Tag-less patency capsule for suspected small bowel stenosis: Nationwide multicenter prospective study in Japan

A case of incorrect evaluation of intestinal patency by early dissolution of a patency capsule

A 60-year-old man presented with a suspected small intestinal tumor on positron-emission tomography-computed tomography. Small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) was planned for close examination of the small intestine. To avoid retention of the SBCE due to strictures, a patency capsule (PC) was first used to evaluate patency. However, PC discharge was not visually confirmed during the 24-h period. No obvious PC was observed on plain abdominal radiography performed in the standing position. The patient underwent SBCE, assuming that the PC had been shed inconspicuously. SBCE revealed a neoplastic lesion with stenosis at a site thought to be the upper small intestine and remained stagnant at the same site for the duration of the battery. In addition, in the SBCE image, a PC shell was captured in the intestinal tract on the oral side of the stenosis. When the pre-SBCE plain abdominal radiograph was enlarged to confirm the details, PC was observed in the lateral and decubitus views as a dissolved shell only. To the best of our knowledge, no previous report has described the complete dissolution of a PC leaving only its shell during a 30-hour patency evaluation period. This case illustrates that, in the absence of visual confirmation of a PC discharge, PC may have remained in the body due to premature dissolution. Additional examinations or plain X-ray imaging should be performed to confirm this, with no preconceived notions that the PC will not dissolve within 30 hours of administration.

Nationwide multicenter study on adverse events associated with a patency capsule: Additional survey of appropriate use of patency capsule study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The PillCam patency capsule (PC) without a radio frequency identification tag was released to preclude retention of the small bowel capsule endoscope (CE) in Japan in 2012. We conducted a multicenter study to determine tag-less PC-related adverse events (AEs).

METHODS

We first conducted a retrospective survey using a standardized data collection sheet for the clinical characteristics of PC-related AEs among 1096 patients collected in a prospective survey conducted between January 2013 and May 2014 (Cohort 1). Next, we retrospectively investigated additional AEs that occurred before and after Cohort 1 within the period June 2012 and December 2014 among 1482 patients (Cohort 2).

RESULTS

Of the 2578 patients who underwent PC examinations from both cohorts, 74 AEs occurred among 61 patients (2.37%). The main AEs were residual parylene coating in 25 events (0.97%), PC-induced small bowel obstruction, suspicious of impaction, in 23 events (0.89%), and CE retention even after patency confirmation in 10 events (0.39%). Residual parylene coating was significantly associated with Crohn's disease (P < 0.01). Small bowel obstruction was significantly associated with physicians with less than 1 year of experience handling the PC and previous history of postprandial abdominal pain (P < 0.01 and P < 0.03, respectively). CE retention was ascribed to erroneous judgment of PC localization in all cases.

CONCLUSIONS

This large-scale multicenter study provides evidence supporting the safety and efficiency of a PC to preclude CE retention. Accurate PC localization in patients without excretion and confirmation of previous history of postprandial abdominal pain before PC examinations is warranted (UMIN000010513).

Patency testing improves capsule retention rates but at what cost? A retrospective look at patency testing

Capsule retention is one of the major complications of capsule endoscopy, which range from 2.1 to 8.2% depending on the indication. Over the last few years, reported rates of retention have fallen due to better patient selection due to the recognition of risk factors for capsule retention as well as the introduction of the patency capsule. The patency capsule is a dissolvable capsule with the same dimensions as the functional capsule. It breaks down in the GI tract after approximately 30 h, reducing the risk of symptomatic retention. Failure to pass this patency capsule out of the small bowel results in the patient being excluded from capsule endoscopy. We performed a retrospective analysis of the patency capsules performed in our unit over a 12-month period. A total of 166 (14.7%) of 1,127 patients referred for capsule endoscopy were deemed to require patency assessment (45.8% men, mean age 48 years). Of those who passed the patency assessment and underwent capsule endoscopy, no capsule retention was seen. Indication for patency assessment was found to be appropriate in 87.0% (n = 147). Overall, the failure rate at the patency assessment was 43.1%. The patency capsule remains an imperfect but useful tool in examining functional patency of the GI tract prior to capsule endoscopy.

