of small-bowel lesions.

Preparation, Timing, Prokinetics, and Surface Agents in Video Capsule Endoscopy

There is a trend in data to support active preparation for video capsule endoscopy (VCE), but the timing of this remains unclear. Split dosing may be the most efficacious preparation. Study methodology continues to evolve, with increased use of standardized scales, with the addition of diagnostic yield as an outcome. The use of adjuncts has not been detrimental, but their value has not been proved to improve outcomes of VCE.

A case-control study demonstrates an improved visualization when capsule endoscopy is performed after preparation with polyethylene glycol and ascorbic acid

BACKGROUND

capsule endoscopy is increasingly used to obtain images of the gastrointestinal tract, although the best preparation for this type of exploration remains unclear.

AIMS

the aim of this study was to compare the results of capsule endoscopy explorations performed after a basic preparation with a clear liquid diet, reduced iron intake and fasting or following preparation with a polyethylene glycol (PEG)/ascorbate solution.

METHODS

the results obtained from a prospective intervention group that used a PEG/ascorbate solution to prepare for capsule endoscopy were compared with those from a retrospective group of patients who followed a more basic preparation. The quality of visualization was assessed with the Park score, the visualization of the mucosal surface and the cleanliness of the intestinal lumen were assessed. The capsule transit time in different segments of the gastrointestinal tract was also evaluated.

RESULTS

a significant improvement in the quality of small intestine visualization was observed in individuals prepared with the PEG/ascorbate solution as opposed to the basic preparation. In fact, there were significant differences in the two separate components that contribute to the overall visualization score, with better mucosa visualization and lumen content scores in the intervention group, thus reflecting an improved performance. The presence of diabetes appeared to affect the results of these explorations, at least when using the PEG/ascorbate preparation.

CONCLUSIONS

preparation with a PEG/ascorbate solution improved the results of capsule endoscopy when compared to a basic preparation, without the inconvenience of the more stringent preparations used for colonoscopies.

Capsule endoscopy for small-intestinal disorders: Current status

Small-bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) is used widely because of its non-invasive and patient-friendly nature. SBCE can visualize entire small-intestinal mucosa and facilitate detection of small-intestinal abnormalities. In this review article, we focus on the current status of SBCE. Several platforms for SBCE are available worldwide. Third-generation SBCE (PillCam^® SB3) has a high-resolution camera equipped with an adaptive frame rate system. Several software modes have been developed to reduce the reading time for capsule endoscopy and to minimize the possibility of missing lesions. The main complication of SBCE is capsule retention. Thus, the main contraindication for SBCE is known or suspected gastrointestinal obstruction unless intestinal patency is proven. Possible indications for SBCE are obscure gastrointestinal bleeding, Crohn's disease, small-intestinal polyps and tumors, and celiac disease. Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) can observe inflamed colonic mucosa non-invasively, and allows for the continuous and non-invasive observation of the entire intestinal tract (pan-endoscopy). Recently, application of CCE as pan-enteric endoscopy for inflammatory bowel diseases (including Crohn's disease) has been reported. In the near future, reading for CE will be assisted by artificial intelligence, and reading CE videos for long periods will not be required.

The Clinical Usefulness of the PillCam Progress Indicator for Route Selection in Double Balloon Endoscopy

Objective The utility of capsule endoscopy (CE) findings in the route selection for double balloon endoscopy (DBE) has not been adequately discussed. The PillCam Progress Indicator in the RAPID 6.5 software program graphically demonstrates the progress of the capsule endoscope through the small-bowel. This study aimed to clarify the usefulness of the PillCam Progress Indicator in choosing the initial DBE route. Methods We retrospectively examined 50 consecutive patients with 50 target lesions detected on both CE and DBE at Hiroshima University Hospital from January 2011 to February 2018. In this study, we selected antegrade DBE on the basis of % Capsule Progress <50% as a clinical trial. The association between the PillCam Progress Indicator data and the DBE route to the target lesion was analyzed. Results The target lesion was reached via the initial DBE route in 96% (48/50) of cases. The cutoff values for selecting an antegrade route for DBE were 50% for % Capsule Progress and 42% for % SB Time. At the cutoff value, the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for route selection were 100%, 91%, 93%, and 100% for % Capsule Progress and 96%, 91%, 93%, and 95% for % SB Time. Conclusion The PillCam Progress Indicator was useful for determining the appropriate initial DBE route.

Development and validation of a computed assessment of cleansing score for evaluation of quality of small-bowel visualization in capsule endoscopy

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

 An objective and reliable scoring system is needed to assess quality of visualization in small bowel (SB) capsule endoscopy (CE), for both clinical practice and research purposes. The aim of this study was to establish and to validate a SB-computed assessment of cleansing (SB-CAC) score.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

 Thirty-three SB-CE were selected. A CAC score, defined as the ratio of the red over green pixels (R/G ratio), was calculated for each frame. Intervals were then determined, ranging from the lowest to the highest ratio among the extracted frames. Twelve frames were randomly selected in each of these intervals. Two hundred eighty-eight frames were shuffled and analyzed twice in random order by two experienced CE readers who were blinded to the CAC scores. Once an "adequately cleansed" or "inadequately cleansed" qualification was allotted to every still frame, a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was created. In case of discrepancy between the two readers, the still frames were excluded. A second dataset of 288 different SB still frames was generated and read twice in random order by two other experienced SB-CE readers, using the same methodology.

RESULTS

 A SB-CAC score threshold of 1.6 best achieved discrimination of adequately from inadequately cleansed frames, with a sensitivity of 92.7 % (95 %CI [89.7 - 95.8]) and a specificity of 92.9 % (95 %CI [89.9 - 95.9]). This threshold was validated using the second dataset, yielding the following performances: sensitivity 91.3 % (95 %CI [87.9 - 94.6]), specificity 94.7 % (95 %CI [92.1 - 97.3]).

CONCLUSION

 An SB-CAC score of 1.6 has the highest sensitivity and specificity to discriminate "adequately cleansed" from "inadequately cleansed" SB-CE still frames. This constitutes an objective, reproducible, reliable, and automated cleansing score for SB-CE.

Systematic review and meta-analysis: is bowel preparation still necessary in small bowel capsule endoscopy?

INTRODUCTION

Optimal bowel preparation for small bowel capsule endoscopy(SBCE) is controversial. This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effects of laxatives in SBCE.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted for studies investigating the use of laxatives in SBCE. The primary outcome was diagnostic yield(DY) for SB findings; secondary outcomes SB visualization quality(SBVQ) and completion rate(CR). Pooled odds ratios(ORs) with 95% confidence intervals(CIs) and number needed to treat(NNT) were calculated.

RESULTS

Forty studies (4380 patients with laxatives, 2185 without) were included. Laxative use did not improve DY of SB findings overall (OR 1.11 (95%CI 0.85-1.44)) or for significant SB findings (OR 1.10 (95%CI 0.76-1.60)). However, SBVQ improved with the use of laxatives (OR 1.60 (95%CI 1.08-2.06)), NNT 14. The OR for completed SBCE was 1.30 (95%CI 0.95-1.78). Patients given polyethylene glycol(PEG) had lower DY than sodium phosphate(NaP). SBVQ improved more with NaP (NNT 7) than PEG (NNT 53).

