Search

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

Main Recommendations 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.

Background and Aims: Meckel's diverticulum (MD) may remain silent or be associated with adverse events such as GI bleeding. The main aim of this study was to evaluate indicative small-bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) findings, and the secondary aim was to describe clinical presentation in patients with MD. Methods: This retrospective European multicenter study included patients with MD undergoing SBCE from 2001 until July 2021. Results: Sixty-nine patients with a confirmed MD were included. Median age was 32 years with a male-to-female ratio of approximately 3:1. GI bleeding or iron-deficiency anemia was present in nearly all patients. Mean hemoglobin was 7.63 ± 1.8 g/dL with a transfusion requirement of 52.2%. Typical capsule endoscopy (CE) findings were double lumen (n = 49 [71%]), visible entrance into the MD (n = 49 [71%]), mucosal webs (n = 30 [43.5%]), and bulges (n = 19 [27.5%]). Two or more of these findings were seen in 48 patients (69.6%). Ulcers were detected in 52.2% of patients (n = 36). In 63.8% of patients (n = 44), a combination of double lumen and visible entrance into the MD was evident, additionally revealing ulcers in 39.1% (n = 27). Mean percent SB (small bowel) transit time for the first indicative image of MD was 57% of the total SB transit time. Conclusions: Diagnosis of MD is rare and sometimes challenging, and a preoperative criterion standard does not exist. In SBCE, the most frequent findings were double-lumen sign and visible diverticular entrance, sometimes together with ulcers.

In the setting of chronic liver disease, capsule endoscopy is safe and well tolerated, making it an appealing diagnostic procedure. It is used mainly for the surveillance of esophageal varices, investigation of anemia, and exploration of the small bowel for complications of portal hypertension. Capsule endoscopy is recognized as a viable alternative in patients unable or unwilling to undergo upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for investigations of esophageal varices. In evaluating the small bowel of patients with liver disease and unexplained anemia, capsule endoscopy increases recognition of mucosal abnormalities, although their clinical significance is often unclear.

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

Introduction Primary colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical test (FIT) are the most commonly used colorectal cancer (CRC) screening modalities. Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) might be an alternative. Data on the performance of CCE as a CRC screening tool in a screening population remain scarce. This is the first systematic review to provide an overview of the applicability of CCE as a CRC screening tool. Methods A systematic search was conducted of literature published up to September 2020. Studies reporting on CRC screening by second-generation CCE in an average-risk screening population were included. Results 582 studies were identified and 13 were included, comprising 2485 patients. Eight studies used CCE as a filter test after a positive FIT result and five studies used CCE for primary screening. The polyp detection rate of CCE was 24 % – 74 %. For polyps > 6 mm, sensitivity of CCE was 79 % – 96 % and specificity was 66 % – 97 %. For polyps ≥ 10 mm, sensitivity of CCE was 84 % – 97 %, which was superior to computed tomographic colonography (CTC). The CRC detection rate for completed CCEs was 93 % (25/27). Bowel preparation was adequate in 70 % – 92 % of examinations, and completion rates varied from 57 % to 92 %, depending on the booster used. No CCE-related complications were described. Conclusion CCE appeared to be a safe and effective tool for the detection of CRC and polyps in a screening setting. Accuracy was comparable to colonoscopy and superior to CTC, making CCE a good alternative to colonoscopy in CRC screening programs, although completion rates require improvement.