Retention of small bowel capsule endoscopy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Capsule endoscopy is widely recognized as a safe and effective procedure to evaluate the small bowel and/or the colon noninvasively. Although infrequent, capsule retention is the most feared adverse event related to this technique. A better knowledge of risk factors, improvement of patients' selection and precapsule patency assessment may further contribute to reducing the incidence of capsule retention, even in patients at increased risk for this complication.

RECENT FINDINGS

This review addresses the main risk factors for capsule retention, strategies for risk reduction such as patients' selection, dedicated cross-sectional imaging and rational use of the patency capsule, as well as management options and outcomes in the case of capsule retention.

SUMMARY

Capsule retention is infrequent, and it is usually manageable conservatively with favorable clinical outcomes. Patency capsules and dedicated small-bowel cross-sectional techniques such as CT or MR enterography should be used selectively and are both effective in decreasing the rate of capsule retention. However, none of them can completely eliminate the risk of retention.

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

INTRODUCTION

retention is the most common adverse event of the small bowel capsule endoscopy procedure. Patency capsule (Medtronic, Dublin, Ireland) and magnetic resonance enterography are two diagnostic methods that can prevent small bowel capsule endoscopy retention. The aim of this study was to evaluate the predictive value of these two diagnostic methods.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

a prospective, comparative and observational study was performed in patients with established Crohn's disease. All patients had undergone magnetic resonance enterography and patency capsule procedures. If the patency capsule was not retained, the patient underwent a small bowel capsule endoscopy; otherwise, double balloon enteroscopy was performed to locate the stenosis. Magnetic resonance enterography predictive criteria for retention were analyzed in all cases. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of the patency capsule and magnetic resonance enterography compared to small bowel capsule endoscopy or double balloon enteroscopy were calculated.

RESULTS

forty patients were included (24 female, 55 ± 13 years old). Retention criteria with capsule endoscopy or double balloon enteroscopy were found in six patients, agreeing in five cases with patency capsule and in three cases with magnetic resonance enterography. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and Kappa coefficient for predicting retention with the patency capsule were 83 %, 100 %, 100 % and 97 %, respectively, and 50 %, 91 %, 50 % and 91 %, respectively, with magnetic resonance enterography.

CONCLUSIONS

patency capsule has a higher sensitivity and positive predictive value than magnetic resonance enterography for preventing small bowel capsule endoscopy retention in Crohn's disease patients.

Enteroscopy in diagnosis and treatment of small bowel bleeding: A Delphi expert consensus

BACKGROUND

Enteroscopy plays an important role in the management of small bowel bleeding. However, current guidelines are not specifically designed for small bowel bleeding and recommendations from different international societies do not always align. Consequently, there is heterogeneity in the definitions of clinical entities, clinical practice policies, and adherence to guidelines among clinicians. This represents an obstacle to providing the best patient care and to obtain homogeneous data for clinical research.

AIMS

The aims of the study were to establish a consensus on the definitions of bleeding entities and on the role of enteroscopy in the management of small bowel bleeding using a Delphi process.

METHODS

A core group of eight experts in enteroscopy identified five main topics of small bowel bleeding management and drafted statements on each topic. An expert panel of nine gastroenterologists participated in three rounds of the Delphi process, together with the core group.

RESULTS

A total of 33 statements were approved after three rounds of Delphi voting.

CONCLUSION

This Delphi consensus proposes clear definitions and a unifying strategy to standardize the management of small bowel bleeding. Furthermore, it provides a useful guide in daily practice for both clinical and technical issues of enteroscopy.

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.

Small bowel endoscopy for children: Collaboration of capsule endoscopy and device-assisted enteroscopy

Capsule endoscopy (CE) and balloon-assisted enteroscopy (BAE) have become indispensable techniques for the diagnosis and management of small bowel disease in both adult and pediatric cases. However, relevant differences exist in the indications between these cohorts, with body weight and age having particular relevance in decisions for the latter. Both CE and BAE are designed for adult physique and they were not widely used among children. In addition, the types of small intestinal diseases differ between adults and children, and consequently, the indications also differ between them. This review focuses on the issues relevant to pediatric cases and describes the practical application of endoscopy in clinical practice. In conclusion, although there are age and weight restrictions, both CE and BAE are safe and useful devices for use in children, and their indications for use in children are likely to expand in the future.

