Magnetic Steering of Capsule Endoscopy Improves Small Bowel Capsule Endoscopy Completion Rate

Luo, Yuanyuan; Chen, Yi-Zhi; Jiang, Xi; Zou, Wenbin; Qian, Yang‐Yang; Zhou, Wei; Xiao, Lianchun; Li, Zhao‐Shen; Liao, Zhuan

doi:10.1007/s10620-019-5479-z

Cited by 16 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In our study, the completion rate of CE was 86.9%, which was similar to that reported in the literature. 13,14 The mean transit time of the small intestine was 295.9 min, slightly longer than that reported in the literature. 15 The positive detection rate was 84.4%, slightly higher than that reported by some researchers, 16 and no adverse complications, such as capsule retention, capsule inhaled into the airway or incarceration in the pharyngeal muscle, occurred during the CE examination.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 52%

Comparison of the Positive Rate and Diagnostic Value of Capsule Endoscopy and Double-Balloon Enteroscopy in Small Bowel Disease: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis

Liao

Deng

2021

Arch Iran Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Capsule endoscopy (CE) and double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE) have provided great help in the diagnosis and treatment of small bowel diseases (SBD). The aim of this study was to explore the positive rate and diagnostic value of CE and DBE for patients who were suspected of having SBD, and to make a comparison between the two methods. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted to analyze the cases at Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University. We divided the patients into CE and DBE group, and recorded the basic characteristics of the patients, checking the results of CE and DBE, positive rate, sensitivity and specificity for statistical analysis. Results: A total of 244 patients were included in our research, including 122 in the CE group and 122 in the DBE group. The positive rate of CE for intestinal diseases was 84.4%, higher than that of DBE (78.7%), but DBE (75.2% and 92.3%) had higher sensitivity and specificity than CE (70.5% and 88.2%), though the differences were not statistically significant. The three most common positive findings in patients were inflammation, erosion, or ulcers (28.7%), vascular malformations (14.3%), and eminence lesions (9.0%). CE had a higher rate detection of inflammation, erosion, or ulcers than DBE (36.1% vs 21.3%), but they both had high positive rates for vascular malformations (13.9% and 14.8%). In addition, both methods had higher positive rates in patients with gastrointestinal bleeding compared to other symptoms. Conclusion: CE and DBE are both important methods for intestinal examination. Patients can choose appropriate tests according to their condition.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 52%

Comparison of the Positive Rate and Diagnostic Value of Capsule Endoscopy and Double-Balloon Enteroscopy in Small Bowel Disease: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis

Liao

Deng

2021

Arch Iran Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Various interventions, such as prolonging battery life, administering prokinetic agents, or endoscopically placement, were shown to contribute to the enhanced rate of completing small intestine examination [ 40 – 42 ]. More recent studies supported that the improvement of GTT by magnetic steering could improve the completion rate more efficiently [ 7 , 12 ]. In this study, magnetic steered MCE in 193 cases significantly shortened the PTT and GTT, and enhanced the detection rate of lesions in the duodenum from 6.26 to 13.47%.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The lesions of certain diseases, such as obscure gastrointestinal bleeding [ 8 ], dual antiplatelet-induced gastrointestinal bleeding [ 9 ], nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)-related diseases and cirrhotic portal hypertension [ 10 ], are widely distributed in both the stomach and the small intestine. Unfortunately, some previously missed or underestimated lesions at the initial gastroscopic evaluation have higher requirements for small intestine examination, while the combination of gastroscopy and enteroscopy can be burdensome and costly [ 11 , 12 ]. Early small bowel CE increases the possibility of detecting above lesions with a higher diagnostic yield than small bowel barium, CT enteroclysis, angiography and push enteroscopy [ 10 , 13 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Magnetically controlled capsule endoscopy in one-time gastro-small intestinal joint examination: a two-centre experience