Background and study aims When capsule endoscopy (CE) detects a small bowel (SB) target lesion that may be manageable with enteroscopy, the selection of the insertion route is critical. Time- and progression-based CE indices have been proposed for localization of SB lesions. This systematic review analysed the role of CE transit indicators in choosing the insertion route for double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE). Methods A comprehensive literature search identified papers assessing the role of CE on the choice of the route selection for DBE. Data on CE, criteria for route selection, and DBE success parameters were retrieved and analyzed according to the PRISMA statement. Risk of bias was assessed through the STROBE assessment. The primary outcome evaluated was DBE success rate in reaching a SB lesion, measured as the ratio of positive initial DBE to the number of total DBE. Results Seven studies including 262 CEs requiring subsequent DBE were selected. Six studies used time-based indices and one used the PillCam Progress indicator. SB lesions were identified and insertion route was selected according to a specific cut-off, using fixed landmarks for defining SB transit except for one study in which the mouth-cecum transit was considered. DBE success rate was high in all studies, ranging from 78.3 % to 100 %. Six of seven studies were high quality. Conclusions The precise localization of SB lesions remains an open issue, and larger studies are required to determine the most accurate index for selecting the DBE insertion route. In the future, 3 D localization technologies and tracking systems will be essential to accomplish this tricky task.

limited evidence is available to guide hepatologists regarding endoscopic surveillance of oesophageal varices (EV) in Hepatitis C Virus (HCV)-positive cirrhotic patients achieving a sustained virologic response. To address these issues, we conducted a long-term prospective study on 427 HCV-positive cirrhotic patients successfully treated by Direct Antiviral Agents (DAAs).Patients were divided into two groups according to their baseline Baveno VI status: Group 1 (92, 21.5%, favourable Baveno VI status) and Group 2 (335, 78.5%, unfavourable Baveno VI status). Each patient underwent baseline endoscopy and was endoscopically monitored for a median follow-up of 65.2 months according to Baveno VI recommendations.About 4.3% of Group 1 patients showed baseline EV compared with 30.1% of Group 2 patients (p .0001). No patients belonging to Group 1 without baseline EV developed EV at follow-up endoscopy compared with 6.5% in Group 2 patients (p = .02); 69/107 (64.5%) patients with baseline EV showed small varices. During the endoscopic follow-up, EV disappeared/improved in 36 (33.6%), were stable in 39 (36.4%) and worsened in 32 (29.9%) patients, all belonging to Group 2 (p = .001). Improvement in Baveno VI status was observed in 118/335 (35.2%, p .0001) of Group 2 patients and among those without pre-therapy EV, none developed EV throughout the follow-up.HCV-positive cirrhotic patients cured by DAAs showing baseline favourable Baveno VI status and no worsening during follow-up can safely avoid endoscopic screening and surveillance. Patients having unfavourable Baveno VI status without baseline EV who improve their status may suspend further endoscopic surveillance.

Background: The main factor that limits wider utilization of capsule endoscopy (CE) in Crohn's disease (CD) is the potential risk of retention. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate capsule retention rates in adult and pediatric CD and determine if retention risk is reduced in established CD (ECD) with patency capsule (PC) or magnetic resonance/computed tomography (MR/CT) enterography. Methods: Studies of CD patients undergoing CE that reported retention were identified. Pooled estimates for retention rates and relative risk in ECD to suspected CD (SCD) were calculated. All hypothesis tests were 2-sided; statistical significance was set at a P value of

Background The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) has recently issued a technical review focused on small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE). Aim To compare SBCE current practice in Italy to ESGE technical recommendations. Material and methods A dedicated per-centre semi-quantitative questionnaire was prepared by a group of SBCE experts. One-hundred-fifty Centres were invited to participate in the data collection concerning SBCEs performed between June 2016 and June 2017. Data were compared with ESGE recommendations. Results 120 Centres participated in the data collection. Current practices agreed with ESGE recommendations in 56.3% (9/16) of the issues evaluated. Differences between ESGE recommendations and current practice concerned the management of patients with pacemakers or cardiac implantable defibrillators (which was in agreement with ESGE recommendations in 31.7% and 15.8% of Centres, respectively), the SBCE setting (only 51% of SBCEs were performed as outpatients procedures), the assessment of capsule excretion (timing and modality were in agreement with ESGE recommendation in 20.0% of Centres), and in the involvement of trained nurses or fellows in training as pre-readers (7/120; 5.8%). Conclusions Although SBCE is widely used and largely available in Italy, there are still some technical, practical and organizational issues that can be modified to bridge the gap between current practice and ESGE guideline recommendations.