CONCLUSIONS

Laxatives do not significantly improve DY or CR in SBCE, but do improve SBQV. The use of laxatives may be beneficial in patients likely to have subtle findings. There are significant differences in methodology/definitions between studies, hence the need for standardized visualization scoring and recording of SBCE findings.

Lubiprostone improves visualization of small bowel for capsule endoscopy: a double-blind, placebo-controlled 2-way crossover study

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

 Lubiprostone has been reported to be an anti-constipation drug. The aim of the study was to investigate the usefulness of lubiprostone both for bowel preparation and as a propulsive agent in small bowel endoscopy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

 This was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2-way crossover study of subjects who volunteered to undergo capsule endoscopy (CE). A total of 20 subjects (16 male and 4 female volunteers) were randomly assigned to receive a 24-μg tablet of lubiprostone 120 minutes prior to capsule ingestion for CE (L regimen), or a placebo tablet 120 minutes prior to capsule ingestion for CE (P regimen). Main outcome was gastric transit time (GTT) and small-bowel transit time (SBTT). Secondary outcome was adequacy of small-bowel cleansing and the fluid score in the small bowel. The quality of the capsule endoscopic images and fluid in the small bowel were assessed on 5-point scale.

RESULTS

 The capsule passed into the small bowel in all cases. Median GTT was 57.3 (3 - 221) minutes for the P regimen and 61.3 (10 - 218) minutes for the L regimen ( P  = 0.836). Median SBTT was 245.0 (164 - 353) minutes for the P regimen and 228.05 (116 - 502) minutes for the L regimen ( P  = 0.501). The image quality score in the small bowel was 3.05 ± 1.08 for the P regimen and 3.80 ± 0.49 for the L regimen ( P  < 0.001). The fluid score in the small bowel was 2.04 ± 1.58 for the P regimen and 2.72 ± 1.43 for the L regimen ( P  < 0.001). There was a significant difference between the 2 regimens with regard to image quality. The fluid score was more plentiful for the L regimen than for the P regimen. There were no cases of capsule retention or serious adverse events in this study.

CONCLUSION

 Our study showed that use of lubiprostone prior to CE significantly improved visualization of the small bowel during CE as a result of inducing fluid secretion into the small bowel.

NASPGHAN Capsule Endoscopy Clinical Report

Wireless capsule endoscopy (CE) was introduced in 2000 as a less invasive method to visualize the distal small bowel in adults. Because this technology has advanced it has been adapted for use in pediatric gastroenterology. Several studies have described its clinical use, utility, and various training methods but pediatric literature regarding CE is limited. This clinical report developed by the Endoscopic and Procedures Committee of the North American Society of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition outlines the current literature, and describes the recommended current role, use, training, and future areas of research for CE in pediatrics.

Validated computed cleansing score for video capsule endoscopy

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Diagnostic yield of video capsule endoscopy may be hampered by intestinal content or air bubbles. A major limitation in video capsule-related study is the lack of a validated objective score for bowel preparation quality. We aimed to design and validate a computed small bowel preparation score for research and clinical use.

METHODS

Two experienced physicians reached a consensus regarding bowel preparation quality based on known criteria used in previous studies and their confidence of an accurate medical interpretation of the procedure. A computed algorithm based on the pixels in the color bar was created and validated. Concordance between the gastroenterologists' agreement (gold standard) and the computed analysis was assessed.

RESULTS

Of 85 videos studied, 44 (52%), 13 (15%) and 28 (33%) had adequate, borderline and inadequate bowel preparation, respectively, according to the gastroenterologists' agreement. Computer analysis restricted to adequate and inadequate cases yielded accurate classification of bowel preparation in 65/72 cases (90% agreement, sensitivity 95%, specificity 82%, total accuracy 90%, Kappa 0.79). When adding the borderline definition, the computer analysis correctly classified 71/85 of the cases, yielding an overall agreement of 84% (Kappa 0.72). Minute-by-minute analysis of 10 cases also yielded an agreement of 91.4%.

CONCLUSION

The present study introduces a user-friendly computer analysis-based small bowel preparation score, which demonstrated excellent concordance with the physician's assessment. This score holds promise as a standardization tool in research and clinical practice of video capsule endoscopy. Further validation is warranted.

Bowel preparation in "real-life" small bowel capsule endoscopy: a two-center experience

Background

Video capsule endoscopy (VCE) is an established diagnostic tool for the investigation of small bowel (SB) pathology. Bowel preparation prior to VCE may improve visualization, transit time, and diagnostic yield. We aimed to evaluate the “real-life” experience comparing two different preparation protocols in patients undergoing SB VCE.

Methods

We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from SB VCE procedures, performed in two tertiary care medical centers in Israel. VCE procedures performed at “Sheba Medical Center” used a 2-L polyethylene glycol (PEG) bowel preparation (n=360) while VCEs performed at “Rambam Health Care campus” used a clear liquid diet plus 12-h fast protocol (n=500). A dichotomous preparation scale (adequate, inadequate) was used to classify cleansing quality. Data collection included patient and procedural details. The proportion of VCE procedures with adequate bowel preparation and the overall positive SB findings in the two different bowel preparation protocols were evaluated.

Results

SB completion rates were higher in the PEG protocol (96% vs. 83%, P<0.001) and SB passage time was significantly faster in the PEG protocol (mean 217±73 vs. 238±77 min, P<0.001). Bowel preparation quality was similar between groups (8% vs. 7% inadequate preparation, P=0.591). Overall positive SB findings were similar between the two groups (57% clear liquid fasting only vs. 51% PEG protocol, P=0.119).

Conclusion

In this large cohort, a 2-L PEG protocol had similar preparation quality and diagnostic yield compared with clear liquid fasting.

Optimal Bowel Preparation for Video Capsule Endoscopy

During video capsule endoscopy (VCE), several factors, such as air bubbles, food material in the small bowel, and delayed gastric and small bowel transit time, influence diagnostic yield, small bowel visualization quality, and cecal completion rate. Therefore, bowel preparation before VCE is as essential as bowel preparation before colonoscopy. To date, there have been many comparative studies, consensus, and guidelines regarding different kinds of bowel cleansing agents in bowel preparation for small bowel VCE. Presently, polyethylene glycol- (PEG-) based regimens are given primary recommendation. Sodium picosulphate-based regimens are secondarily recommended, as their cleansing efficacy is less than that of PEG-based regimens. Sodium phosphate as well as complementary simethicone and prokinetics use are considered. In this paper, we reviewed previous studies regarding bowel preparation for small bowel VCE and suggested optimal bowel preparation of VCE.

Long-term outcome in patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding after capsule endoscopy

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to identify the risk factors associated with rebleeding and long-term outcomes after capsule endoscopy (CE) for obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB) in a follow-up study.

METHODS

Data of consecutive patients who underwent CE due to OGIB from June 2002 to January 2012 were retrospectively reviewed. The Cox proportional hazard model was used to evaluate the risk factors associated with rebleeding, while Kaplan-Meier survival curves and the log-rank test were used to analyze cumulative rebleeding rates.

