1
|
Bjoersum-Meyer T, Skonieczna-Zydecka K, Cortegoso Valdivia P, Stenfors I, Lyutakov I, Rondonotti E, Pennazio M, Marlicz W, Baatrup G, Koulaouzidis A, Toth E. Efficacy of bowel preparation regimens for colon capsule endoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endosc Int Open 2021; 9:E1658-E1673. [PMID: 34790528 PMCID: PMC8589531 DOI: 10.1055/a-1529-5814] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/25/2021] [Accepted: 06/04/2021] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Background and study aims Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) is an alternative to conventional colonoscopy (CC) in specific clinical settings. High completion rates (CRs) and adequate cleanliness rates (ACRs) are fundamental quality parameters if CCE is to be widely implemented as a CC equivalent diagnostic modality. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy of different bowel preparations regimens on CR and ACR in CCE. Patients and methods We performed a systematic literature search in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. Data were independently extracted per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The primary outcome measures (CR, ACR) were retrieved from the individual studies and pooled event rates were calculated. Results Thirty-four observational (OBS) studies (n = 3,789) and 12 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) (n = 1,214) comprising a total 5,003 patients were included. The overall CR was 0.798 (95 % CI, 0.764-0.828); the highest CRs were observed with sodium phosphate (NaP) + gastrografin booster (n = 2, CR = 0.931, 95 % CI, 0.820-0.976). The overall ACR was 0.768 (95 % CI, 0.735-0.797); the highest ACRs were observed with polyethylene glycol (PEG) + magnesium citrate (n = 4, ER = 0.953, 95 % CI, 0.896-0.979). Conclusions In the largest meta-analysis on CCE bowel preparation regimens, we found that both CRs and ACRs are suboptimal compared to the minimum recommended standards for CC. PEG laxative and NaP booster were the most commonly used but were not associated with higher CRs or ACRs. Well-designed studies on CCE should be performed to find the optimal preparation regimen.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Pablo Cortegoso Valdivia
- Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Unit, University Hospital of Parma, University of Parma, Parma, Italy.
| | - Irene Stenfors
- Department of Gastroenterology, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Lund University, Sweden
| | - Ivan Lyutakov
- Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospital “Tsaritsa Yoanna – ISUL”, Medical University Sofia, Bulgaria
| | | | - Marco Pennazio
- University Division of Gastroenterology, City of Health and Science University Hospital, Turin, Italy
| | - Wojciech Marlicz
- Department of Gastroenterology, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland,The Centre for Digestive Diseases, Endoklinika, Szczecin, Poland
| | - Gunnar Baatrup
- Department of Surgery, Odense University Hospital, Odense Denmark
| | - Anastasios Koulaouzidis
- Department of Social Medicine & Public Health, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland
| | - Ervin Toth
- Department of Gastroenterology, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Lund University, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Spada C, Pasha SF, Gross SA, Leighton JA, Schnoll-Sussman F, Correale L, González Suárez B, Costamagna G, Hassan C. Accuracy of First- and Second-Generation Colon Capsules in Endoscopic Detection of Colorectal Polyps: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2016; 14:1533-1543.e8. [PMID: 27165469 DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2016.04.038] [Citation(s) in RCA: 80] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/09/2016] [Revised: 04/09/2016] [Accepted: 04/26/2016] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) is a noninvasive technique used to explore the colon without sedation or air insufflation. A second-generation capsule was recently developed to improve accuracy of detection, and clinical use has expanded globally. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the accuracy of CCE in detecting colorectal polyps. METHODS We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and other databases from 1966 through 2015 for studies that compared accuracy of colonoscopy with histologic evaluation with CCE. The risk of bias within each study was ascertained according to Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy in Systematic Reviews recommendations. Per-patient accuracy values were calculated for polyps, overall and for first-generation (CCE-1) and second-generation (CCE-2) capsules. We analyzed data by using forest plots, the I2 statistic to calculate heterogeneity, and meta-regression analyses. RESULTS Fourteen studies provided data from 2420 patients (1128 for CCE-1 and 1292 for CCE-2). CCE-2 and CCE-1 detected polyps >6 mm with 86% sensitivity (95% confidence interval [CI], 82%-89%) and 58% sensitivity (95% CI, 44%-70%), respectively, and 88.1% specificity (95% CI, 74.2%-95.0%) and 85.7% specificity (95% CI, 80.2%-90.0%), respectively. CCE-2 and CCE-1 detected polyps >10 mm with 87% sensitivity (95% CI, 81%-91%) and 54% sensitivity (95% CI, 29%-77%), respectively, and 95.3% specificity (95% CI, 91.5%-97.5%) and 97.4% specificity (95% CI, 96.0%-98.3%), respectively. CCE-2 identified all 11 invasive cancers detected by colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS The sensitivity in detection of polyps >6 mm and >10 mm increased substantially between development of first-generation and second-generation colon capsules. High specificity values for detection of polyps by CCE-2 seem to be achievable with a 10-mm cutoff and in a screening setting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cristiano Spada
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli", Rome, Italy.