Safety and efficacy of capsule endoscopy for patients with newly diagnosed Crohn's disease: A multicenter retrospective study

Crohn's disease (CD) is a chronic inflammatory disease that develops at a young age and frequently leads to intestinal resection. Capsule endoscopy (CE) can directly and non-invasively inspect the entire small bowel mucosa. We suspected that CE could be a good diagnostic tool for detecting CD in young patients. The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of CE in patients with newly diagnosed CD and to evaluate the CE findings, especially in the upper small bowel of young patients. We retrospectively investigated 32 patients with newly diagnosed CD from 5 institutions. Patient characteristics, clinical course, and characteristics of CE findings were analyzed. The total small intestine observation rate was 93%, and the retention rate was 3% (1/32). No abnormality was identified by ileocolonoscopy in 46% (15/32), and transition of small bowel lesions (TSL) was found in 35% (12/34) of the patients. The frequency of longitudinal ulcers and cobblestones in the upper small intestine was significantly higher in younger patients (≤20 years). Moreover, positive findings in the upper small intestine were predominantly observed in younger patients (≤20 years). CE for patients with newly diagnosed CD was safe and useful, especially for the detection of upper small bowel lesions in young patients.

Modified method of patency judgement using patency capsule prior to capsule endoscopy in clinical practice

In 2012, Japan approved the use of a tag-less patency capsule (PC), which evaluates gastrointestinal patency before small-bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE). This study aimed to evaluate the validity of our modification on the passage criteria for this PC in clinical practice. We retrospectively enrolled 326 consecutive patients who underwent PC examination before SBCE. If X-ray could not reveal the PC in the body during the judgement time (30–33 h after ingestion), we defined it as ‘estimated patency’ and performed SBCE. We employed plain computed tomography (CT) for the second judgement, as needed. The overall patency rate was 95.1%. By X-ray, 41 (12.6%) patients were judged to have ‘estimated patency’, and SBCE could be safely performed. Plain CT judgement was necessary in 106 patients (32.5%). One PC case had a residual coating film associated with stenosis in a patient with Crohn’s disease (CD), and one (0.3%) SBCE case had capsule retention resulting from false CT judgement. Multivariate analysis revealed that established CD and inpatient were factors related to no-patency. In conclusion, PC is useful for examining gastrointestinal patency, keeping in mind CT misjudgement. If PC was not found in the body via X-ray, performing SBCE as ‘estimated patency’ seemed appropriate.

Safety and efficacy of the endoscopic delivery of capsule endoscopes in adult and pediatric patients: Multicenter Japanese study (AdvanCE-J study)

BACKGROUND AND AIM

We retrospectively determined the safety and efficacy of the endoscopic delivery (ED) of capsule endoscopes.

METHODS

We enrolled 10,156 patients who underwent small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE), 3182 who underwent patency capsule (PC), and 1367 who underwent colon capsule endoscopy (CCE), at 11 gastroenterological and nine pediatric centers.

RESULTS

Small bowel capsule endoscopies, PCs, and CCEs were endoscopically delivered to 546 (5.4%), 214 (6.7%), and 14 (1.0%) patients, respectively. Only mild complications occurred for 21.6% (167/774), including uneventful mucosal damage, bleeding, and abdominal pain. Successful ED of SBCE to the duodenum or jejunum occurred in 91.8% and 90.7% of patients aged <16 years and ≥16 years, respectively (P = 0.6661), but the total enteroscopy rate was higher in the first group (91.7%) than in the second (76.2%, P < 0.0001), for whom impossible ingestion (87.3%) was significantly more common than prolonged lodging in the stomach (64.2%, P = 0.0010). Successful PC and CCE delivery to the duodenum occurred in 84.1% and 28.6%, thereafter the patency confirmation rate and total colonoscopy rate was 100% and 61.5%, respectively. The height, weight, and age cutoff points in predicting spontaneous ingestion were 132 cm, 24.8 kg, and 9 years 2 months, respectively, in patients aged <16 years. Patients aged ≥16 years could not swallow the SBCEs mainly due to dysphagia (75.0%); those who retained it in the esophagus due to cardiac disease (28.6%), etc. and in the stomach due to diabetes mellitus (15.7%), etc. CONCLUSIONS: This large-scale study supports the safety and efficacy of ED in adult and pediatric patients. UMIN000042020.