RESULTS

The overall rebleeding rate after CE in patients with OGIB was 28.6% (97/339) during a median follow-up of 48 months (range 12-112 months). Multivariate analysis showed that age ≥60 years (hazard ratio [HR] 2.473, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.576-3.881, P = 0.000), positive CE findings (HR 3.393, 95% CI 1.931-5.963, P = 0.000), hemoglobin ≤70 g/L before CE (HR 2.010, 95% CI 1.261-3.206, P = 0.003), nonspecific treatments (HR 2.500, 95% CI 1.625-3.848, P = 0.000) and the use of anticoagulants, antiplatelet or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs after CE (HR 2.851, 95% CI 1.433-5.674, P = 0.003) were independent risk factors associated with rebleeding. Univariate analysis showed that chronic hepatitis was independently associated with rebleeding in CE-negative patients (P = 0.021).

CONCLUSIONS

CE has a significant impact on the long-term outcome of patients with OGIB. Further investigation and close follow-up in patients with OGIB and those with negative CE findings are necessary.

Lubiprostone decreases the small bowel transit time by capsule endoscopy: an exploratory, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled 3-way crossover study

The aim of this study was to investigate the usefulness of lubiprostone for bowel preparation and as a propulsive agent in small bowel endoscopy. Six healthy male volunteers participated in this randomized, 3-way crossover study. The subjects received a 24 μg tablet of lubiprostone 60 minutes prior to the capsule ingestion for capsule endoscopy (CE) and a placebo tablet 30 minutes before the capsule ingestion (L-P regimen), a placebo tablet 60 minutes prior to CE and a 24 μg tablet of lubiprostone 30 minutes prior to CE (P-L regimen), or a placebo tablet 60 minutes prior to r CE and a placebo tablet again 30 minutes prior to CE (P-P regimen). The quality of the capsule endoscopic images and the amount of water in the small bowel were assessed on 5-point scale. The median SBTT was 178.5 (117-407) minutes in the P-P regimen, 122.5 (27-282) minutes in the L-P regimen, and 110.5 (11-331) minutes in the P-L regimen (P = 0.042). This study showed that the use of lubiprostone significantly decreased the SBTT. We also confirmed that lubiprostone was effective for inducing water secretion into the small bowel during CE.

Coffee enema for preparation for small bowel video capsule endoscopy: a pilot study

Coffee enemas are believed to cause dilatation of bile ducts and excretion of bile through the colon wall. Proponents of coffee enemas claim that the cafestol palmitate in coffee enhances the activity of glutathione S-transferase, an enzyme that stimulates bile excretion. During video capsule endoscopy (VCE), excreted bile is one of the causes of poor preparation of the small bowel. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and effect of coffee enema for preparation of the small bowel during VCE. In this pilot study, 17 of 34 patients were assigned to the coffee enema plus polyethylene glycol (PEG) 2 L ingestion group, whereas the 17 remaining control patients received 2 L of PEG only. The quality of bowel preparation was evaluated in the two patient groups. Bowel preparations in the proximal segments of small bowel were not differ between two groups. In the mid and distal segments of the small intestine, bowel preparations tend to be better in patients who received coffee enemas plus PEG than in patients who received PEG only. The coffee enema group did not experience any complications or side effects. Coffee enemas may be a feasible option, and there were no clinically significant adverse events related to coffee enemas. More prospective randomized studies are warranted to improve small bowel preparation for VCE.

Small bowel cleansing for capsule endoscopy in paediatric patients: a prospective randomized single-blind study

BACKGROUND

Small bowel cleansing by capsule endoscopy has never been addressed in children.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effect of five bowel preparation regimens on the mucosal visibility surface (as percentage of visualized surface area). Group A: a clear liquid diet for 12 h on the day before; Group B: high volume polyethylene glycol (50 mL/kg, up to 2Lt/die); Group C: low volume polyethylene glycol (25 mL/kg up to 1Lt/die); Group D: 20 mL (376 mg) of oral simethicone; Group E: 25 mL/kg (up to 1Lt/die) of polyethylene glycol solution plus 20 mL (376 mg) of oral simethicone.

RESULTS

Overall, 198 patients (53% male, median age 13 years) were enrolled. Preparation regimen visualization scores were 14.1 ± 4.2, 18.9 ± 5.1, 17.8 ± 5.5, 14.9 ± 4.8 and 20.9 ± 4.6 in groups A, B, C, D and E, respectively (P < 0.01). Positive findings were found in 172 cases (87%), but no significant differences were observed in the diagnostic yield and tolerability. Interobserver agreement, k = 0.89 (95% CI 0.83 ± 0.71).

CONCLUSION

This is the first report in children that supports the use of 25 mL/kg (up to 1Lt/die) of polyethylene glycol solution plus 20 mL (376 mg) of oral simethicone as the preparation of choice for capsule endoscopy.

Wireless capsule endoscopy

Over the last decade, WCE has established itself as a valuable test for imaging the small intestine. It is a safe and relatively easy procedure to perform that can provide valuable information in the diagnosis of small-bowel conditions. Its applications still remain limited within the esophagus and colon. Future developments may include improving visualization within the esophagus and developing technologies that may allow manipulation of the capsule within the GI tract and biopsy capabilities.

Learning curve of capsule endoscopy

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Capsule endoscopy (CE) has become an important tool for the diagnosis of small bowel disease. Although CE does not require the skill of endoscope insertion, the images should be interpreted by a person with experience in assessing images of the gastrointestinal mucosa. This investigation aimed to document the number of cases needed by trainees to gain the necessary experience for CE competency.

METHODS

Fifteen cases were distributed to 12 trainees with no previous experience of CE during their gastroenterology training as clinical fellows. Twelve trainees and an expert were asked to read CE images from one patient each week for 15 weeks. The diagnosis was reported using five categories (no abnormalities detected, small bowel erosion or ulcer, small bowel tumor, Crohn disease, and active small bowel bleeding with no identifiable source). We then examined, using the κ coefficient, how the degree of mean agreements between the trainees and the expert changed as the training progressed each week.

RESULTS

The agreement rate of CE diagnosis increased as the frequencies of interpretation increased. Most of the mean κ coefficients were >0.60 and >0.80 after week 9 and 11, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Experience with approximately 10 cases of CE is appropriate for trainees to attain CE competency.

Guidelines for Bowel Preparation before Video Capsule Endoscopy

The preparation for video capsule endoscopy (VCE) of the bowel suggested by manufacturers of capsule endoscopy systems consists only of a clear liquid diet and an 8-hour fast. While there is evidence for a benefit from bowel preparation for VCE, so far there is no domestic consensus on the preparation regimen in Korea. Therefore, we performed this study to recommend guidelines for bowel preparation before VCE. The guidelines on VCE were developed by the Korean Gut Image Study Group, part of the Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Four key questions were selected. According to our guidelines, bowel preparation with polyethylene glycol (PEG) solution enhances small bowel visualization quality (SBVQ) and diagnostic yield (DY), but it has no effect on cecal completion rate (CR). Bowel preparation with 2 L of PEG solution is similar to that with 4 L of PEG in terms of the SBVQ, DY, and CR of VCE. Bowel preparation with fasting or PEG solution combined with simethicone enhances the SBVQ, but it does not affect the CR of VCE. Bowel preparation with prokinetics does not enhance the SBVQ, DY, or CR of VCE.

Oral purgative and simethicone before small bowel capsule endoscopy

AIM: To evaluate small bowel cleansing quality, diagnostic yield and transit time, comparing three cleansing protocols prior to capsule endoscopy.