| | - Shabana F Pasha
- Division of Gastroenterology, Mayo Clinic School of Medicine, Scottsdale, Arizona
| | - Seth A Gross
- Department of Gastroenterology, Tisch Hospital, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, New York
| | - Jonathan A Leighton
- Division of Gastroenterology, Mayo Clinic School of Medicine, Scottsdale, Arizona
| | - Felice Schnoll-Sussman
- Department of Gastroenterology, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York, New York
| | | | | | - Guido Costamagna
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli", Rome, Italy
| | - Cesare Hassan
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli", Rome, Italy; Department of Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy, Nuovo Regina Margherita Hospital, Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Yung DE, Rondonotti E, Koulaouzidis A. Review: capsule colonoscopy-a concise clinical overview of current status. ANNALS OF TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE 2016; 4:398. [PMID: 27867950 DOI: 10.21037/atm.2016.10.71] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
The colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) was first introduced in 2007. Currently, the main clinical indications for CCE are completion of incomplete colonoscopy, polyp detection and investigation of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Although conventional colonoscopy is the gold standard in bowel cancer screening, incomplete colonoscopy remains a problem as lesions are missed. CCE compares favourably to computer tomography colonography (CTC) in adenoma detection and has therefore been proposed as a method for completing colonoscopy. However the data on CCE remains sparse and current evidence does not show its superiority over CTC or conventional colonoscopy in bowel cancer screening. CCE also seems to show good correlation with conventional colonoscopy when used to evaluate IBD, but there are not many published studies at present. Other significant limitations include the need for aggressive bowel preparation and the labour-intensiveness of CCE reading. Therefore, much further software and hardware development is required to enable CCE to fulfill its potential as a minimally-invasive and reliable method of colonoscopy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Diana E Yung
- Endoscopy Unit, the Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Morgan DR, Malik PR, Romeo DP, Rex DK. Initial US evaluation of second-generation capsule colonoscopy for detecting colon polyps. BMJ Open Gastroenterol 2016; 3:e000089. [PMID: 27195129 PMCID: PMC4860721 DOI: 10.1136/bmjgast-2016-000089] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/25/2016] [Revised: 03/16/2016] [Accepted: 04/07/2016] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Objectives Capsule colonoscopy is an additional screening modality for colorectal cancer. Second-generation capsule colonoscopy (CC2) may have improved efficacy in the detection of colon adenomas as compared with prior devices. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of CC2 in the detection of polyps in symptomatic and screening patients in the USA. Design Prospective, multicentre study. Setting and participants Two academic medical centres and two private practice facilities, evaluating patients with indications for colonoscopy. Methods Patients underwent capsule colonoscopy procedure using magnesium citrate as a boost, followed by colonoscopy on the same day. The main outcome measurement was accuracy of CC2 for the detection of colorectal polyps ≥6 and ≥10 mm as compared with conventional colonoscopy. Results 51 patients were enrolled, 50 of whom had CC2 and colonoscopy examinations and were included in the accuracy analysis. 30% and 14% of patients had polyps ≥6 and ≥10 mm, respectively. For lesions ≥10 mm identified on conventional colonoscopy, CC2 sensitivity was 100% (95% CI 56.1% to 100%) with a specificity of 93.0% (79.9% to 98.2%). For polyps ≥6 mm, the CC2 sensitivity was 93.3% (66.0% to 99.7%) and the specificity was 80.0% (62.5% to 90.9%). There was a 61% adequate cleansing rate with 64% of CC2 procedures being complete. Conclusions In the initial US experience with CC2 there was adequate sensitivity for detecting patients with polyps ≥6 mm in size. Magnesium citrate was inadequate as a boost agent. Trial registration number NCT01087528.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Douglas R Morgan
- Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition , Vanderbilt Institute for Global Health, Vanderbilt University , Nashville, Tennessee , USA
| | - Pramod R Malik
- Gastroenterology Associates of Tidewater, P.C , Virginia Gastroenterology Institute , Suffolk, Virginia , USA
| | - David P Romeo
- Dayton Gastroenterology, Inc. , Beavercreek, Ohio , USA
| | - Douglas K Rex
- Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology/Hepatology , Indiana University Hospital , Indianapolis, Indiana , USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Ciuti G, Caliò R, Camboni D, Neri L, Bianchi F, Arezzo A, Koulaouzidis A, Schostek S, Stoyanov D, Oddo CM, Magnani B, Menciassi A, Morino M, Schurr MO, Dario P. Frontiers of robotic endoscopic capsules: a review. JOURNAL OF MICRO-BIO ROBOTICS 2016; 11:1-18. [PMID: 29082124 PMCID: PMC5646258 DOI: 10.1007/s12213-016-0087-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 49] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/22/2016] [Revised: 03/24/2016] [Accepted: 04/07/2016] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
Digestive diseases are a major burden for society and healthcare systems, and with an aging population, the importance of their effective management will become critical. Healthcare systems worldwide already struggle to insure quality and affordability of healthcare delivery and this will be a significant challenge in the midterm future. Wireless capsule endoscopy (WCE), introduced in 2000 by Given Imaging Ltd., is an example of disruptive technology and represents an attractive alternative to traditional diagnostic techniques. WCE overcomes conventional endoscopy enabling inspection of the digestive system without discomfort or the need for sedation. Thus, it has the advantage of encouraging patients to undergo gastrointestinal (GI) tract examinations and of facilitating mass screening programmes. With the integration of further capabilities based on microrobotics, e.g. active locomotion and embedded therapeutic modules, WCE could become the key-technology for GI diagnosis and treatment. This review presents a research update on WCE and describes the state-of-the-art of current endoscopic devices with a focus on research-oriented robotic capsule endoscopes enabled by microsystem technologies. The article also presents a visionary perspective on WCE potential for screening, diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopic procedures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gastone Ciuti
- The BioRobotics Institute of Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pontedera, Pisa 56025 Italy
| | - R Caliò
- The BioRobotics Institute of Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pontedera, Pisa 56025 Italy
| | - D Camboni
- The BioRobotics Institute of Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pontedera, Pisa 56025 Italy
| | - L Neri
- The BioRobotics Institute of Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pontedera, Pisa 56025 Italy.,Ekymed S.r.l., Livorno, Italy
| | - F Bianchi
- The BioRobotics Institute of Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pontedera, Pisa 56025 Italy
| | - A Arezzo
- Department of Surgical Disciplines, University of Torino, Torino, Italy
| | - A Koulaouzidis
- Endoscopy Unit, The Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
| | | | - D Stoyanov
- Centre for Medical Image Computing and the Department of Computer Science, University College London, London, UK
| | - C M Oddo
- The BioRobotics Institute of Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pontedera, Pisa 56025 Italy
| | | | - A Menciassi
- The BioRobotics Institute of Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pontedera, Pisa 56025 Italy
| | - M Morino
- Department of Surgical Disciplines, University of Torino, Torino, Italy
| | - M O Schurr
- Ovesco Endoscopy AG, Tübingen, Germany.,Steinbeis University Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - P Dario
- The BioRobotics Institute of Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pontedera, Pisa 56025 Italy
| |
Collapse
|