Population-Based Prevalence of Gastrointestinal Abnormalities at Colon Capsule Endoscopy

Prevalence of clinical signs, symptoms and comorbidities at diagnosis of acromegaly: a systematic review in accordance with PRISMA guidelines

OBJECTIVE

Diagnostic delay is high in acromegaly and leads to increased morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study is to systematically assess the most prevalent clinical signs, symptoms and comorbidities of acromegaly at time of diagnosis.

DESIGN

A literature search (in PubMed, Embase and Web of Science) was performed on November 18, 2021, in collaboration with a medical information specialist.

METHODS

Prevalence data on (presenting) clinical signs, symptoms and comorbidities at time of diagnosis were extracted and synthesized as weighted mean prevalence. The risk of bias was assessed for each included study using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Studies Reporting Prevalence Data.

RESULTS

Risk of bias and heterogeneity was high in the 124 included articles. Clinical signs and symptoms with the highest weighted mean prevalence were: acral enlargement (90%), facial features (65%), oral changes (62%), headache (59%), fatigue/tiredness (53%; including daytime sleepiness: 48%), hyperhidrosis (47%), snoring (46%), skin changes (including oily skin: 37% and thicker skin: 35%), weight gain (36%) and arthralgia (34%). Concerning comorbidities, acromegaly patients more frequently had hypertension, left ventricle hypertrophy, dia/systolic dysfunction, cardiac arrhythmias, (pre)diabetes, dyslipidemia and intestinal polyps- and malignancy than age- and sex matched controls. Noteworthy, cardiovascular comorbidity was lower in more recent studies. Features that most often led to diagnosis of acromegaly were typical physical changes (acral enlargement, facial changes and prognatism), local tumor effects (headache and visual defect), diabetes, thyroid cancer and menstrual disorders.

CONCLUSION

Acromegaly manifests itself with typical physical changes but also leads to a wide variety of common comorbidities, emphasizing that recognition of a combination of these features is key to establishing the diagnosis.

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?”.

ScotCap - A large observational cohort study

AIM

The aim of this work was to evaluate the performance of colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) in a lower gastrointestinal diagnostic care pathway.

METHOD

This large multicentre prospective clinical evaluation recruited symptomatic patients (patients requiring investigation of symptoms suggestive of colorectal pathology) and surveillance patients (patients due to undergo surveillance colonoscopy). Patients aged 18 years or over were invited to participate and undergo CCE by a secondary-care clinician if they met the referral criteria for a colonoscopy. The primary outcome was the test completion rate (visualization of the whole colon and rectum). We also measured the need for further tests after CCE.

RESULTS

A total of 733 patients were invited to take part in this evaluation, with 509 patients undergoing CCE. Of these, 316 were symptomatic patients and 193 were surveillance patients. Two hundred and twenty-eight of the 316 symptomatic patients (72%) and 137 of the 193 surveillance patients (71%) had a complete test. It was found that 118/316 (37%) of symptomatic patients required no further test following CCE, while 103/316 (33%) and 81/316 (26%) required a colonoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy, respectively. Fifty-three of the 193 surveillance patients (28%) required no further test following CCE, while 104/193 (54%) and 30/193 (16%) required a colonoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy, respectively. No patient in this evaluation was diagnosed with colorectal cancer. Two patients experienced serious adverse events - one capsule retention with obstruction and one hospital admission with dehydration due to the bowel preparation.

CONCLUSION

CCE is a safe, well-tolerated diagnostic test which can reduce the proportion of patients requiring colonoscopy, but the test completion rate needs to be improved to match that of lower gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Predictors of Gastrointestinal Transit Times in Colon Capsule Endoscopy

INTRODUCTION

Optimizing the accuracy of colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) requires high completion rates. To prevent incomplete CCE, we aimed to identify predictors associated with slow CCE transit times.

METHODS

In this population-based study, participants received CCE with a split-dose polyethylene glycol bowel preparation and booster regimen (0.5 L oral sulfate solution and 10 mg metoclopramide if capsule remained in stomach for > 1 hour). The following predictors were assessed: age, sex, body mass index (BMI), smoking, coffee and fiber intake, diet quality, physical activity, dyspeptic complaints, stool pattern, history of abdominal surgery, medication use, and CCE findings. Multivariable logistic and linear regressions with backward elimination were performed.