METHODS: Sixty patients were prospectively enrolled and randomized to one of the following cleansing protocols: patients in Group A underwent a 24 h liquid diet and overnight fasting; patients in Group B followed protocol A and subsequently were administered 2 L of polyethylene glycol (PEG) the evening before the procedure; patients in Group C followed protocol B and were additionally administered 100 mg of simethicone 30 min prior to capsule ingestion. Small bowel cleansing was independently assessed by two experienced endoscopists and classified as poor, fair, good or excellent according to the proportion of small bowel mucosa under perfect conditions for visualization. When there was no agreement between the two endoscopists, the images were reviewed and discussed until a consensus was reached. The preparation was considered acceptable if > 50% or adequate if > 75% of the mucosa was in perfect cleansing condition. The amount of bubbles was assessed independently and it was considered significant if it prevented a correct interpretation of the images. Positive endoscopic findings, gastric emptying time (GET) and small bowel transit time (SBTT) were recorded for each examination.

RESULTS: There was a trend favoring Group B in achieving an acceptable (including fair, good or excellent) level of cleansing (Group A: 65%; Group B: 83.3%; Group C: 68.4%) [P = not significant (NS)] and favoring Group C in attaining an excellent level of cleansing (Group A: 10%; Group B: 16.7%; Group C: 21.1%) (P = NS). The number of patients with an adequate cleansing of the small bowel, corresponding to an excellent or good classification, was 5 (25%) in Group A, 5 (27.8%) in Group B and 4 (21.1%) in Group C (P = 0.892). Conversely, 7 patients (35%) in Group A, 3 patients (16.7%) in Group B and 6 patients (31.6%) in Group C were considered to have poor small bowel cleansing (P = 0.417), with significant fluid or debris such that the examination was unreliable. The proportion of patients with a significant amount of bubbles was 50% in Group A, 27.8% in Group B and 15.8% in Group C (P = 0.065). This was significantly lower in Group C when compared to Group A (P = 0.026). The mean GET was 27.8 min for Group A, 27.2 min for Group B and 40.7 min for Group C (P = 0.381). The mean SBTT was 256.4 min for Group A, 256.1 min for Group B and 258.1 min for Group C (P = 0.998). Regarding to the rate of complete examinations, the capsule reached the cecum in 20 patients (100%) in Group A, 16 patients (88.9%) in Group B and 17 patients (89.5%) in Group C (P = 0.312). A definite diagnosis based on relevant small bowel endoscopic lesions was established in 60% of the patients in Group A (12 patients), 44.4% in Group B (8 patients) and 57.8% in Group C (11 patients) (P = 0.587).

CONCLUSION: Preparation with 2 L of PEG before small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) may improve small bowel cleansing and the quality of visualization. Simethicone may further reduce intraluminal bubbles. No significant differences were found regarding GET, SBTT and the proportion of complete exploration or diagnostic yield among the three different cleansing protocols.

Factors associated with diagnosis of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding by video capsule enteroscopy

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Capsule enteroscopy (CE) is the best noninvasive tool to explore the entire small bowel of patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB); it has a diagnostic yield of 40%-80%. However, little is known about the factors associated with a diagnosis of OGIB by CE.

METHODS

We analyzed data from 911 consecutive patients who underwent CE for OGIB from January 2004 to January 2010. Results from upper and lower gastrointestinal endoscopy examinations were negative in all patients. CE findings were recorded. Features of patients that were associated with diagnosis of OGIB by CE were identified by using logistic regression.

RESULTS

Based on CE, 509 patients (56%) had a confirmed lesion responsible for the OGIB: 203 had disease of the small bowel (22%), 88 had ulcerations (10%), 70 had tumors (8%), 24 had varices (2%), 6 had diverticula (0.5%), and 118 had what appeared to be bleeding lesions of the esophagus or stomach (10.6%) or colon (2%). Factors independently associated with a diagnosis of OGIB by CE were age >60 years (odds ratio [OR], 1.2), male sex, history of overt bleeding (OR, 3.8), and current hospitalization (OR, 1.4). Women were less likely to be diagnosed with OGIB by CE (OR, 0.7).

CONCLUSIONS

A history of overt bleeding is the factor most strongly associated with a diagnosis of OGIB by CE. Male sex, age >60 years, and inpatient status were also independent predictors of positive diagnosis by CE.

Capsule endoscopy with flexible spectral imaging color enhancement reduces the bile pigment effect and improves the detectability of small bowel lesions

BACKGROUND

Capsule endoscopy with flexible spectral imaging color enhancement (CE-FICE) has been reported to improve the visualization and detection of small-bowel lesions, however, its clinical usefulness is still not established. Therefore, we conducted a study to evaluate whether CE-FICE contributes to improve the detectability of small-bowel lesions by CE trainees.

METHODS

Four gastroenterology trainees without prior CE experience were asked to read and interpret 12 CE videos. Each of the videos was read by conventional visualization method and under three different FICE settings. To evaluate whether the lesion recognition ability of the CE trainees could be improved by the FICE technology, the lesion detection rate under each of the three FICE settings was compared with that by conventional CE. CE trainees tend to miss small-bowel lesions in bile-pigment-positive condition, therefore we evaluated whether CE-FICE contributes to reducing the bile-pigment effect. The bile-pigment condition was determined by the color values around the small-bowel lesions according to the results of the receiver-operating-characteristic analysis. Moreover, we also evaluated whether poor bowel preparion might affect the accuracy of lesion recognition by CE-FICE.

RESULTS

Of a total of 60 angioectasias, CE trainees identified 26 by conventional CE, 40 under FICE setting 1, 38 under FICE setting 2, and 31 under FICE setting 3. Of a total of 82 erosions/ulcerations, CE trainees identified 38 by conventional CE, 62 under FICE setting 1, 60 under FICE setting 2, and 20 under FICE setting 3. Compared with conventional CE, FICE settings 1 and 2 significantly improved the detectability of angioectasia (P = 0.0017 and P = 0.014, respectively) and erosions/ulcerations (P = 0.0012 and P = 0.0094, respectively). Although the detectability of small-bowel lesions by conventional CE (P = 0.020) and under FICE setting 2 (P = 0.0023) was reduced by the presence of bile-pigments, that under FICE setting 1 was not affected (P = 0.59). Our results also revealed that in poor bowel visibility conditions, CE-FICE yielded a high rate of false-positive findings.

CONCLUSIONS

CE-FICE may reduce the bile-pigment effect and improve the detectability of small-bowel lesions by CE trainees; the reliability of CE-FICE may be improved by good bowel preparation.

Prospective controlled study on the effects of polyethylene glycol in capsule endoscopy

AIM: To prospectively confirm whether a small amount of polyethylene glycol (PEG) ingested after swallowing endoscopy capsule improves image quality and completion rate.

METHODS: Forty-four consecutive patients referred to us for capsule endoscopy (CE) were randomized to two groups. All patients were restricted to clear fluids for 12 h before the examination. Patients in group A (22 cases) received no additional preparation, while those in group B (20 cases) ingested 500 mL of PEG within a 2 h period starting 30 min after swallowing the capsule. Clear fluids and meals were allowed 2 h and 4 h after capsule ingestion, respectively. Image quality was assessed as the percentage of visualized bowel surface area as follows: 1: < 25%; 2: 25%-49%; 3: 50%-74%; 4: 75%-89%; 5: > 90%. The small bowel record was divided into five segments by time, and the score for each segment was evaluated. All CE examinations were performed with the Pillcam SB capsule endoscopy system (Given Imaging Co. Ltd., Yoqnem).

