Non-small-bowel abnormalities identified during small bowel capsule endoscopy

Glasgow-Blatchford and Rockall score utility in predicting findings on video capsule endoscopy in patients admitted with overt small bowel bleeding

Background and study aims

Glasgow-Blachford (GBS) and Rockall scores are recognized tools to prioritize patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Their utility in predicting findings on capsule endoscopy (CE) in patients with overt small bowel bleeding (OSBB) remains unclear. The aim was to assess use of these scores in predicting relevant findings on CE and outcome among patients with suspected OSBB.

Patients and methods

A retrospective analysis was performed from January 2019 to June 2022. Clinical parameters and scores were collected at presentation and at 24 hours. Univariate analysis used simple logistic regression, chi-squared test or Mann-Whitney as needed. ROC analysis was performed selecting the optimal cut-off point maximized by the Youden index.

Results

Seventy-nine patients were included, 62% of whom had relevant findings. The predictor showing the highest discrimination ability was the initial GBS (area under the curve [AUC] 0.625; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49-0.76). The optimal cut-off point was at least 4, with sensitivity 98%, specificity 30%, and accuracy 72%. Multivariable regression analysis showed inpatient status on CE (odds ratio [OR] 117.27; 95% CI 11.32-4492.93; P = 0.001), shorter time to CE (OR 1.02; CI 1.01-1.04; P = 0.018), higher initial GBS (OR 1.22; CI 1.06-1.43; P = 0.009), and higher GBS within 24 hours (OR 1.19; CI 1.04-1.37; P = 0.013) were predictive factors for relevant findings on CE, with a model AUC 0.802, sensitivity 91.8%, and specificity 63.3%.

Conclusions

GBS and Rockall scores were useful in predicting relevant findings on CE in this cohort of patients with suspected OSBB. In patients with GBS 5 or higher, early CE during the same admission is warranted.

Inpatient Small Bowel Capsule Endoscopy: Not Associated With Bleeding Site Identification or 30-Day Readmission Prevention

Background The utility of small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) in the inpatient setting is controversial due to retention rates and costs. Aim This study aims to evaluate whether using SBCE significantly improved the identification of potential bleeding sites or reduced the risk of 30-day readmission for overt or occult gastrointestinal bleeding. Methods This was a single-center retrospective cohort study involving inpatients who underwent SBCE at a suburban tertiary care hospital from January 1, 2012, to January 1, 2022, for suspected small bowel bleeding. There was no control group used in this observational study. We used chi-square testing to determine the significance among our categorical variables and t-tests to compare means for our numerical variables. We also did multivariable logistic regression to analyze risk factors for increased hospital stay. All statistical analysis was done in R (R Core Team, 2020, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria). Results We identified 514 inpatients who underwent SBCE from January 1, 2012, to January 1, 2022, including 300 (58.4%) men and 214 (41.6%) women. Most (305/514, 59.3%) had no notable findings on SBCE, but 209/514 (40.7%) subsequently underwent endoscopic procedures, and a bleeding site was identified and treated in 168/209 (80.4%). Undergoing a subsequent procedure significantly increased the average number of days between capsule deployment and discharge (9.6 vs. 4.9 days, p < 0.005) without significantly reducing the risk for 30-day readmission (OR 1.33, 95% CI 0.9-1.9, p = 0.2). Among the 209 patients who had a subsequent procedure, identifying and treating a bleeding site did not significantly change readmission rates (OR 1.35, 95% CI 0.6-3.1, p = 0.5) compared to patients who did not have a procedure. Conclusion We did not find that inpatient SBCE significantly affected 30-day readmission rates even if an endoscopic procedure was subsequently done or a potential bleeding site was treated.

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.

British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines for the management of iron deficiency anaemia in adults

Iron deficiency anaemia (IDA) is a major cause of morbidity and burden of disease worldwide. It can generally be diagnosed by blood testing and remedied by iron replacement therapy (IRT) using the oral or intravenous route. The many causes of iron deficiency include poor dietary intake and malabsorption of dietary iron, as well as a number of significant gastrointestinal (GI) pathologies. Because blood is iron-rich it can result from chronic blood loss, and this is a common mechanism underlying the development of IDA-for example, as a consequence of menstrual or GI blood loss.Approximately a third of men and postmenopausal women presenting with IDA have an underlying pathological abnormality, most commonly in the GI tract. Therefore optimal management of IDA requires IRT in combination with appropriate investigation to establish the underlying cause. Unexplained IDA in all at-risk individuals is an accepted indication for fast-track secondary care referral in the UK because GI malignancies can present in this way, often in the absence of specific symptoms. Bidirectional GI endoscopy is the standard diagnostic approach to examination of the upper and lower GI tract, though radiological scanning is an alternative in some situations for assessing the large bowel. In recurrent or refractory IDA, wireless capsule endoscopy plays an important role in assessment of the small bowel.IDA may present in primary care or across a range of specialties in secondary care, and because of this and the insidious nature of the condition it has not always been optimally managed despite the considerable burden of disease- with investigation sometimes being inappropriate, incorrectly timed or incomplete, and the role of IRT for symptom relief neglected. It is therefore important that contemporary guidelines for the management of IDA are available to all clinicians. This document is a revision of previous British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines, updated in the light of subsequent evidence and developments.

PREDICTIVE FACTORS FOR COMPLETE AND INCOMPLETE EVALUATION OF SMALL INTESTINE BY ENDOSCOPIC CAPSULE

Background:

The small-bowel is the most difficult segment to be visualized by traditional endoscopic methods. The need for its exploration led to the development of capsule endoscopy. The percentage of the complete examination varies and still remains uncertain the factors that influence the complete and incomplete examination.

Aim:

Evaluate the factors that interfere with the completeness of the endoscopic evaluation by the capsule.

Methods:

A prospective study in which were included 939 patients divided into two groups: complete group (CG) and incomplete group (IG). The studied variables that could interfere were: age, gender, comorbidities, diagnosis of Crohn’s disease, previous abdominal surgery, inadequate preparation to compare the groups reached and did not reach the cecum.

Results:

Of the 939 patients included 879 (93.3%) reached the cecum (CG) and 63 (6.7%) IG no. The IG was composed of 29 (46.0%) men and 34 (54.0%) women with a mean age of 49.7 years; comorbidities this group accounted for 46% of which 15.9% was Crohn’s disease, previous abdominal surgery 22.2% and 17.5% inadequate preparation.

Conclusion:

Factors associated with complete or incomplete outcome of the examination with capsule endoscopy were: associated comorbidities, Crohn’s disease, previous abdominal surgery and inadequate preparation.

Non-small bowel lesion detection at small bowel capsule endoscopy: A comprehensive literature review

Small bowel capsule endoscopy is a minimally-invasive endoscopic investigation that is often used in clinical practice to investigate overt or occult gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding among other clinical indications. International guidance recommends small bowel capsule endoscopy as a first-line investigation to detect abnormalities in the small bowel, when gastroscopy and colonoscopy fail to identify a cause of GI bleeding. It can diagnose with accuracy abnormalities in the small bowel. However, there has been increasing evidence indicating that small bowel capsule endoscopy may also detect lesions outside the small intestine that are within the reach of conventional endoscopy and have been probably missed during prior endoscopic investigations. Such lesions vary from vascular deformities to malignancy and their detection often alters patient management, leading to further endoscopic and/or surgical interventions. The current study attempts to review all available studies in the literature and summarise their relevant findings.