Background Pathogenesis of acute diverticulitis and diverticular bleeding remains poorly defined, and few data compare directly risk factors for these complications. Aims to assess differences in clinical features, lifestyles factors and concurrent drug use in patients with acute diverticulitis and those with diverticular bleeding. Methods Data were obtained from the REMAD Registry, an ongoing 5-year prospective, observational, multicenter, cohort study conducted on 1,217 patients. Patient- and clinical- related factors were compared among patients with uncomplicated diverticular disease, patients with previous acute diverticulitis, and patients with previous diverticular bleeding. Results Age was significantly lower (OR 0.48, 95% CI: 0.34–0.67) and family history of diverticular disease was significantly higher (OR 1.60, 95% CI: 1.11–2.31) in patients with previous diverticulitis than in patients with uncomplicated diverticular disease, respectively. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was significantly higher in patients with previous diverticular bleeding as compared with both uncomplicated diverticular disease (OR 8.37, 95% CI: 2.60–27.0) and diverticulitis (OR 4.23, 95% CI: 1.11–16.1). Conclusion This ancillary study from a nationwide Registry showed that some distinctive features identify patients with acute diverticulitis and diverticular bleeding. These information might improve the assessment of risk factors for diverticular complications.

Small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) remains the gold standard for practice for the diagnosis of small bowel disorders. A rather challenging task, for those who start to use this diagnostic modality, is the recognition of the typical anatomic landmarks and the distinction of normal small bowel anatomy from abnormal findings. The reader of SBCE images may also often encounter unusual views of the normal anatomy as well as various artifacts that need to be distinguished from pathologic findings. Experience gained through standard endoscopy is invaluable to the interpretation of capsule examinations; however, formalized training and credentialing in reading competency are essential.

Background and Aims Second-generation colon capsule endoscopy (CCE-2) has shown promising accuracy for the diagnosis of overall neoplasia. Advanced neoplasia (AN) represents the main target of colorectal cancer screening programs. Our aim was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of CCE-2 for the detection of AN in patients with a positive result for the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) who are undergoing screening. Methods Patients aged 50 to 69 years with a positive result for the FIT in 4 population screening programs in Italy and Spain were enrolled. Screenees were asked to undergo CCE-2, followed by traditional colonoscopy (TC). TC was performed the same day or the following morning. Bowel preparation included a split-dose polyethylene glycol–based regimen, with sodium phosphate (NaP) with gastrografin as boosters. The CCE-2 video was read by an endoscopist blinded to the results of TC. The main outcomes were CCE-2 accuracy in terms of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) for AN when using 2 different size thresholds for TC referral (ie, polyps ≥6 mm and ≥10 mm). Results Two hundred twenty-two patients were enrolled, and 178 patients completed both CCE-2 and TC (87.7%). Overall, 59 cases of AN were detected at TC. CCE-2 sensitivity was 90%, specificity was 66.1%, PPV was 57.4%, and NPV was 92.9% for AN when using a 6-mm cut-off (TC referral rate, 52.8%) and 76.7%, 90.7%, 80.7%, and 88.4% when using a 10-mm cut-off (TC referral rate, 32%), respectively. CCE-2 detected that 8 of 9 already developed colorectal cancers. Among the 41 false positives at the 6-mm cut-off, 34 (82.9%) presented with a nonadvanced adenoma at TC. Mean transit time was 4 hours and 4 minutes, and ≥70% of patients excreted the capsule within 5 hours. Conclusions In an enriched disease setting, we showed the high sensitivity of CCE-2 for the diagnosis of AN at a 6-mm cut-off. The apparently low CCE-2 specificity is related to the choice of AN as the main outcome. (Clinical trial registration number: ISRCTN 62158762.)