RESULTS: This study ended in December 2009, because sample size was considered large enough. A total of 44 patients were enrolled. Two patients in group B were excluded from the analysis because small bowel images could not be obtained from these patients; one had a full stomach, while the other presented with a massive gastric bleed. Thus, 22 patients from group A and 20 patients from group B completed the study. There was no significant difference in age (P = 0.22), sex (P = 0.31), and indication for CE. No significant adverse events occurred in any of the study patients. In group A, image quality deteriorated as the capsule progressed distally. However, in group B, image quality was maintained to the distal small bowel. In each of the five segments, the visibility score was significantly higher in group B than in group A (segment 1: 4.3 ± 0.7 vs 4.7 ± 0.5, P = 0.03; segment 2: 4.2 ± 0.9 vs 4.8 ± 0.4, P = 0.01; segment 3: 4.0 ± 1.0 vs 4.6 ± 0.7, P = 0.04; segment 4: 3.6 ± 1.1 vs 4.5 ± 0.6, P = 0.003; segment 5: 2.7 ± 1.0 vs 4.4 ± 0.8, P = 0.00004). Thus, the use of PEG during CE examination significantly improved image quality in all time segments, and this effect was more pronounced in the distal ileum. The completion rate to the cecum was not significantly different between groups A and B (81.8% vs 85.0%, P = 0.89). There was no difference in the gastric transit time between groups (36.2 ± 35.0 min vs 54.0 ± 56.6 min, P = 0.23), but the small bowel transit time was significantly longer in group A than in group B (246.0 ± 107.0 min vs 171.0 ± 104.0 min, P = 0.04).

CONCLUSION: The ingestion of a small amount of PEG after the swallowing of an endoscopy capsule significantly improved CE image quality, but did not enhance the completion rate to the cecum.

Evaluation of different bowel preparations for small bowel capsule endoscopy: a prospective, randomized, controlled study

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

To obtain an adequate view of the whole small intestine during capsule endoscopy (CE) a clear liquid diet and overnight fasting is recommended. However, intestinal content can hamper vision in spite of these measures. Our aim was to evaluate tolerance and degree of intestinal cleanliness during CE following three types of bowel preparation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled study. Two-hundred ninety-one patients underwent one of the following preparations: 4 L of clear liquids (CL) (group A; 92 patients); 90 mL of aqueous sodium phosphate (group B; 89 patients); or 4 L of a polyethylene glycol electrolyte solution (group C; 92 patients). The degree of cleanliness of the small bowel was classified by blinded examiners according to four categories (excellent, good, fair or poor). The degree of patient satisfaction, gastric and small bowel transit times, and diagnostic yield were measured.

RESULTS

The degree of cleanliness did not differ significantly between the groups (P = 0.496). Interobserver concordance was fair (k = 0.38). No significant differences were detected between the diagnostic yields of the CE (P = 0.601). Gastric transit time was 35.7 ± 3.7 min (group A), 46.1 ± 8.6 min (group B) and 34.6 ± 5.0 min (group C) (P = 0.417). Small-intestinal transit time was 276.9 ± 10.7 min (group A), 249.7 ± 13.1 min (group B) and 245.6 ± 11.6 min (group C) (P = 0.120). CL was the best tolerated preparation. Compliance with the bowel preparation regimen was lowest in group C (P = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

A clear liquid diet and overnight fasting is sufficient to achieve an adequate level of cleanliness and is better tolerated by patients than other forms of preparation.

Effect of bowel preparation with polyethylene glycol on quality of capsule endoscopy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Capsule endoscopy (CE) has the problem that lumen visualization is impaired by bubbles, bile, and debris. The benefits of bowel preparation are still controversial and the best method remains to be determined. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of the method of bowel preparation on the quality of visualization and on transit time.

METHODS

The study sample consisted of 68 patients for CE. Patients were randomly allocated to three groups. In group A (n = 23), patients fasted for 12 h before CE. In groups B (n = 20) and C (n = 25), patients received 2 and 4 l of polyethylene glycol (PEG), respectively. Small bowel images were evaluated by use of a cleansing score system. Representative frames were serially selected at 5-min intervals and scored by assessment of two properties (proportion of luminal visibility and extent of obscuration).

RESULTS

The median scores of image quality in groups A, B, and C were 2.26, 2.43, and 2.55 respectively, (P = 0.034). Cecal completion rates, gastric transit time, and small bowel transit time were no different among the three groups. Detection of lesions in groups A, B, and C was 56.5, 65.0, and 68.0%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Bowel preparation with PEG resulted in better image quality than fasting alone. No significant difference was observed between 2 and 4 l. PEG 2 l rather than 4 l may be a useful method of preparation for CE.

Diagnostic yield of repeat capsule endoscopy and the effect on subsequent patient management

BACKGROUND

Capsule endoscopy (CE) has been shown to produce a high diagnostic yield in patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB); however, in those with negative studies, management is controversial. Very few studies have reported on repeat CE in the same patient; data regarding this diagnostic strategy are limited.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the diagnostic yield of repeated CE studies and how this yield affects subsequent patient management.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of all patients who underwent CE at St Paul's Hospital (Vancouver, British Columbia) between December 2001 and June 2009 was conducted. Patients who underwent subsequent repeat CE were identified and divided into one of four subgroups. Findings were classified as positive or negative.

RESULTS

Eighty-two of 676 patients underwent more than one CE study. Group 1 (incomplete study) included 22 patients (27%) and yielded 10 positive findings (45%). Group 2 (screening) comprised four patients (5%) and yielded two positive findings (50%). Group 3 (ongoing symptoms despite previous negative study) totalled 26 patients (32%) and yielded 10 positive findings (38%). Group 4 (previous positive study with treatment/investigation) included 30 patients (37%) and yielded 23 positive findings (77%). Overall, the present study found positive findings in 55% (45 of 82) of repeated CE cases, which resulted in a change in management in 39% (n=32) of the patients.

CONCLUSION

Due to the high diagnostic yield and noninvasive nature of CE, repeat CE appears to be of benefit and should be considered for specific patients before other types of small bowel studies.

Diagnosis and treatment of small bowel diseases are advanced by capsule endoscopy and double-balloon enteroscopy

In 2001, new endoscopic procedures for the small bowel, capsule endoscopy (CE) and double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE), were introduced into regular clinical practice. These methods were significant breakthroughs for imaging examination of the small bowel. The methods have different characteristics with regard to their approach into the target organ; however, common to both is the feature of enabling rapid total observation of the small bowel. CE is the first safe, non-invasive well-tolerated procedure and can be performed in any condition. The examination time is about 8 h and the patient can spend the time freely. CE can demonstrate active bleeding or neoplasm in the small bowel, which other modalities cannot detect. DBE, which was developed by Yamamoto, employs two balloons combined with an overtube and allows deeper insertion into the small bowel, and can be a modality for examination of the entire small bowel with combined oral and anal approaches. This modality enables biopsy specimens to be taken, polyps to be resected and hemostatic procedures to be performed throughout the small bowel. The understanding of small bowel disease is being extended by using CE and DBE for diagnosis. CE is considered to be superior for the first examination of the small bowel and DBE is useful for detailed examination and endoscopic therapy. Further clinical study of unknown small bowel disorders using these two modalities and algorithms for the management of small bowel disorders are required.