Indications and Limitations Associated with the Patency Capsule Prior to Capsule Endoscopy

The retention of the capsule used during small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) is a serious complication that can occur in patients with known or suspected small bowel stenosis, and a prior evaluation of the patency of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract is therefore essential. Patency capsule (PC) is a non-diagnostic capsule the same size as the diagnostic SBCE. To date, there are no clear guidelines regarding the contraindications for undergoing a PC evaluation prior to SBCE. Each small bowel disorder has specific occasions to inhibit the progress of PC and SBCE, even though they do not have any stenotic symptoms or abnormalities on imaging. In this review, we summarize the indications and limitations of PC prior to SBCE, especially the contraindications, and discuss clinical scenarios in which even PC should be avoided, and therefore such areas of stenosis should be evaluated by alternative modalities. We thus propose this new algorithm to evaluate the patency of the GI tract for patients with suspected and known small bowel stenosis in order that they may undergo SBCE safely.

Usefulness of radiographic targeting on the evaluation of the location of a patency capsule using abdominal ultrasonography

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The usefulness of a radio-tag-free PillCam patency capsule (PatCap) has been reported to evaluate the patency of the small intestine. If the PatCap is not excreted within 33 h, the location of the failed PatCap must be confirmed. Although several methods for locating the failed PatCap have been reported, a universal method has not been established. In this study, we aimed to confirm the clinical feasibility of abdominal ultrasonography combined with abdominal X-ray in the determination of the location of a failed PatCap.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Consecutive patients who were scheduled to undergo the capsule endoscopy and had received PatCap examination between July 2012 and September 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Failed PatCap was assessed using ultrasonography combined with abdominal X-ray.

RESULTS

Among the eligible 250 patients, 129 retrieved the PatCap in their stool within 33 h after ingestion. Among the remaining 121 patients, abdominal X-ray was performed and the PatCaps were suspected to be in the small bowel in 57 patients. Among these 57 patients, abdominal ultrasonography identified 17 PatCaps in the small bowel. Among the selected 250 patients, 233 patients (93.2%) were eligible for capsule endoscopy examination, while 17 patients (6.8%) were not eligible. Capsule endoscopy passed through the small intestine without any incident.

CONCLUSION

We confirmed that the abdominal ultrasonography with a radiographic targeting of the PatCap location is a reliable indicator to avoid the risk of capsule endoscopy retention or impaction and can be performed in most hospitals and clinics.

Feasibility of patency capsule and colon capsule endoscopy in patients with suspected gastrointestinal stenosis: a prospective study

Patency capsule (PC) can evaluate the patency of gastrointestinal (GI) tract. We hypothesized preceding patient selection using PC would improve the successful rate of colon capsule endoscopy (CCE). Therefore, a prospective single-arm study using PC followed by CCE was conducted with a control group of CCE alone. Patients with suspected or known GI stenosis scheduled for CCE were enrolled. CCE was performed only when the PC was excreted out of the body within 33 hours of ingestion. Primary endpoint was the rate of observation of the entire GI tract within the duration of examination. The secondary endpoints were complications and CCE findings. Twenty-three patients (17 men) were enrolled. The mean age was 50.5±19.8 years. Suspected stenotic sites were 8, 5, and 10 in the small, large, and small and large bowel, respectively. Sixteen, 12, and 10 patients had abdominal pain, active inflammatory bowel disease, and history of surgery for suspected stenosis, respectively. Patency of GI tract was confirmed in 96% (22/23) of the patients by administered PC. Of the 22 patients who underwent CCE, the entire GI tract was observed in 86% (19/22). No complications were observed. The median transit times in the small bowel and colon were 99 (21–682) and 160 (5–328) minutes, respectively. CCE findings revealed ulcers, erosions, and diverticula in 5, 9, and 4 patients, respectively. In conclusion, CCE with PC might be a safer and useful modality to observe the large colon for patients with suspected GI stenosis.