A comparative evaluation of single-balloon enteroscopy and spiral enteroscopy for patients with mid-gut disorders

Performance and safety of motorized spiral enteroscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The introduction of motorized spiral enteroscopy (mSE) into clinical practice holds diagnostic and therapeutic potential for small-bowel investigations. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the performance of this modality in diagnosing and treating small-bowel lesions.

METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were performed through September 2022. The primary outcome was diagnostic success, defined as the identification of a lesion relative to the indication. Secondary outcomes were successful therapeutic manipulation, total enteroscopy rate (examination from the duodenojejunal flexion to the cecum), technical success (passage from the ligament of Treitz or ileocecal valve for anterograde and retrograde approach, respectively), and adverse event rates. We performed meta-analyses using a random-effects model, and the results are reported as percentages with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

From 2016 to 2022, 9 studies (959 patients; 42% women; mean age >45 years; 474 patients [49.4%] investigated for mid-GI bleeding/anemia) were considered eligible and included in analysis. The diagnostic success rate of mSE was 78% (95% CI, 72-84; I2 = 78.3%). Considering secondary outcomes, total enteroscopy was attempted in 460 cases and completed with a rate of 51% (95% CI, 30-72; I2 = 96.2%), whereas therapeutic interventions were successful in 98% of cases (95% CI, 96-100; I2 = 79.8%) where attempted. Technical success rates were 96% (95% CI, 94-97; I2 = 1.5%) for anterograde and 97% (95% CI, 94-100; I2 = 38.6%) for retrograde approaches, respectively. Finally, the incidence of adverse events was 17% (95% CI, 13-21; I2 = 65.1%), albeit most were minor adverse events (16%; 95% CI, 11-20; I2 = 67.2%) versus major adverse events (1%; 95% CI, 0-1; I2 = 0%).

CONCLUSIONS

mSE provides high rates of diagnostic and therapeutic success with a low prevalence of severe adverse events.

The performance and safety of motorized spiral enteroscopy, including in patients with surgically altered gastrointestinal anatomy: a multicenter prospective study

BACKGROUND

Data are scarce on the efficacy and safety of motorized spiral enteroscopy (MSE). No data are available on the utility of this technique in patients with surgically altered gastrointestinal (GI) anatomy. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of MSE in patients with suspected small-bowel disease, including those with surgically altered GI anatomy.

METHODS

A multicenter prospective observational, uncontrolled study evaluated MSE in consecutive patients with suspected small-bowel pathology and an indication for diagnostic and/or therapeutic intervention.

RESULTS

A total of 170 patients (102 men; median age 64 years, range 18-89) were included. The overall diagnostic yield was 64.1 %. Endotherapy was performed in 53.5 % of procedures. The median total procedure times for the antegrade and retrograde approaches were 45 minutes (interquartile range [IQR] 30-80) and 40 minutes (IQR 30-70), respectively. When total (pan)enteroscopy was intended, this was achieved at rate of 70.3 % (28.1 % by antegrade approach and 42.2 % by a bidirectional approach). Surgically altered GI anatomy was present in 34 /170 of all procedures (20.0 %) and in 11 /45 of the successful total enteroscopy procedures (24.4 %). Propofol sedation or general anesthesia were used in 92.9 % and 7.1 % of the procedures, respectively. Minor adverse events were observed in 15.9 % of patients, but there were no major adverse events.

CONCLUSION

MSE seems to be an effective and safe endoscopic procedure. Total (pan)enteroscopy can be achieved, in one or two sessions, even in the presence of surgically altered GI anatomy. The total procedure time is relatively short. For both antegrade and retrograde MSE procedures, propofol sedation seems sufficient and safe.

Water exchange-assisted versus carbon dioxide-insufflated single-balloon enteroscopy: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Single-balloon enteroscopy (SBE) is a valuable but difficult modality for the diagnosis and treatment of small-bowel disease. The water exchange method has the advantage of facilitating intubation during colonoscopy. Here, we evaluated the effects of water exchange on procedure-related variables related to SBE.

METHODS

This randomized controlled trial was conducted in a tertiary-care referral center in China. Patients due for attempted total enteroscopy were randomly allocated to undergo water exchange-assisted (water exchange group) or carbon dioxide-insufflated enteroscopy (CO₂ group). All patients were planned to undergo both anterograde and retrograde procedures. The primary outcome was the total enteroscopy rate. Secondary outcomes included the maximal insertion depth, positive findings, procedural time, and adverse events.