Route selection for double-balloon endoscopy, based on capsule transit time, in obscure gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND

Double-balloon endoscopy (DBE) utilizes both oral and anal routes. The proper selection of the initial route is important for more rapid management of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB). The aim of this retrospective study was to clarify the accuracy of the transit time of video capsule endoscopy (VCE) to the lesion as a predictive indicator for the decision on the initial DBE route.

METHODS

Of 172 patients who underwent both DBE and VCE, 65 who were diagnosed with small-intestinal hemorrhagic lesions by both means were enrolled. The relation between VCE transit time to the lesion and the DBE route by which the lesion was discovered was analyzed, distinguishing between 46 complete and 19 incomplete VCEs.

RESULTS

Among the 46 patients with a complete VCE, the transit time and position of the lesion were strongly correlated. The best cutoff values for route selection by the VCE transit time from capsule intake and from the duodenal bulb to the lesion, determined using a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, were 60% and 50%, respectively, of the transit time to the cecum. At that point, the accuracy of route selection was 90% and 94%, respectively. Positions shown by VCE for ileal lesions tended to be more proximal than those shown by surgery. In the 19 patients with incomplete VCEs, the best cutoff for transit time was 180 min from the duodenal bulb.

CONCLUSIONS

The VCE transit time was useful for determining the route for DBE in OGIB. This parameter was most accurate when the cutoff value for the selection was half of the small-bowel transit time in the complete VCE examination.

Polyethylene glycol plus simethicone in small-bowel preparation for capsule endoscopy

BACKGROUND

Small-bowel contents can hamper the quality of video-capsule endoscopy (VCE). No standardized protocol has been proposed and overnight fasting remains the proposed preparation for VCE.

AIMS

The aim was to evaluate the effects of 2 regimens of bowel preparation on small intestine cleansing, diagnostic yield and capsule transit times.

METHODS

This is a prospective, randomized, blinded, and controlled study. Sixty patients referred for VCE were randomized into 2 groups. Group A ingested 2l of a polyethylene glycol and simethicone solution 16h before VCE. Group B were instructed to consume a fibre-free diet and allowed to consume clear liquids the day before VCE. The small-bowel cleansing was graded as "complete" if the entire wall was assessable, "incomplete" if more than 50% of the wall was visible, and "insufficient" if less than 50% of the wall was visible.

RESULTS

In group A, a "complete", "incomplete" and "insufficient" small-bowel cleansing was achieved in 42%, 39% and 19% of cases respectively. In group B, a "complete", "incomplete" and "insufficient" small-bowel cleansing was achieved in 43%, 33% and 24% of cases respectively. No significant differences were observed between the two groups, regarding small-bowel cleansing level (p=0.65). No differences were also observed in the diagnostic yield (48.2%, 13.8% and 38% vs 65.5%, 6.9% and 27.6% of positive, suspicious and no findings respectively, in groups A and B [p=0.39]) and small-bowel transit times (mean 288min and 299 min in groups A and B respectively [p=0.70]).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the present study do not support the use of 2l of a polyethylene glycol and simethicone solution before VCE.

A novel cleansing score system for capsule endoscopy

AIM: To suggest a new cleansing score system for small bowel preparation and to evaluate its clinical efficacy.

METHODS: Twenty capsule endoscopy cases were reviewed and small bowel preparation was assessed with the new scoring system. For the assessment, two visual parameters were used: proportion of visualized mucosa and degree of obscuration. Representative frames from small bowel images were serially selected and scored at 5-min intervals. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was obtained to assess the reliability of the new scoring system. For efficacy evaluation and validation, scores of our new scoring system were compared with another previously reported cleansing grading system.

RESULTS: Concordance with the previous system, inter-observer agreement, and intra-patient agreement were excellent with ICC values of 0.82, 0.80, and 0.76, respectively. The intra-observer agreements at four-week intervals were also excellent. The cut-off value of adequate image quality was found to be 2.25.

CONCLUSION: Our new scoring system is simple, efficient, and can be considered to be applicable in clinical practice and research.

Usefulness of polyethylene glycol solution with dimethylpolysiloxanes for bowel preparation before capsule endoscopy

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Capsule endoscopy (CE) is widely used for diagnosing small intestinal diseases. In some cases, however, observation of target sites is very poor during CE because of residues etc. Herein we report the usefulness of a preparation comprised of polyethylene glycol solution (PEG) for CE.

METHODS

This was a prospective, randomized, and single-blind study. Forty subjects, fasted for 12 h before CE, were randomized into two groups: 20 subjects in Group A were fasted only, whereas 20 in Group B received 1 liter (L) PEG with 200 mg dimethylpolysiloxane 3 h before CE. For evaluation, the observation period of the small intestine was divided into first and second halves. Subsequently, four investigators, blinded as to which group received the preparation, assessed the condition of the intestine using four rating scales in terms of 'residue' and 'intraluminal gas bubbles'. The effects of the preparation were statistically compared.

RESULTS

CE images were better in Group B than in Group A with respect to 'intraluminal gas bubbles' (P = 0.0038) in the first half of the observation period, as well as residue (P = 0.0087) and intraluminal gas bubbles (P = 0.0011) in the second half.

CONCLUSION

Bowel preparation using 1 L PEG with dimethylpolysiloxane 3 h before CE significantly reduced residue and intraluminal gas bubbles, and was considered to be a useful method for CE.

Capsule endoscopy in clinical practice: concise up-to-date overview

Until recently, the small bowel was considered a ‘no man’s land’ as the imaging modalities available for its investigation were laborious, invasive, costly, or involve significant radiation exposure. Wireless capsule endoscopy (WCE) has changed the field dramatically, over the last eight years. The established indications for small bowel WCE are obscure gastrointestinal bleed/anemia, Crohn’s disease, hereditary polyposis syndromes, and to a lesser extent, evaluation of side effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medications and coeliac disease. We herein present an overview of the capsule examination, which seems to be a quickly improving area.

Bowel preparation before small bowel capsule endoscopy: what is the optimal approach?

The usefulness of bowel preparation before small bowel capsule endoscopy is surrounded with controversy. In this concise review, the available literature is discussed. Current evidence indicates that bowel preparation with purgative agents increases the diagnostic yield of the procedure by improving small bowel mucosal visualization compared with a clear liquid diet or overnight fast. With respect to the type of purgative, most evidence supports the use of polyethylene glycol (PEG). The optimal dose of PEG that needs to be administered before capsule endoscopy is not entirely clear, but 2 l appears to be sufficient.

Comparison of two schemes of small bowel preparation for capsule endoscopy with polyethylene glycol: a prospective, randomized single-blind study

OBJECTIVE

Small bowel preparation for capsule endoscopy remains controversial. This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of 2 and 4 l of polyethylene glycol.

METHODS

One hundred and one patients (group A) received 2 l and 100 (group B) received 4 l in a prospective, randomized single-blind trial. To objectively evaluate enteric preparation, a cleansing coefficient was calculated for each patient.

