Colon capsule endoscopy: toward the future

The Saudi Gastroenterology Association guidelines for quality indicators in gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures

The quality and safety of gastrointestinal endoscopy varies considerably across regions and facilities worldwide. In this field, quality management has traditionally focused on individual performance of endoscopists, with most indicators addressing process measures and limited evidence of improvement in health outcomes. Indicators of quality can be classified according to their nature and sequence. The various professional societies and organizations have proposed many systems of indicators, but a universal system is necessary so that healthcare professionals are not overburdened and confused with a variety of quality improvement approaches. In this paper, we propose guidelines by the Saudi Gastroenterology Association pertaining to quality in endoscopic procedures aiming to improve the awareness of endoscopy unit staff toward important quality indications to enhance and standardize quality of care provided to our patients.

Colon Capsule Endoscopy in the Diagnosis of Colon Polyps: Who Needs a Colonoscopy?

Colon screening programs have reduced colon cancer mortality. Population screening should be minimally invasive, safe, acceptably sensitive, cost-effective, and scalable. The range of screening modalities include guaiac or immunochemical fecal occult blood testing and CT colonography and colonoscopy. A number of carefully controlled studies concur that second-generation capsule endoscopy has excellent sensitivity for polyp detection and a high negative predictive value. Colon capsules fulfill the screening expectation of safety, high sensitivity for polyp detection, and patient acceptance, and appear to straddle the divide between occult blood testing and colonoscopy. While meeting these criteria, there remains the challenges of scaling, capsule practitioner training, resource allocation, and implementing change of practice. Like CT colonography, capsule screening presents the clinician with a decision on the threshold for colonoscopy referral. Overall, colon capsules are an invaluable tool in polyp detection and colon screening and offer a filter that determines “who needs a colonoscopy?”.

Review: Colon Capsule Endoscopy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused considerable disruption in healthcare services and has had a substantial impact on the care of patients with chronic diseases, such as inflammatory bowel disease. Endoscopy services were significantly restricted, resulting in long waiting lists. There has been a growing interest in the use of capsule endoscopy in the diagnostic pathway and management of these patients. This review explores the published literature on the role of colon capsule endoscopy in ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease as a method for mucosal assessment of extent, severity, and response to treatment. Colon capsule preparation regimens and scoring systems are reported. The studies indicate that, despite inherent limitations of minimally invasive capsule endoscopy, there is increasing evidence to support the use of the second-generation colon capsule in inflammatory bowel disease evaluation, providing an additional pathway to expedite investigation of appropriate patients especially during and after the pandemic.

Examination of Entire Gastrointestinal Tract: A Perspective of Mouth to Anus (M2A) Capsule Endoscopy

Capsule endoscopy (CE) is the only non-invasive diagnostic tool that enables the direct visualization of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Even though CE was initially developed for small-bowel investigation, its clinical application is expanding, and technological advances continue. The final iteration of CE will be a mouth to anus (M2A) capsule that investigates the entire GI tract by the ingestion of a single capsule. This narrative review describes the current developmental status of CE and discusses the possibility of realizing an M2A capsule and what needs to be overcome in the future.

Development and Verification of a Deep Learning Algorithm to Evaluate Small-Bowel Preparation Quality

Capsule endoscopy (CE) quality control requires an objective scoring system to evaluate the preparation of the small bowel (SB). We propose a deep learning algorithm to calculate SB cleansing scores and verify the algorithm’s performance. A 5-point scoring system based on clarity of mucosal visualization was used to develop the deep learning algorithm (400,000 frames; 280,000 for training and 120,000 for testing). External validation was performed using additional CE cases (n = 50), and average cleansing scores (1.0 to 5.0) calculated using the algorithm were compared to clinical grades (A to C) assigned by clinicians. Test results obtained using 120,000 frames exhibited 93% accuracy. The separate CE case exhibited substantial agreement between the deep learning algorithm scores and clinicians’ assessments (Cohen’s kappa: 0.672). In the external validation, the cleansing score decreased with worsening clinical grade (scores of 3.9, 3.2, and 2.5 for grades A, B, and C, respectively, p < 0.001). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed that a cleansing score cut-off of 2.95 indicated clinically adequate preparation. This algorithm provides an objective and automated cleansing score for evaluating SB preparation for CE. The results of this study will serve as clinical evidence supporting the practical use of deep learning algorithms for evaluating SB preparation quality.

