Double Balloon Enteroscopy in a North American Setting: A Large Single Center 5-year Experience

Device-assisted enteroscopy in the UK: description of a large tertiary case series under conscious sedation

OBJECTIVE

Device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE) has developed rapidly, particularly with the advent of double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE). This study reports a case series from a UK tertiary centre for DAE across two modalities-DBE and spiral enteroscopy (SE)-under conscious sedation.

DESIGN

Retrospective observational study of 257 enteroscopy procedures from 2008 to 2014. Data were collected on demographics, indications, diagnosis, sedation requirements, duration, complications, tolerance, therapy performed and completion rate. Procedures were performed under conscious sedation using a combination of midazolam, pethidine and fentanyl in a solely outpatient setting.

RESULTS

Obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB) was the commonest indication for DAE (n=164, 63.8%). Overall, yield of DAE was 47.2% and varied significantly across the indications (p=0.003). There was a greater likelihood of positive findings if the indication was polyposis syndrome (75%), abnormal capsule endoscopy (67%) or OGIB (53%) and in older patients (mean age normal exam 60.3 vs abnormal exam 67.9 years, p<0.001). Higher mean doses of midazolam were used for DBE from above (5.4 mg, SD 2.24) and SE (5.6 mg, SD 2.9) to DBE from below (4.4 mg, SD 1.8). No serious complications were recorded. Tolerance of DAE was good with the majority (240/257, 93.4%) of procedures tolerated with comfort scores 0 or 1. Therapy was performed in 121/257 (47.1%) of procedures. The strongest predictor indications for therapy to be performed at DAE were abnormal capsule endoscopy (88.9%) and occult gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding (54.9%). Completion rates were higher in DBEb (91.8%) compared to DBEa (76.5%) and SE (81.6%).

CONCLUSION

DAE under conscious sedation is safe and well tolerated. DAE has a high yield if performed for recognised indications and may be safely used to provide therapy where a diagnosis has been made using other modalities.

Clinical outcome after enteroscopy for small bowel angioectasia bleeding: A Korean Associateion for the Study of Intestinal Disease (KASID) multiceter study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Angioectasias are the most common sources of bleeding in the small bowel. They can be treated using balloon-assisted enteroscopy (BAE). This study aimed to identify the rebleeding rate and associated factors after BAE in patients with small bowel angioectasia bleeding.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the records of patients with bleeding due to small bowel vascular lesion in a multicenter enteroscopy database including 1108 BAEs. Finally, in rebleeding analysis, we analyzed 66 patients with angioectasia on the basis of the Yano-Yamamoto classification. Patients who had undergone endotherapy (ET) were divided into ET (n = 45) and non-ET (n = 21) groups. Rebleeding was defined as evidence of bleeding at least 30 days after BAE.

RESULTS

Fifty-three patients (80.4%) underwent only one-side enteroscopy. The most common ET was argon plasma coagulation (87.2%). During a mean follow-up duration of 24.5 months, ET and non-ET groups had rebleeding rates of 15.6% and 38.1% (P = 0.059), respectively. Median rebleeding time of ET and non-ET groups was 32.5 and 62 months, respectively. Liver cirrhosis (LC), low platelet count (< 10⁵ /μL), and transfusions were the rebleeding-associated factors in the univariate analysis. In the multivariate analysis, the presence of LC (HR 4.064, 95% CI 1.098-15.045; P = 0.036) was the only independent rebleeding-associated risk factor.

CONCLUSIONS

ET using BAE did not significantly affect the rebleeding rate in patients with small bowel angioectasia bleeding. An independent rebleeding risk factor was the presence of LC. Regardless of ET, careful long-term follow-up may be needed, especially in LC patients with small bowel angioectasia bleeding.

Exploring the Small Bowel: Update on Deep Enteroscopy

Deep enteroscopy allows for the diagnosis and treatment of small bowel disorders that historically required operative intervention. There are a variety of endoscopic platforms using balloons and rotational overtubes to facilitate small bowel intubation and even allow for total enteroscopy. Obscure gastrointestinal bleeding is the most common indication for deep enteroscopy. By visualizing segments of the small bowel not possible through standard EGD or push enteroscopy, deep enteroscopy has an established high rate of identification and treatment of bleeding sources. In addition to obscure bleeding, other common indications include diagnosis and staging of Crohn's disease, evaluation of findings on capsule endoscopy and investigation of possible small bowel tumors. Large endoscopy databases have shown deep enteroscopy to be not only effective but safe. Recent research has focused on comparing the diagnostic rates, efficacy, and total enteroscopy rates of the different endoscopic platforms.

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.

Capsule Endoscopy for Portal Hypertensive Enteropathy

Portal hypertensive enteropathy (PHE) is a mucosal abnormality of the small bowel that is observed in patients with portal hypertension (PH) and can lead to gastrointestinal bleeding and anemia. The pathogenesis is still not completely understood. The introduction of new endoscopic methods, including capsule endoscopy (CE) or balloon-assisted enteroscopy, has increased the detection of these abnormalities. CE can also serve as a road map for deciding subsequent interventions and evaluating the treatment effect. The prevalence of PHE is reportedly 40-70% in patients with PH. Endoscopic findings can be roughly divided into vascular and nonvascular lesions such as inflammatory-like lesions. Traditionally, PHE-associated factors include large esophageal varices, portal hypertensive gastropathy or colopathy, Child-Turcotte-Pugh class B or C, a history of variceal treatment, and acute gastrointestinal bleeding. More recently, on using scoring systems, a high computed tomography or transient elastography score was reportedly PHE-related factors. However, the prevalence of PHE and its related associated factors remain controversial. The management of PHE has not yet been standardized. It should be individualized according to each patient's situation, the availability of therapy, and each institutional expertise.

Double-balloon enteroscopy in elderly patients: is it safe and useful?

Background/Aims

Providers may be hesitant to perform double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE) in the elderly because the increased number of co-morbidities in this population poses a greater risk of complications resulting from sedation. There are limited data on the use of DBE in the elderly. Here, we assessed the safety and efficacy of DBE in the elderly compared to those in younger patients.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of 158 patients who underwent 218 DBEs. Patients were divided into an elderly group (age ≥65 years; mean 71.4±5.4; n=34; 41 DBEs) and a younger group (age <65 years; mean 39.5±13.5; n=124; 177 DBEs).

Results

In both groups, the most common indication for DBE was obscure gastrointestinal bleeding. Mucosal lesions (33.3% vs. 60.9%; P=0.002) were the most common finding in both groups, followed by tumors (30.8% vs. 14.1%; P=0.036). The elderly were more likely to receive interventional therapy (51.3% vs. 23.5%; P=0.001). The diagnostic yield of DBE was slightly higher in the elderly group (92.3% vs. 86.5%; P=0.422), but was not statistically significant. The therapeutic success rate of DBE was 100% in the elderly group compared to 87.5% in the younger group (P=0.536). The overall DBE complication rate was 1.8% overall, and this rate did not differ significantly between the groups (2.6% vs. 1.7%; P=0.548).

Conclusions

DBE is safe and effective in the elderly, and has a high diagnostic yield and high therapeutic success rate.