Main recommendations Small-bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) 1 ESGE recommends that prior to SBCE patients ingest a purgative (2 L of polyethylene glycol [PEG]) for better visualization.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence.However, the optimal timing for taking purgatives is yet to be established. 2 ESGE recommends that SBCE should be performed as an outpatient procedure if possible, since completion rates are higher in outpatients than in inpatients.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3 ESGE recommends that patients with pacemakers can safely undergo SBCE without special precautions.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4 ESGE suggests that SBCE can also be safely performed in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators and left ventricular assist devices.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 5 ESGE recommends the acceptance of qualified nurses and trained technicians as prereaders of capsule endoscopy studies as their competency in identifying pathology is similar to that of medically qualified readers. The responsibility of establishing a diagnosis must however remain with the attending physician.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 6 ESGE recommends observation in cases of asymptomatic capsule retention.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.In cases where capsule retrieval is indicated, ESGE recommends the use of device-assisted enteroscopy as the method of choice.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. Device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE) 1 ESGE recommends performing diagnostic DAE as a day-case procedure in patients without significant underlying co-morbidities; in patients with co-morbidities and/or those undergoing a therapeutic procedure, an inpatient stay is recommended.Strong recommendation, low quality evidenceThe choice between different settings also depends on sedation protocols.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 2 ESGE suggests that conscious sedation, deep sedation, and general anesthesia are all acceptable alternatives: the choice between them should be governed by procedure complexity, clinical factors, and local organizational protocols.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 3 ESGE recommends that the findings of previous diagnostic investigations should guide the choice of insertion route.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.If the location of the small-bowel lesion is unknown or uncertain, ESGE recommends that the antegrade route should be generally preferred.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.In the setting of massive overt bleeding, ESGE recommends an initial antegrade approach.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4 ESGE recommends that, for balloon-assisted enteroscopy (i. e., single-balloon enteroscopy [SBE] and double-balloon enteroscopy [DBE]), small-bowel insertion depth should be estimated by counting net advancement of the enteroscope during the insertion phase, with confirmation of this estimate during withdrawal.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends that, for spiral enteroscopy, insertion depth should be estimated during withdrawal.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. Since the calculated insertion depth is only a rough estimate, ESGE recommends placing a tattoo to mark the identified lesion and/or the deepest point of insertion.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5 ESGE recommends that all endoscopic therapeutic procedures can be undertaken at the time of DAE.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.Moreover, when therapeutic interventions are performed, additional specific safety measures are needed to prevent complications.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence.

BACKGROUND: This prospective single-centre study aims to evaluate a new diagnostic algorithm using capsule endoscopy, colon capsule endoscopy and single-balloon enteroscopy in the work-up of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding in children. METHODS: The usefulness of a new diagnostic algorithm was assessed comparing the clinically relevant findings revealed by each technique, and evaluating the clinical outcomes during the follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 22 paediatric patients were evaluated (14 male; mean age 12.5 years±3.9). Capsule endoscopies were positive in 14 (63.6%), suspicious in 5 (22.7%) and negative in 3 (13.6%). A second look with colon capsule identified new lesions in 2/3 (67%) of previous negative cases. Enteroscopies were able to reach the positive and suspicious findings in all but 2, in which an intraoperative enteroscopy was needed. This combined approach showed positive findings in 21/22 of cases with a diagnostic yield of 95%. Eighteen patients (82%) had a complete resolution after therapy. One patient resolved his symptoms spontaneously. Despite diagnosis, in three patients (13.6%) the gastrointestinal bleeding was not resolved after therapy. CONCLUSION: This algorithm achieves optimal levels of diagnostic yield (95%) and therapeutic outcome (82%). This approach deserves to be studied in a larger multicentre cohort of patients and for a longer follow-up period. Background: This prospective single-centre study aims to evaluate a new diagnostic algorithm using capsule endoscopy, colon capsule endoscopy and single-balloon enteroscopy in the work-up of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding in children. Methods: The usefulness of a new diagnostic algorithm was assessed comparing the clinically relevant findings revealed by each technique, and evaluating the clinical outcomes during the follow-up. Results: A total of 22 paediatric patients were evaluated (14 male; mean age 12.5 years ± 3.9). Capsule endoscopies were positive in 14 (63.6%), suspicious in 5 (22.7%) and negative in 3 (13.6%). A second look with colon capsule identified new lesions in 2/3 (67%) of previous negative cases. Enteroscopies were able to reach the positive and suspicious findings in all but 2, in which an intraoperative enteroscopy was needed. This combined approach showed positive findings in 21/22 of cases with a diagnostic yield of 95%. Eighteen patients (82%) had a complete resolution after therapy. One patient resolved his symptoms spontaneously. Despite diagnosis, in three patients (13.6%) the gastrointestinal bleeding was not resolved after therapy. Conclusion: This algorithm achieves optimal levels of diagnostic yield (95%) and therapeutic outcome (82%). This approach deserves to be studied in a larger multicentre cohort of patients and for a longer follow-up period.