RESULTS

We analyzed 451 CCE procedures with a completion rate of 51.9%. The completion rate was higher among older participants (odds ratio [OR] 1.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-2.28, P = 0.03) and participants with a changed stool pattern (OR 2.27, 95% CI 1.20-4.30, P = 0.01). Participants with a history of abdominal surgery had a lower completion rate (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.36-0.80, P = 0.003). Participants with higher BMI had faster stomach, small bowel, and total transit times (β = -0.10, P = 0.01; β = -0.14, P = 0.001; β = -0.12, P = 0.01). A faster small bowel transit was found in participants with a changed stool pattern (β = -0.08, P = 0.049) and the use of metoclopramide (β = -0.14, P = 0.001). Participants with high fiber intake had a slower colonic transit (β = 0.11, P = 0.03).

DISCUSSION

Younger age, unchanged stool pattern, history of abdominal surgery, low BMI, and high fiber intake resulted in slower CCE transit times and lower completion rates. In future practice, these factors can be considered to adjust preparation protocols.

Computer-Aided Diagnosis of Gastrointestinal Ulcer and Hemorrhage Using Wireless Capsule Endoscopy: Systematic Review and Diagnostic Test Accuracy Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Interpretation of capsule endoscopy images or movies is operator-dependent and time-consuming. As a result, computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) has been applied to enhance the efficacy and accuracy of the review process. Two previous meta-analyses reported the diagnostic performance of CAD models for gastrointestinal ulcers or hemorrhage in capsule endoscopy. However, insufficient systematic reviews have been conducted, which cannot determine the real diagnostic validity of CAD models.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the diagnostic test accuracy of CAD models for gastrointestinal ulcers or hemorrhage using wireless capsule endoscopic images.

METHODS

We conducted core databases searching for studies based on CAD models for the diagnosis of ulcers or hemorrhage using capsule endoscopy and presenting data on diagnostic performance. Systematic review and diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis were performed.

RESULTS

Overall, 39 studies were included. The pooled area under the curve, sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio of CAD models for the diagnosis of ulcers (or erosions) were .97 (95% confidence interval, .95-.98), .93 (.89-.95), .92 (.89-.94), and 138 (79-243), respectively. The pooled area under the curve, sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio of CAD models for the diagnosis of hemorrhage (or angioectasia) were .99 (.98-.99), .96 (.94-0.97), .97 (.95-.99), and 888 (343-2303), respectively. Subgroup analyses showed robust results. Meta-regression showed that published year, number of training images, and target disease (ulcers vs erosions, hemorrhage vs angioectasia) was found to be the source of heterogeneity. No publication bias was detected.

CONCLUSIONS

CAD models showed high performance for the optical diagnosis of gastrointestinal ulcer and hemorrhage in wireless capsule endoscopy.

Applicability of colon capsule endoscopy as pan-endoscopy: From bowel preparation, transit, and rating times to completion rate and patient acceptance

Background and study aims  Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) has the potential to explore the entire gastrointestinal tract. The aim of this study was to assess the applicability of CCE as pan-endoscopy. Patients and methods  Healthy participants received CCE with bowel preparation (bisacodyl, polyethylene electrolyte glycol (PEG) + ascorbic acid) and booster regimen (metoclopramide, oral sulfate solution (OSS)). For each segment of the gastrointestinal tract, the following quality parameters were assessed: cleanliness, transit times, reading times, patient acceptance and safety of the procedure. When all gastrointestinal segments had cleansing score good or excellent, cleanliness of the whole gastrointestinal tract was assessed as good. Participants' expected and perceived burden was assessed by questionnaires and participants were asked to grade the procedure (scale 0-10). All serious adverse events (SAEs) were documented. Results  A total of 451 CCE procedures were analyzed. A good cleansing score was achieved in the stomach in 69.6%, in the SB in 99.1 % and in the colon in 76.6 %. Cleanliness of the whole gastrointestinal tract was good in 52.8 % of the participants. CCE median transit time of the whole gastrointestinal tract was 583 minutes IQR 303-659). The capsule reached the descending colon in 94.7 %. Median reading time per procedure was 70 minutes (IQR 57-83). Participants graded the procedure with a 7.8. There were no procedure-related SAEs. Conclusions  CCE as pan-endoscopy has shown to be a safe procedure with good patient acceptance. When cleanliness of all gastrointestinal segments per patient, completion rate and reading time will be improved, CCE can be applied as a good non-invasive alternative to evaluate the gastrointestinal tract.

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.