RESULTS

The two groups were found comparable regarding age, sex, body mass index, and reason for referral. In 82 patients of group A and in 76 of group B, examination of small bowel was completed (P =0.40). Gastric emptying time and small bowel transit time were found comparable in both groups. Cleansing coefficients, for small bowel as a whole or for proximal or distal separately, were similar among the two groups. However, the cleansing coefficient of the proximal bowel was significantly higher than that of the distal, independently of preparation (group A: P < 0.001, group B: P< 0.001). Small bowel preparation was related only with the age of the patients and gastric emptying time; the younger the patient or the shorter the gastric emptying time, the higher the cleansing coefficient. Pathological findings were found in 43 (42.6%) patients of group A and in 37 (37.0%) patients of group B (P =0.42). A final positive diagnosis was established in 33 (32.7%) patients of group A and in 29 (29.0%) of group B (P = 0.57).

CONCLUSION

The two schemes were equal regarding enteric cleansing and completion of the procedure. Therefore, 2 l seems to be an adequate preparation for capsule endoscopy.

Bowel preparation for capsule endoscopy: a prospective randomized multicenter study

Background/Aims

The ability to visualize the small bowel mucosa by capsule endoscopy is limited. Moreover, studies involving small-bowel preparation with purgative drugs have failed to establish which preparations produce better images and higher diagnostic yields. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacies and diagnostic yields of different bowel preparations.

Methods

A cohort of 134 patients with suspected small bowel disease was randomly assigned to 3 groups. Patients in group A (n=44) fasted for 12 h before being administered an M2A capsule (Given Imaging, Yoqneam, Israel). Patients in group B (n=45) were asked to drink two doses of 45 mL of sodium phosphate (NaP) with water during the afternoon and evening on the day before the procedure and to drink at least 2 L of water thereafter. Patients in group C (n=45) drank 2 L of a polyethylene glycol (PEG) lavage solution the evening before the procedure.

Results

Overall cleansing of the small bowel was adequate in 43% of patients in group A, 77% of those in group B, and 56% of those in group C (group A vs group B, p=0.001). Diagnoses for obscure gastrointestinal bleeding were established in 9 patients (39%) in group A, 16 patients (69%) in group B, and 14 patients (50%) in group C. No significant difference in diagnostic yield was observed between groups.

Conclusions

Bowel preparation with NaP for capsule endoscopy improved small-bowel mucosal visualization when compared to 12-h overnight fasting.

Optimal preparation for small bowel examinations with video capsule endoscopy

BACKGROUND

Video capsule endoscopy is a major advance for small bowel exploration. Although the clinical benefit is well accepted, there are still unresolved issues concerning patient preparation.

AIM

This study was set up in order to clarify the clinical benefit of small bowel preparation and give advices in order to obtain the best results for this expensive device.

METHOD

116 patients were randomised in 3 centres between two preparations from the traditional liquid diet versus polyethylene glycol colonoscopy-like preparation. External viewer monitoring and recording pictures were focused on image quality, bubbles or diet residues. Picture qualities were assessed blindly.

RESULTS

For jejunal exploration no differences were noticed between the two preparations but for the ileum, polyethylene glycol preparation gives significant better results than liquid diet: air bubbles (64.4% versus 29.8% p<0.05); opaque residue (83.1% versus 38.6% p<0.05). External viewer was useful in order to use prokinetic drugs in case of delayed gastric emptying.

CONCLUSION

The result leads to a new advice for colleagues in handling patients in order to improve the diagnosis yield by using a modified polyethylene glycol preparation.

Are bowel purgatives and prokinetics useful for small-bowel capsule endoscopy? A prospective randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

Capsule endoscopy (CE) is limited by incomplete small-bowel transit and poor view quality in the distal bowel. Currently, there is no consensus regarding the use of bowel purgatives or prokinetics in CE.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the usefulness of bowel purgatives and prokinetics in small-bowel CE.

DESIGN

Prospective single-blind randomized controlled study.

SETTING

Academic endoscopy unit.

PATIENTS

A total of 150 patients prospectively recruited.

INTERVENTION

Patients were randomized to 1 of 4 preparations: "standard" (fluid restriction then nothing by mouth 12 hours before the procedure, water and simethicone at capsule ingestion [S]); "standard" + 10 mg oral metoclopramide before the procedure (M); Citramag + senna bowel-purgative regimen the evening before CE (CS); Citramag + senna + 10 mg metoclopramide before the procedure (CSM).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Gastric transit time (GTT) and small-bowel transit time (SBTT), completion rates (CR), view quality, and patient acceptability.

SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

positive findings, diagnostic yield.

RESULTS

No significant difference was noted among groups for GTT (median [minutes] M, CS, and CSM vs S: 17.3, 24.7, and 15.1 minutes vs 16.8 minutes, respectively; P = .62, .18, and .30, respectively), SBTT (median [minutes] M, CS, and CSM vs S: 260, 241, and 201 vs 278, respectively; P = .91, .81, and .32, respectively), or CRs (85%, 85%, and 88% vs 89% for M, CS, and CSM vs S, respectively; P = .74, .74, and 1.00, respectively). There was no significant difference in view quality among groups (of 44: 38, 37, and 40 vs 37 for M, CS, and CSM, vs S, respectively; P = .18, .62, and .12, respectively). Diagnostic yield was similar among the groups. CS and CSM regimens were significantly less convenient (P < .001), and CS was significantly less comfortable (P = .001) than standard preparation.

CONCLUSIONS

Bowel purgatives and prokinetics do not improve CRs or view quality at CE, and bowel purgatives reduce patient acceptability.

Intestinal preparation prior to capsule endoscopy administration

In order to have an adequate view of the whole small intestine during capsule endoscopy, the preparation recommended consists of a clear liquid diet and an overnight fast. However, visualization of the small bowel during video capsule endoscopy can be impaired by intestinal contents. To improve mucosal visualization, some authors have evaluated different regimens of preparation. There is no consensus about the necessity of intestinal preparation for capsule endoscopy and it should be interesting to develop adequate guidelines to improve its efficacy and tolerability. Moreover, the effect of preparation type (purgative) on intestinal transit time is not clear. Since a bowel preparation cannot definitively improve its visibility (and theoretically the yield of the test), it is not routinely recommended.

Effect of small bowel preparation with simethicone on capsule endoscopy

BACKGROUND

Capsule endoscopy is a novel non-invasive method for visualization of the entire small bowel. The diagnostic yield of capsule endoscopy depends on the quality of visualization of the small bowel mucosa and its complete passage through the small bowel. To date, there is no standardized protocol for bowel preparation before capsule endoscopy. The addition of simethicone in the bowel preparation for the purpose of reducing air bubbles in the intestinal lumen had only been studied by a few investigators.

METHODS

Sixty-four participants were randomly divided into two groups to receive a bowel preparation of polyethylene glycol (PEG) solution (Group 1) and both PEG solution and simethicone (Group 2). The PEG solution and simethicone were taken the night before and 20 min prior to capsule endoscopy, respectively. Frames taken in the small intestine were examined and scored for luminal bubbles by two professional capsule endoscopists. Gastric emptying time and small bowel transit time were also recorded.