The evaluation of patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB) and iron-deficiency anemia (IDA) has been suboptimal for a long time, mainly owing to the limitations of techniques for the study of the small bowel. Since the introduction of capsule endoscopy (CE) and device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE), the diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to OGIB have improved significantly. CE allows the evaluation of the entire small bowel mucosa, providing high-quality images and identifying mucosal changes (ie, vascular malformations, inflammatory changes, mass, or polyps), whereas DAE ensures an effective therapeutic approach. Many studies have shown that the diagnostic yield (DY) of CE in patients with OGIB and IDA (~50%) is similar to that of DAE and significantly superior to the DY of other imaging modalities for the small bowel. Nowadays, CE is considered the examination of choice in patients with OGIB or IDA, after negative gastroscopy and ileocolonoscopy results. The DY of CE is increased in patients with overt bleeding, or when the procedure is performed closely to an acute episode of bleeding, as well as in patients with severe IDA or high transfusion requirement. CE is also an effective tool in directing further diagnostic or therapeutic interventions (ie, deciding the optimal insertion route of DAE). Moreover, numerous studies have also shown that CE-based strategies affect the management of patients with OGIB.

Background In small-bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE), differentiating masses (ie, lesions of higher probability for neoplasia) requiring more aggressive intervention from bulges (essentially, false-positive findings) is a challenging task; recently, software that enables 3-dimensional (3D) reconstruction has become available. Objective To evaluate whether "coupling" 3D reconstructed video clips with the standard 2-dimensional (s2D) counterparts helps in distinguishing masses from bulges. Design Three expert and 3 novice SBCE readers, blind to others and in a random order, reviewed the s2D video clips and subsequently the s2D clips coupled with their 3D reconstruction (2D+3D). Setting Multicenter study in 3 community hospitals in Italy and a university hospital in Scotland. Patients Thirty-two deidentified 5-minute video clips, containing mucosal bulging (19) or masses (13). Intervention 3D reconstruction of s2D SBCE video clips. Main Outcome Measure Differentiation of masses from bulges with s2D and 2D+3D video clips, estimated by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC); interobserver agreement. Results AUC for experts and novices for s2D video clips was .74 and .5, respectively ( P = .0053). AUC for experts and novices with 2D+3D was .70 (compared with s2D: P = .245) and .57 (compared s2D: P = .049), respectively. AUC for experts and novices with 2D+3D was similar ( P = .1846). The interobserver agreement was good for both experts and novices with the s2D ( k = .71 and .54, respectively) and the 2D+3D video clips ( k = .58 in both groups). Limitations Few, short video clips; fixed angle of 3D reconstruction. Conclusions The adjunction of a 3D reconstruction to the s2D video reading platform does not improve the performance of expert SBCE readers, although it significantly increases the performance of novices in distinguishing masses from bulging.