RESULTS

In total, 110 patients were enrolled, with 55 in each group. Baseline characteristics between the two groups were comparable. Total enteroscopy was achieved in 58.2 % (32/55) of the water exchange group and 36.4 % (20/55) of the control group (P = 0.02). The mean (standard deviation) estimated intubation depth was 521.2 (101.4) cm in the water exchange group and 481.6 (95.2) cm in the CO₂ group (P = 0.04). The insertion time was prolonged in the water exchange group compared with the CO₂ group (178.9 [45.1] minutes vs. 154.2 [27.6] minutes; P < 0.001). Endoscopic findings and adverse events were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The water exchange method improved the total enteroscopy rate and increased the intubation depth during SBE. The use of water exchange did not increase the complications of enteroscopy.

The Evolution of Device-Assisted Enteroscopy: From Sonde Enteroscopy to Motorized Spiral Enteroscopy

The introduction of capsule endoscopy in 2001 opened the last "black box" of the gastrointestinal tract enabling complete visualization of the small bowel. Since then, numerous new developments in the field of deep enteroscopy have emerged expanding the diagnostic and therapeutic armamentarium against small bowel diseases. The ability to achieve total enteroscopy and visualize the entire small bowel remains the holy grail in enteroscopy. Our journey in the small bowel started historically with sonde type enteroscopy and ropeway enteroscopy. Currently, double-balloon enteroscopy, single-balloon enteroscopy, and spiral enteroscopy are available in clinical practice. Recently, a novel motorized enteroscope has been described with the potential to shorten procedure time and allow for total enteroscopy in one session. In this review, we will present an overview of the currently available techniques, indications, diagnostic yield, and complications of device-assisted enteroscopy.

Video Capsule Endoscopy and Device-Assisted Enteroscopy

Mark Hanscom Courtney Stead Harris Feldman Neil B. Marya David Cave.

Use, Yield, and Risk of Device-assisted Enteroscopy in the United States: Results From a Large Retrospective Multicenter Cohort

INTRODUCTION

Since 2001, device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE) has revolutionized the diagnostic and therapeutic capabilities for managing small bowel pathology. Though commonly performed, there have been no recent large studies to assess the use, yield, and risks of DAE and none that include all 3 DAE modalities. We hypothesized that DAE is safe with high diagnostic and therapeutic yields achieved within reasonable procedure duration and here we present a large retrospective multicenter US study evaluating the use, yield, and complications of DAE.

METHODS

After obtaining institutional review board approval, electronic records were used to identify all DAE's performed for luminal small bowel evaluation in adult patients at 4 US referral centers (Duke University Medical Center, New York University Langone Medical Center, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, and University of Massachusetts Medical Center) from January 1, 2014 to January 1, 2019. Electronic medical records were reviewed to collect and analyze a variety of procedure-related outcomes. Using the data pooled across centers, descriptive statistics were generated for the patient and procedure-related characteristics and outcomes; relationships between characteristics and outcomes were explored.

RESULTS

A total of 1787 DAE's were performed over this 5-year period (392 at Duke University Medical Center, 887 at Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, 312 at New York University Langone Medical Center, and 195 at University of Massachusetts Medical Center). Of these, there were 1017 (57%) double-balloon, 391 (29%) single-balloon, and 378 (21%) spiral enteroscopies. The mean age of patients undergoing DAE was 66 years and 53% of examinations were performed on women; 18% of patients in the cohort underwent >1 DAE over this time span. A total of 53% of examinations were performed for suspected small bowel bleeding, 31% were directly guided by video capsule endoscopy findings and 8% were performed for abnormal imaging. A total of 85% of examinations used an antegrade approach and DAE took a mean of 45 minutes to complete; 76% of examinations revealed abnormal findings, with vascular, inflammatory, and neoplastic findings seen in 49%, 17%, and 15% of the cohort, respectively. Older age was significantly associated with any abnormal finding, including arteriovenous malformations (P<0.0001); 50% of examinations included a therapeutic maneuver, most commonly argon plasma coagulation/cautery (43%). There were complications in 16 examinations (0.9%) including 2 perforations (0.1%), 6 cases with bleeding (0.3%) and 1 episode of pancreatitis (0.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

DAE is most commonly performed to evaluate suspected small bowel bleeding and is commonly directed by video capsule findings. DAE is safe, has a high diagnostic yield, with 76% of examinations showing abnormal findings, and frequently features therapeutic maneuvers. Advancing age is associated with abnormal findings on DAE.