RESULTS

Simethicone significantly reduced luminal bubbles both in the proximal and distal small intestines. The mean time proportions with slight bubbles in the proximal and distal intestines in Group 2 were 97.1% and 99.0%, respectively, compared with 67.2% (P<0.001) and 68.8% (P<0.001) in Group 1. Simethicone had no effect on mean gastric emptying time, 32.08 min in Group 2 compared with 30.88 min in Group 1 (P=0.868), but it did increase mean small intestinal transit time from 227.28 to 281.84 min (P=0.003).

CONCLUSION

Bowel preparation with both PEG and simethicone significantly reduced bubbles in the intestinal lumen and improved the visualization of the small bowel by capsule endoscopy without any side effects observed.

Does purgative preparation influence the diagnostic yield of small bowel video capsule endoscopy?: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Video capsule endoscopy (VCE) is a useful tool in investigating small bowel pathology. However, the role of bowel preparation is controversial. Therefore, the aim of this study was to explore the role of bowel preparation and in particular its consequences on diagnostic yield in a meta-analysis of all relevant studies.

METHODS

Extensive English-language medical literature searches were performed up to February 2008, using suitable keywords, looking for human studies that compared different modes of small bowel preparation (purgative vs. clear liquids diet). We examined the effects of this preparation on the following three primary end points, diagnostic yield (DY), small bowel visualization quality (SBVQ), and VCE completion rate (CR) by meta-analysis of relevant studies.

RESULTS

A total of 12 eligible studies (6 prospective, 6 retrospective) were identified, including 16 sets of data relevant to our primary end points. There were significant differences between patients prepared with purgative vs. those prepared with clear liquids diet in DY (263 vs. 213 patients, respectively; OR (95% CI)=1.813 (1.251-2.628), P=0.002) and SBVQ (404 vs. 249 patients, respectively; OR (95% CI)=2.113 (1.252-3.566), P=0.005). There was no statistically significant difference regarding CR rate. Purgatives did not affect VCE gastric transit time (GTT) or VCE small bowel transit time (SBTT).

CONCLUSIONS

Pooled data showed that in comparison to clear liquids diet, purgative bowel cleansing, before VCE, improves the SBVQ and increases the DY of the examination, but does not affect the VCE completion rate.

Bowel preparations for capsule endoscopy: a comparison between simethicone and magnesium citrate

BACKGROUND

Bowel preparation for capsule endoscopy (CE) has not been standardized.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare CE images between patients prepared by simethicone and those prepared by magnesium citrate.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of case series of our hospital from 2004 to 2007.

SETTING

Single center.

PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS

CE images of 75 patients receiving bowel preparation either by 200 mg of simethicone (n=39) or by 34 g of magnesium citrate (n=36) were retrospectively investigated. Grades of fluid transparency and mucosal invisibility by air bubbles and food residue were compared between the 2 preparations. Capsule transit time, frequency of positive findings, and interobserver variations between 2 observers were also investigated.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Image quality and diagnostic yield of CE.

RESULTS

Fluid transparency in the first and the third time segments of the small intestine was better in patients prepared by magnesium citrate than in those prepared by simethicone (P= .001 and P= .03, respectively). On the other hand, mucosal invisibility was not different in any part of the small intestine between the 2 groups. Neither gastric transit time nor small-bowel transit time was different between the 2 groups. The diagnostic yield of CE correlated significantly with fluid transparency (P= .04), but it did not correlate with mucosal invisibility.

LIMITATIONS

Single-center retrospective study.

CONCLUSION

Magnesium citrate seems to be a recommended preparation for CE compared with simethicone. The fluid transparency, rather than the mucosal invisibility, may be a factor associated with the diagnostic yield of CE.

Right lateral position does not affect gastric transit times of video capsule endoscopy: a prospective study

BACKGROUND

Video capsule endoscopy (VCE) examination of the small bowel is not complete in approximately 20% of the procedures. This fact limits its diagnostic yield. One of the main factors that influences the small-bowel transit time (SBTT) is the gastric transit time (GTT), ie, the interval in which the capsule stays in the stomach. It has been described that placing the patient in a right lateral position (RLP) after swallowing the capsule could decrease the GTT.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether the RLP, after the patient swallows the capsule, shortens the GTT and, secondarily, increases the rate of complete procedures.

DESIGN

Randomized prospective study.

SETTING

Third-level hospital.

PATIENTS

Consecutive outpatients in whom VCE was indicated. Exclusion criteria were inpatients and previous gastric surgery.

INTERVENTION

GTT for RLP 30 minutes after swallowing the capsule versus non-RLP (standing up position).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

The GTT, SBTT, and rate of complete procedures (examination of the entire small bowel).

RESULTS

We did not observe significant differences in the GTT, the SBTT, and the complete procedures between groups.

LIMITATION

Only outpatients were included.

CONCLUSIONS

RLP after swallowing the capsule does not influence either GTT nor the rate of VCE complete procedures.

Ingesting 500 ml of polyethylene glycol solution during capsule endoscopy improves the image quality and completion rate to the cecum

The benefits of bowel preparation prior to capsule endoscopy (CE) are controversial. The aim of this study was to examine whether ingesting a small amount of polyethylene glycol (PEG) during, not before, the CE procedure improves the image quality and the cecal completion rate. A prospective single-blind controlled study was conducted including 59 patients. The initial 32 patients (group A) received no preparation, and the subsequent 27 patients (group B) ingested 500 ml of PEG starting 30 min after swallowing the capsule. The capsule reached the cecum in 65.6% of the patients in group A and 88.9% of the patients in group B (P = 0.038). The use of PEG during CE examination significantly improved the image quality, and this effect was more pronounced in the distal ileum. Ingesting a small amount of PEG during CE examination significantly improves both the CE image quality and the cecal completion rate.

Intestinal preparation prior to capsule endoscopy administration

In order to have an adequate view of the whole small intestine during capsule endoscopy, the preparation recommended consists of a clear liquid diet and an overnight fast. However, visualization of the small bowel during video capsule endoscopy can be impaired by intestinal contents. To improve mucosal visualization, some authors have evaluated different regimens of preparation. There is no consensus about the necessity of intestinal preparation for capsule endoscopy and it should be interesting to develop adequate guidelines to improve its efficacy and tolerability. Moreover, the effect of preparation type (purgative) on intestinal transit time is not clear. Since a bowel preparation cannot definitively improve its visibility (and theoretically the yield of the test), it is not routinely recommended.

Capsule endoscopy: technique and indications

Since it was introduced in 2000, capsule endoscopy has become the gold standard for endoscopic examination of the small bowel in several clinical situations such as obscure gastrointestinal bleeding, suspicion of Crohn's disease, and surveillance of polyposis syndromes. In this technique a miniaturised endoscope, embedded in a swallowable capsule, is propelled through the gut by peristalsis and reaches the right colon in 5-8h. Images captured by the capsule are recorded on a hard drive in a belt worn by the patient. In addition to the extensive literature currently available on small bowel CE, new capsule devices are currently under evaluation for the examination of the colon with the purpose of screening for colorectal cancer, and of the oesophagus for screening for oesophageal varices and Barrett's oesophagus. These latter indications currently remain under evaluation. This review considers the technical aspects of capsule endoscopy and discusses the indications. Issues of safety and tolerance are also discussed.