The Differential Diagnosis of Colorectal Polyps Using Colon Capsule Endoscopy

Objective Although colorectal polyps (CPs) can be observed with colon capsule endoscopy (CCE), it is difficult to determine the type of polyp using CCE. The objective of this study was to differentiate adenomatous polyps (APs) from hyperplastic polyps (HPs) with CCE. Methods In this single-center retrospective study, an analysis was conducted on the same CPs with both CCE and colonoscopy (CS) and histopathologically diagnosed as AP or HP. The color difference (ΔE) between the polyp surface and the surrounding mucosa was calculated using the CIE1976 L*a*b* color space method on white light (WL), flexible spectral imaging color enhancement (FICE), and blue mode (BM) CP images. We investigated the ability of the ratio of the color differences (ΔE') to differentiate between APs and HPs. Results The size of all 51 polyps (34 APs, 17 HPs) was 7.5±4.6 mm with CCE and 7.3±4.2 mm with CS, and this difference was not significant (p=0.28). The FICEΔE' of APs was 3.3±1.8, which was significantly higher than the FICEΔE' of HPs (1.3±0.6; p<0.001). A receiver operating characteristic analysis showed that FICEΔE' was useful for differentiating between APs and HPs, with an area under the curve of 0.928 (95% confidence interval, 0.843-1). The sensitivity was 91.2%, and the specificity was 88.2% with a cut-off value of 1.758. Conclusion Using FICE on CCE images of CPs and applying the CIELAB color space method, we were able to differentiate between APs and HPs with high accuracy. This method has the potential to reduce unnecessary CS procedures.

Scoring Systems for Clinical Colon Capsule Endoscopy-All You Need to Know

In the constantly developing era of minimal diagnostic invasiveness, the role of colon capsule endoscopy in colonic examination is being increasingly recognised, especially in the context of curtailed endoscopy services due to the COVID-19 pandemic. It is a safe diagnostic tool with low adverse event rates. As with other endoscopic modalities, various colon capsule endoscopy scores allow the standardisation of reporting and reproducibility. As bowel cleanliness affects CCE’s diagnostic yield, a few operator-dependent scores (Leighton–Rex and CC-CLEAR scores) and a computer-dependent score (CAC score) have been developed to grade bowel cleanliness objectively. CCE can be used to monitor IBD mucosal disease activity through the UCEIS and the panenteric CECDAIic score for UC and CD, respectively. CCE may also have a role in CRC screening, given similar sensitivity and specificity rates to conventional colonoscopy to detect colonic polyps ≥ 10 mm and CRC. Given CCE’s diagnostic yield and reproducible clinical scores with high inter-observer agreements, CCE is fast becoming a suitable alternative to conventional colonoscopy in specific patient populations.

Is a Fundamental Design Change for Gastrointestinal Endoscopes Required?

Since the first fiberoptic instruments, gastrointestinal endoscopy has shaped the field of gastroenterology and is now a key diagnostic and therapeutic tool. Compared with the initial fiberoptic endoscopes state-of-the-art optical chips (or charge-coupled device technology) allowed a quantum leap in image quality. Despite these advances, gastrointestinal endoscopy is far from being perfect. The diagnostic yield (eg, for adenoma detection rates) is highly operator dependent and there is still the need for sedation or even anesthesia to address discomfort during the procedure. Despite highly standardized cleaning and high-level disinfection the reuse of contemporary (and difficult to clean) endoscopes with multiple channels exposes patients to the risk of transmission of infections. Artificial intelligence and pattern recognition should eliminate interindividual variability including polyp detection rates, self-propelled, and (potentially remotely controlled) scopes with a soft shaft could reduce the discomfort during procedures and abolish the need for sedation and anesthesia altogether and single-use designs should eliminate the risk of patient-to-patient transmission of infections. While these innovations are feasible and could be implemented rapidly utilizing available technology, they require a paradigm shift affecting all levels of the value chain from the supplier of the instruments to the end-users. Some may negate the need for a paradigm shift, but it is evident that a major redesign of the endoscopic equipment is overdue to fully utilize novel technologies and most importantly ensure the best possible outcomes for patients.

Colon Capsule Endoscopy in Detecting Colonic Diverticula in a Japanese Population

Objective

The assessment of colonic diverticula with colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) in a Japanese population provided unclear results. In this study, we retrospectively reviewed a cohort of Japanese patients who had undergone CCE to assess its safety and usefulness in the diagnosis of colonic diverticula.

Methods

In this study, 175 consecutive Japanese patients who had their entire colon observed via CCE from November 2013 to July 2018 were included. Patients were retrospectively stratified according to age, gender, colonic segment, and symptoms involvement. A multivariable regression analysis was performed to investigate the presence of any correlation among variables. The safety of CCE was assessed in terms of the incidence of adverse events (AEs).

Results

Colonic diverticula were observed in 42.3% of all cases; of those; 36.5% were right-sided, 31.1% were left-sided, and 32.4% were bilateral. Moreover, one to two colonic diverticula were observed in 35.1%, while three or more diverticula were seen in 64.9%. Multivariable analysis showed that age (≥70 years) was positively associated with colonic diverticula, while male gender and the presence of colonic polyps were negatively associated with colonic diverticula. No correlation was found between colonic diverticula and symptoms. There was no significant difference between groups with and without colonic diverticula in the incidence of AEs. AEs were mild in severity, with no severe AE-related bowel preparation and capsule ingestion reported.