Background Limited data are available on the clinical impact of single balloon enteroscopy. Aims To evaluate the diagnostic and therapeutic yield of single balloon enteroscopy in patients with suspected small bowel disease. Methods Data on patients with suspected small bowel disease based on non-invasive imaging, who were subjected sequentially to enteroscopy were prospectively collected. Results 131 procedures were performed in 111 patients. The mean procedure time was 61 ± 33 min for the oral approach, and 78 ± 41 min for the anal approach. The mean insertion depth was 223 ± 93 cm beyond the ligament of Treitz, and 96 ± 56 beyond the ileo-cecal valve. A diagnosis suspected with prior small bowel tests was confirmed in 82 patients, confidently excluded in 20, while in 9 the suspected area was not reached. Total enteroscopy was deemed clinically unnecessary in 94 patients; when total enteroscopy was attempted, it was achieved in 8 out 17 patients. Endoscopic therapeutic interventions were performed in 39 patients, medical treatment was started in 30, whereas 18 underwent to surgery. No major complications were registered. Conclusions This study shows that single balloon enteroscopy appears to be an helpful and safe procedure with a high clinical impact, especially when it is placed in decision-making as a third level examination.

Small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) remains the gold standard for practice for the diagnosis of small bowel disorders. A rather challenging task, for those who start to use this diagnostic modality, is the recognition of the typical anatomic landmarks and the distinction of normal small bowel anatomy from abnormal findings. The reader of SBCE images may also often encounter unusual views of the normal anatomy as well as various artifacts that need to be distinguished from pathologic findings. Experience gained through standard endoscopy is invaluable to the interpretation of capsule examinations; however, formalized training and credentialing in reading competency are essential.

Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis are lifelong diseases seen predominantly in the developed countries of the world. Whereas ulcerative colitis is a chronic inflammatory condition causing diffuse and continuous mucosal inflammation of the colon, Crohn's disease is a heterogeneous entity comprised of several different phenotypes, but can affect the entire gastrointestinal tract. A change in diagnosis from Crohn's disease to ulcerative colitis during the first year of illness occurs in about 10 % - 15 % of cases. Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) restricted to the colon that cannot be characterized as either ulcerative colitis or Crohn's disease is termed IBD-unclassified (IBDU). The advent of capsule and both single- and double-balloon-assisted enteroscopy is revolutionizing small-bowel imaging and has major implications for diagnosis, classification, therapeutic decision making and outcomes in the management of IBD. The role of these investigations in the diagnosis and management of IBD, however, is unclear. This document sets out the current Consensus reached by a group of international experts in the fields of endoscopy and IBD at a meeting held in Brussels, 12-13th December 2008, organised jointly by the European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation (ECCO) and the Organisation Mondiale d'Endoscopie Digestive (OMED). The Consensus is grouped into seven sections: definitions and diagnosis; suspected Crohn's disease; established Crohn's disease; IBDU; ulcerative colitis (including ileal pouch-anal anastomosis [IPAA]); paediatric practice; and complications and unresolved questions. Consensus guideline statements are followed by comments on the evidence and opinion. Statements are intended to be read in context with qualifying comments and not read in isolation.

Background and Aims Small-bowel bleeding is the primary indication for capsule endoscopy (CE). Many experts advocate a "watch-and-wait" policy in negative CE. This meta-analysis examines the odds of rebleeding after negative index CE and the impact on long-term follow-up. Methods A comprehensive literature search identified articles examining the rebleeding rate after negative CE. Demographic and clinical information with emphasis on outcomes was retrieved, pooled, and analyzed. Heterogeneity among studies was assessed using the I 2 statistic. A random effects model was used as the pooling method because of high heterogeneity. Risk of bias was assessed using the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies (QUADAS-2) tool. The primary outcome evaluated was the pooled odds ratios (ORs) for rebleeding after a negative CE for obscure GI bleeding (OGIB). Results Twenty-six studies with 3657 patients were included. The pooled rate of rebleeding after negative CE was .19 (95% CI, .14-.25; P P P P = .01). Most studies were high quality. Conclusions Our analysis shows that negative CE provides adequate evidence of a subsequently low risk of rebleeding. Such patients can therefore be safely managed with watchful waiting. However, patients who rebleed after 2 years may need to be investigated for a new source of blood loss.