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The lesions of certain diseases are widely distributed in both stomach and small intestine, while the step-by-step strategy of gastroscopy followed by enteroscopy can be burdensome and costly. We aimed to determine if magnetically controlled capsule endoscopy (MCE) could be used in one-time gastro-small intestine (GSI) joint examination. Methods In this study, data of patients in Chinese PLA General Hospital and Changhai Hospital who underwent MCE GSI examination from January 2020 to August 2021 were retrospectively analysed. The primary outcome of this study was the success rate of one-time GSI joint examination, and secondary outcomes included visualization and cleanliness of gastrointestinal tract, gastrointestinal transit times, diagnostic yield and safety of MCE examination. Results A total of 768 patients were included. The success rate of one-time GSI joint examination was 92.58%. There were 94.92% MCEs observed > 90% gastric mucosa in the 6 anatomic landmarks. The rate of complete small bowel examination was 97.40%. The median gastric examination time, gastric transit time and small intestine transit time were 8.18 min, 63.89 min and 4.89 h, respectively. Magnetic steering of MCE significantly decreased gastric transit time (8.92 min vs. 79.68 min, P = 0.001) and increased duodenal lesion detection rate (13.47% vs. 6.26%, P = 0.001) when compared with non-magnetic steering group. Two capsules were retained and were removed by enteroscopy or spontaneously excreted. Conclusions MCE is feasible to complete GSI joint examination and the detection of both gastric and small intestinal diseases can be achieved simultaneously. Trial registration Clinical Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT05069233.

show abstract

“…GI transit times recorded included the esophageal transit time, gastric transit time, pyloric transit time, and small-bowel transit time [14]. The gastric examination time was defined as the time required to perform complete examination of the stomach twice.…”

Section: Study Outcomes and Definitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Small-sized versus standard magnetic capsule endoscopy in adults: a two-center, double-blinded randomized controlled trial

Jiang

Qiu

et al. 2022

Endoscopy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Certain patients experience difficulty swallowing a video capsule endoscopy (VCE) device owing to its relatively large size. The newly developed small-sized magnetically controlled capsule endoscopy (MCE) device is the smallest VCE device ever reported. We aimed to evaluate the performance of the small-sized MCE device in terms of ingestion and examination efficacy. Methods Patients in two centers were prospectively enrolled and randomized to the small-sized or standard MCE groups. Differences in capsule ingestion difficulties, visualization of the gastrointestinal tract, and capsule transit times were compared. Results 96 patients were enrolled (48 in each group). In the small-sized MCE group, the mean (SD) difficulty score and time to swallow the capsule, and success rate for swallowing the capsule at the first attempt were 0.6 (1.0), 3.4 (1.3) seconds, and 89.6 %, which was significant better compared with the standard MCE group with 3.1 (1.7), 12.0 (14.3) seconds and 60.4 %, respectively (all P < 0.001). Visualization of the esophagus, stomach, and small bowel were comparable between the two groups. The small-sized MCE group had a significantly shorter gastric transit time (49.4 minutes vs. 66.2 minutes; P = 0.04) and longer small-bowel transit time (5.8 hours vs. 5.0 hours; P = 0.045). Conclusions The small-sized MCE device is feasible and safe for gastrointestinal examination, alleviating difficulties in capsule ingestion, improving gastric emptying under magnetic control, and prolonging the small-bowel transit time.

show abstract

Magnetic Steering of Capsule Endoscopy Improves Small Bowel Capsule Endoscopy Completion Rate

Cited by 16 publications

References 24 publications

Comparison of the Positive Rate and Diagnostic Value of Capsule Endoscopy and Double-Balloon Enteroscopy in Small Bowel Disease: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis

Comparison of the Positive Rate and Diagnostic Value of Capsule Endoscopy and Double-Balloon Enteroscopy in Small Bowel Disease: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis

Magnetically controlled capsule endoscopy in one-time gastro-small intestinal joint examination: a two-centre experience

Small-sized versus standard magnetic capsule endoscopy in adults: a two-center, double-blinded randomized controlled trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About