Conclusion

CCE was well-tolerated by the participants, and the incidence of colonic diverticula was 42.3%, with one to two and three or more diverticula being found in 35.1% and 64.9%, respectively. There was little difference in the frequency of colonic diverticula formation on the right side, left side, and on both sides. Age was a positive association factor, while male gender and the presence of colorectal polyps were negative association factors. No correlation was found between diverticula and symptoms.

Genetic Aberration Analysis in Thai Colorectal Adenoma and Early-Stage Adenocarcinoma Patients by Whole-Exome Sequencing

Colorectal adenomas are precursor lesions of colorectal adenocarcinoma. The transition from adenoma to carcinoma in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) has been associated with an accumulation of genetic aberrations. However, criteria that can screen adenoma progression to adenocarcinoma are still lacking. This present study is the first attempt to identify genetic aberrations, such as the somatic mutations, copy number variations (CNVs), and high-frequency mutated genes, found in Thai patients. In this study, we identified the genomic abnormality of two sample groups. In the first group, five cases matched normal-colorectal adenoma-colorectal adenocarcinoma. In the second group, six cases matched normal-colorectal adenomas. For both groups, whole-exome sequencing was performed. We compared the genetic aberration of the two sample groups. In both normal tissues compared with colorectal adenoma and colorectal adenocarcinoma analyses, somatic mutations were observed in the tumor suppressor gene APC (Adenomatous polyposis coli) in eight out of ten patients. In the group of normal tissue comparison with colorectal adenoma tissue, somatic mutations were also detected in Catenin Beta 1 (CTNNB1), Family With Sequence Similarity 123B (FAM123B), F-Box And WD Repeat Domain Containing 7 (FBXW7), Sex-Determining Region Y-Box 9 (SOX9), Low-Density Lipoprotein Receptor-Related Protein 5 (LRP5), Frizzled Class Receptor 10 (FZD10), and AT-Rich Interaction Domain 1A (ARID1A) genes, which are involved in the Wingless-related integration site (Wnt) signaling pathway. In the normal tissue comparison with colorectal adenocarcinoma tissue, Kirsten retrovirus-associated DNA sequences (KRAS), Tumor Protein 53 (TP53), and Ataxia-Telangiectasia Mutated (ATM) genes are found in the receptor tyrosine kinase-RAS (RTK-RAS) signaling pathway and p53 signaling pathway, respectively. These results suggest that APC and TP53 may act as a potential screening marker for colorectal adenoma and early-stage CRC. This preliminary study may help identify patients with adenoma and early-stage CRC and may aid in establishing prevention and surveillance strategies to reduce the incidence of CRC.

Critical research gaps and recommendations to inform research prioritisation for more effective prevention and improved outcomes in colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

Colorectal cancer (CRC) leads to significant morbidity/mortality worldwide. Defining critical research gaps (RG), their prioritisation and resolution, could improve patient outcomes.

DESIGN

RG analysis was conducted by a multidisciplinary panel of patients, clinicians and researchers (n=71). Eight working groups (WG) were constituted: discovery science; risk; prevention; early diagnosis and screening; pathology; curative treatment; stage IV disease; and living with and beyond CRC. A series of discussions led to development of draft papers by each WG, which were evaluated by a 20-strong patient panel. A final list of RGs and research recommendations (RR) was endorsed by all participants.

RESULTS

Fifteen critical RGs are summarised below: RG1: Lack of realistic models that recapitulate tumour/tumour micro/macroenvironment; RG2: Insufficient evidence on precise contributions of genetic/environmental/lifestyle factors to CRC risk; RG3: Pressing need for prevention trials; RG4: Lack of integration of different prevention approaches; RG5: Lack of optimal strategies for CRC screening; RG6: Lack of effective triage systems for invasive investigations; RG7: Imprecise pathological assessment of CRC; RG8: Lack of qualified personnel in genomics, data sciences and digital pathology; RG9: Inadequate assessment/communication of risk, benefit and uncertainty of treatment choices; RG10: Need for novel technologies/interventions to improve curative outcomes; RG11: Lack of approaches that recognise molecular interplay between metastasising tumours and their microenvironment; RG12: Lack of reliable biomarkers to guide stage IV treatment; RG13: Need to increase understanding of health related quality of life (HRQOL) and promote residual symptom resolution; RG14: Lack of coordination of CRC research/funding; RG15: Lack of effective communication between relevant stakeholders.

CONCLUSION

Prioritising research activity and funding could have a significant impact on reducing CRC disease burden over the next 5 years.