Small-bowel bleeding is a clinical entity regularly observed in the practice of gastroenterology that can pose difficult diagnostic and management problems. This form of bleeding accounts for approximately 5% of all cases of clinically evident gastrointestinal bleeding. The types of lesions that cause bleeding in the small bowel are similar to those found in other areas of the digestive tract, angioectasia being the commonest cause. Routine endoscopy of the upper and lower gastrointestinal tract is important in these patients, particularly to search for rare lesions or more common lesions with an unusual or atypical appearance. Diagnosing small-bowel bleeding has always been challenging, but the development of capsule endoscopy, computed tomography enterography, and device-assisted enteroscopy have significantly improved our ability to diagnose and treat patients suffering from this disorder. Clinical decision making about the use of these new technologies is complex and evolving; further research is expected to shed light on their role, in particular to investigate whether these modalities improve patients' clinical outcomes.

Background: Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) represents a new diagnostic, endoscopic technology for colonic exploration. Current protocols of preparation led to discordant rates of adequate cleansing level or CCE excretion. Aim: To evaluate the effect of a new regimen of bowel preparation for CCE on colon cleansing levels and on rate of capsule excretion. Study: 60 patients were prospectively enrolled. The new regimen of preparation consisted of a split regimen of PEG administration and of a 45 mL dose of sodium phosphate (NaP). Four senna tablets and a low-residue diet were also included. CCE excretion rate, colon cleansing, and accuracy were assessed. Results: Forty-six patients were included in the final analysis, 13 patients (22%) being excluded because of preparation protocol deviations and one due to CCE technical failure (2%). At CCE, bowel preparation was rated as good in 78% of patients, fair in 20% and poor in 2%. CCE excretion rate occurred in 83% of patients. CCE sensitivity and specificity for significant findings was 100% and 95%, respectively. Conclusions: The combination of a split-dose of PEG solution with a low dose of NaP boosters resulted in high rates of adequate cleansing level and CCE excretion. © 2010 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l.

Background and Aim Few studies have specifically addressed interobserver agreement in describing lesions identified during capsule endoscopy. The aim of our study is to evaluate interobserver agreement in the description of capsule endoscopy findings. Materials and methods Consecutive short segments of capsule endoscopy were prospectively observed by 8 investigators. Seventy-five videos were prepared by an external investigator (gold standard). The description of the findings was reported by the investigators using the same validated and standardized capsule endoscopy structured terminology. The agreement was assessed using Cohen's kappa statistic. Results As concerns the ability to detect a lesion, the agreement with the gold standard was moderate (kappa 0.48), as well as the agreement relating to the final diagnosis ( κ 0.45). The best agreement was observed in identifying the presence of active bleeding ( κ 0.72), whereas the poorest agreement concerned the lesion size ( κ 0.32). The agreement with the GS was significantly better in endoscopists with higher case/volume of capsule endoscopy per year. Diagnostic concordance was better in the presence of angiectasia than in the presence of polyps or ulcers/erosions. Conclusions Correct lesion identification and diagnosis seem more likely to occur in presence of angiectasia, and for readers with more experience in capsule endoscopy reading.

