Assessment of the Role of a Second Evaluation of Capsule Endoscopy Recordings to Improve Diagnostic Yield and Patient Management

Very High Yield of Urgent Small-Bowel Capsule Endoscopy for Ongoing Overt Suspected Small-Bowel Bleeding Irrespective of the Usual Predictive Factors

Evidence for an urgent approach to ongoing overt suspected small-bowel bleeding (SSBB) is scarce. We aimed to analyze our series of urgent small-bowel capsule endoscopies (SBCEs) for ongoing overt SSBB and to identify factors associated with positive findings and outcomes. A retrospective study of all SBCEs performed in the first 48 h after admission for overt SSBB between January 2006 and February 2022 was performed. Descriptive and inferential analyses (univariate and multivariable) were performed. Eighty-three urgent SBCEs were performed for overt SSBB. Patients were mostly men (69.2%, median age 68) and were followed for a median of 58.2 months (range 5-176). The diagnostic yield was 80.7%; in 60.2%, blood was detected in the small bowel (SB), while in 50.6%, a bleeding lesion was identified, mostly angioectasia. Patients with diabetes mellitus or taking NSAIDs were more prone to present SB findings, yet the explanatory power was low. Endoscopic or surgical treatments were performed in 28.9% and 19.3%, respectively, with the "non-conservative" therapeutic yield being 56.6%. Rebleeding occurred in 20.5% and was associated in the multivariable analysis with the female gender and anticoagulants use. This cohort of urgent SBCE, the largest from a European center, reinforces the usefulness of SBCE for ongoing overt SSBB management. This prompt performance of this procedure is highly effective, regardless of patients' features.

Inter/Intra-Observer Agreement in Video-Capsule Endoscopy: Are We Getting It All Wrong? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Video-capsule endoscopy (VCE) reading is a time- and energy-consuming task. Agreement on findings between readers (either different or the same) is a crucial point for increasing performance and providing valid reports. The aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis is to provide an evaluation of inter/intra-observer agreement in VCE reading. A systematic literature search in PubMed, Embase and Web of Science was performed throughout September 2022. The degree of observer agreement, expressed with different test statistics, was extracted. As different statistics are not directly comparable, our analyses were stratified by type of test statistics, dividing them in groups of “None/Poor/Minimal”, “Moderate/Weak/Fair”, “Good/Excellent/Strong” and “Perfect/Almost perfect” to report the proportions of each. In total, 60 studies were included in the analysis, with a total of 579 comparisons. The quality of included studies, assessed with the MINORS score, was sufficient in 52/60 studies. The most common test statistics were the Kappa statistics for categorical outcomes (424 comparisons) and the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) for continuous outcomes (73 comparisons). In the overall comparison of inter-observer agreement, only 23% were evaluated as “good” or “perfect”; for intra-observer agreement, this was the case in 36%. Sources of heterogeneity (high, I² 81.8–98.1%) were investigated with meta-regressions, showing a possible role of country, capsule type and year of publication in Kappa inter-observer agreement. VCE reading suffers from substantial heterogeneity and sub-optimal agreement in both inter- and intra-observer evaluation. Artificial-intelligence-based tools and the adoption of a unified terminology may progressively enhance levels of agreement in VCE reading.