Non-small-bowel lesions identification by capsule endoscopy: A single centre retrospective study

Long-term outcomes of patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding after negative capsule endoscopy

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Although small-bowel capsule endoscopy (CE) is widely used for obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB), long-term outcomes for OGIB patients after negative CE remain unclear. Herein, we defined negative CE as P0 (no bleeding potential) or P1 (less likely to bleed), based on the P classification using CE. We aimed to clarify long-term outcomes of patients with OGIB after negative CE.

METHODS

This single-center observational study enrolled 461 consecutive patients with OGIB who underwent CE from March 2014 to October 2021 and were followed up for >1 year. We examined rebleeding rates and predictive factors.

RESULTS

Two hundred and twenty-four (49%) patients had P0, and 237 (51%) had P1 findings. Rebleeding occurred in 9% and 16% of patients in the P0 and P1 groups, respectively. Two patients in the P0 group and 15 in the P1 group showed rebleeding from the small bowel. The rate of small-bowel rebleeding was significantly lower in the P0 group than that in the P1 group (1% vs 6%, P = 0.002), as was the cumulative rebleeding rate (P = 0.004). In the multivariate analysis, history of endoscopic hemostasis (hazard ratio [HR] = 15.958, 95% confidence interval [CI]:4.950-51.447, P < 0.001) and P1 CE findings (HR = 9.989, 95% CI: 2.077-48.030, P = 0.004) were independently predicted small-bowel rebleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

OGIB with P0 CE findings rarely showed rebleeding from the small bowel. Rebleeding may occur in patients with OGIB. Patients with history of endoscopic hemostasis for small-bowel lesions or P1 CE findings should be followed up intensively.

Age-specific causes of upper gastrointestinal bleeding in children

The etiology of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) varies by age, from newborns to adolescents, with some of the causes overlapping between age groups. While particular causes such as vitamin K deficiency and cow's milk protein allergy are limited to specific age groups, occurring only in neonates and infants, others such as erosive esophagitis and gastritis may be identified at all ages. Furthermore, the incidence of UGIB is variable throughout the world and in different hospital settings. In North America and Europe, most UGIBs are non-variceal, associated with erosive esophagitis, gastritis, and gastric and duodenal ulcers. In recent years, the most common causes in some Middle Eastern and Far Eastern countries are becoming similar to those in Western countries. However, variceal bleeding still predominates in certain parts of the world, especially in South Asia. The most severe hemorrhage arises from variceal bleeding, peptic ulceration, and disseminated intravascular coagulation. Hematemesis is a credible indicator of a UGI source of bleeding in the majority of patients. Being familiar with the most likely UGIB causes in specific ages and geographic areas is especially important for adequate orientation in clinical settings, the use of proper diagnostic tests, and rapid initiation of the therapy. The fundamental approach to the management of UGIB includes an immediate assessment of severity, detecting possible causes, and providing hemodynamic stability, followed by early endoscopy. Unusual UGIB causes must always be considered when establishing a diagnosis in the pediatric population because some of them are unique to children. Endoscopic techniques are of significant diagnostic value, and combined with medicaments, may be used for the management of acute bleeding. Finally, surgical treatment is reserved for the most severe bleeding.

Diagnosis and management of small-bowel bleeding

Small-bowel (SB) bleeding is a challenging problem for the clinician, presenting many pitfalls in both diagnosis and subsequent treatment. Videocapsule endoscopy (VCE) and device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE) have revolutionized the approach to the patient with SB bleeding, allowing for the endoscopic diagnosis and management of what was previously only a surgical matter. The patients' assessment in SB bleeding is of foremost importance, as treatment success relies on a detailed evaluation of clinical history, suspicion for underlying lesions, and a careful selection and timing of diagnostic and therapeutic tools. This review will summarize current state-of-the-art evidence and practice points, to provide the clinician with a comprehensive guide towards the management of SB bleeding.

Small-bowel capsule endoscopy and device-assisted enteroscopy for diagnosis and treatment of small-bowel disorders: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Update 2022

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.

Clinical profile, diagnostic yield, and procedural outcomes of single balloon enteroscopy: A tertiary care hospital experience

BACKGROUND

Single balloon enteroscopy (SBE) allows ease of access for small bowel visualization and has multiple diagnostic and therapeutic indications. It provides the advantage of performing various therapeutic interventions alongside the diagnostic procedure. SBE has also been considered a relatively safe procedure with no major complications.

AIM

To investigate the indications, safety, and clinical yield of SBE, and determine its effect on disease outcome.

METHODS

A retrospective, descriptive study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital in Karachi, Pakistan. Medical records of 56 adult patients (≥ 18 years) who underwent SBE between July 2013 and December 2021 were reviewed and data were collected using a structured proforma. A descriptive analysis of the variables was performed using Statistical Package of Social Sciences Version 19. Results are reported as the mean ± SD for quantitative variables and numbers and percentages for qualitative variables. Missing data are reported as unknown.

RESULTS

A total of 56 patients who underwent 61 SBE procedures were included. The mean age was 50.93 ± 16.16 years, with 53.6% of them being males. Hypertension (39.3%) and diabetes mellitus (25.0%) were the most common pre-existing comorbidities. Obscure gastrointestinal bleed (39.3%) was the most common indication for enteroscopy, followed by chronic diarrhea (19.7%) and unexplained anemia (16.4%). The majority of procedures were performed in the endoscopy suite (90.2%) under monitored anaesthesia care (93.4%). Most procedures were diagnostic (91.8%) and completed without complications (95.1%). The depth of examination ranged from 95 cm to 500 cm with a mean of 282.05 ± 90.04 cm. The most common findings were inflammation and ulcerations (29.5%), followed by masses (19.7%) and vascular malformations (14.8%). As a result of the findings, a new diagnosis was made in 47.5% of the cases and a previous one was ruled out in 24.6% of them; 65.6% of the cases had a change in management.

CONCLUSION

SBE is a suitable modality for investigating diseases in the small bowel. It is shown to be technically efficient and reasonably safe and is associated with high diagnostic and therapeutic yield.

A Practical Guide to the Evaluation of Small Bowel Bleeding

Gastrointestinal bleeding is a common clinical problem encountered in both the inpatient and outpatient settings. Although the evaluation of upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding is often straightforward, bleeding from the small bowel may pose a clinical challenge. In this article, we review the indications, modalities, and differential diagnoses of small bowel bleeding. On completion of the article, clinicians should be able to identify common causes of small bowel bleeding, understand the advantages and disadvantages of the modalities used to evaluate small bowel bleeding, and enact a stepwise management approach to the patient with presumed small bowel bleeding.