Background and study aims Capsule endoscopy is considered the diagnostic procedure of choice in patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB). Double-balloon endoscopy (DBE) offers both diagnostic and therapeutic potential, but is invasive, complex, and time-consuming. The aim was to evaluate diagnostic agreement between capsule endoscopy and DBE in patients with OGIB, and secondarily the diagnostic gain of DBE when capsule endoscopy detected only blood or clots in the small-bowel lumen. Methods Multicenter prospective study carried out at six institutions in Italy. Results 193 patients (119 men, mean age 61.6 +/- 16.2) first underwent capsule endoscopy and then DBE. The most frequent positive findings at capsule endoscopy were vascular lesions (74 patients, 38.3 %), blood or clot in the lumen (34, 17.6 %), and tumor mass (20, 10.4 %). The most frequent findings at DBE were vascular lesions (72 patients, 37.3 %), neoplasia (30, 15.5 %) and ulcers/inflammatory lesions (12, 6.2 %). Overall kappa coefficient was 0.46 (95 %CI 0.38 - 0.54), with maximum concordance for vascular (0.72 [95 %CI 0.59 - 0.84]) and inflammatory (0.78 [0.58 - 0.99]) lesions and minimum for polyps (0.46 [0.16 - 0.80]). Blood in the lumen was the only positive finding at capsule endoscopy in 34 cases; of these, 12 had negative DBE findings whereas 10 had vascular lesions, 6 neoplasia, 1 ulcer, and 5 diverticula. Conclusion Capsule endoscopy and DBE have good agreement for vascular and inflammatory lesions but not for polyps or neoplasia. DBE provides valuable adjunctive information, particularly in patients with neoplasia or polyp at capsule endoscopy. DBE clarified the origin of bleeding in two-thirds of patients with capsule endoscopy showing only blood in the lumen.

Capsule endoscopy and balloon-assisted enteroscopy, have revolutionized our approach to the diagnosis and management of patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding, largely replacing intraoperative enteroscopy and conventional barium studies. Despite its limitations, capsule endoscopy may well be the most reasonable initial diagnostic strategy to evaluate most patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding, leaving balloon-assisted enteroscopy in reserve as a complementary tool. This article reviews the data on enteroscopy, with particular emphasis on the use of capsule endoscopy and balloon-assisted enteroscopy for the diagnosis and management of patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding.

The primary and most thoroughly validated indication to double-balloon endoscopy is obscure gastrointestinal bleeding, for which this procedure has high diagnostic and therapeutic efficacy and appears to be safe. In this clinical setting, double-balloon endoscopy is a better diagnostic tool than push enteroscopy; it complements capsule endoscopy and may make intraoperative enteroscopy unnecessary. Whether the more precise diagnoses and the more effective treatments possible with this exciting technology will ultimately result in enduring positive patient outcomes and cost savings remains to be determined through carefully designed studies.

Objectives Duodenal biopsy is the current gold standard for diagnosis of celiac disease. Videocapsule endoscopy examines the entire small bowel and allows visualization of mucosal villi. We evaluated the potential of videocapsule endoscopy in assessing the severity and extent of mucosal changes in patients with suspected celiac disease. Methods Consecutive patients with signs/symptoms suggesting celiac disease and positive anti-gliadin and/or anti-endomysial and/or anti-tissue transglutaminase antibodies underwent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and videocapsule endoscopy. Duodenal biopsies were classified according to modified Marsh's criteria. Capsule findings were evaluated for the presence of lesions compatible with celiac disease (scalloping of duodenal folds, fissures, flat mucosa, and mosaic appearance). Results Forty-three patients were studied. Duodenal histology was normal in 11 and compatible with celiac disease in 32. Using duodenal histology as the gold standard, the performance characteristics of capsule endoscopy for the diagnosis of celiac disease were: sensitivity 87.5% (95% CI 76.1-98.9%), specificity 90.9% (95% CI 81.0-100%), positive predictive value 96.5% (95% CI 90.1-100%), negative predictive value 71.4% (95% CI 55.8-87%), positive and negative likelihood ratios 9.6 and 0.14, respectively. Eighteen patients had mucosal changes extending beyond the duodenum, involving the entire small bowel in three. These patients tended to have more severe symptoms, but the difference was not statistically significant. Interobserver agreement for the diagnosis of celiac disease by capsule endoscopy ranged between 79.2 and 94.4%; kappa values ranged between 0.56 and 0.87. Conclusions Videocapsule endoscopy shows good sensitivity and excellent specificity for the detection of villous atrophy in patients with suspected celiac disease.