The role of small-bowel endoscopy in inflammatory bowel disease: an updated review on the state-of-the-art in 2021

The impact of small-bowel (SB) capsule endoscopy and device-assisted enteroscopy on clinical practice, since their introduction 2 decades ago, has been remarkable. These disruptive technologies have transformed the investigation and management of SB pathology and now have a firmly established place in guidelines and clinical algorithms. Furthermore, recent years have witnessed innovations, driven by the demand of new goals in the management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), such as mucosal healing and evolving strategies based on tight monitoring and accelerated escalation of care. These developments in SB endoscopy have also been paralleled by refinement in dedicated radiological SB imaging technologies. This updated review highlights the current state of the art and more recent innovations with a focus on their role in IBD.

[Exploration of the small intestine through single-balloon enteroscopy, experience in the Mohammed V Training Military Hospital in Rabat: about 51 cases]

L´entéroscopie est devenue une technique incontournable dans l´exploration mais surtout dans le traitement des lésions de l´intestin grêle. Elle est en général réalisée suite à un examen préalable du grêle par vidéo-capsule endoscopique. Trois techniques équivalentes existent: l´entéroscopie double ballon, l´entéroscopie simple ballon et l´entéroscopie spiralée. Le but de cette étude est de décrire la faisabilité technique de l´entéroscopie simple ballon ainsi que sa tolérance, ses indications et ses résultats obtenus dans notre expérience. Une analyse rétrospective et descriptive s´étalant sur 8 ans des dossiers de patients ayant bénéficié d´une entéroscopie simple ballon au sein du service de gastro-entérologie de l´hôpital militaire et d´instruction Mohamed V de Rabat. Les critères d´inclusion étaient: être atteint ou suspecté d´une pathologie du grêle soit à l´imagerie soit à la vidéo-capsule-endoscopique et avoir bénéficié d´une entéroscopie simple ballon. Les variables étudiées étaient la faisabilité technique du geste, ses indications, ses résultats ainsi que ses complications. Cinquante-un (51) patients dont 30 hommes et 21 femmes d´âge moyen 48 ans (18 ans-91 ans) ont été inclus dans l´étude. La technique adoptée chez tous les patients était une entéroscopie simple ballon sous anesthésie générale avec intubation des voies respiratoires. La durée de l´examen était en moyenne de 45 min par voie haute et de 60 min par voie basse. Le grêle a été exploré jusqu´à l´iléon proximal en cas d´entéroscopie haute et jusqu´au-delà de 120cm de la DAI en cas d´entéroscopie basse. Les indications étaient représentées par les saignements digestifs inexpliqués (72%), épaississements grêliques (17%), suspicion de tumeur grêlique (6%), bilan d´évaluation d´un crohn grêlique (4%), et retrait de la vidéo-capsule endoscopique (VCE) (2%). Un diagnostic a été réalisé ou confirmé chez 29 patients soit une rentabilité diagnostic de 57%. Les angiodysplasies représentaient 70% des lésions retrouvées, les ulcérations grêliques (10%), les sténoses grêlique (7%), les tumeurs grêliques (7%), des diverticules grêliques (3%) et un retrait spontané de la VCE (3%). Un traitement endoscopique a été possible chez 20 patients soit une rentabilité thérapeutique de 39%; il s´agissait d´une électrocoagulation au plasma argon des lésions d´angiodysplasies grêliques. Aucune complication n´a été observée dans notre série. L´entéroscopie simple ballon reste donc un examen bien toléré qui permet d´explorer une grande longueur du grêle. Ses indications étaient nombreuses et variées dans notre étude et ses rentabilités diagnostic et thérapeutique étaient satisfaisantes.

Small bowel enteroscopy - A joint clinical guideline by the Spanish and Portuguese small-bowel study groups

The present evidence-based guidelines are focused on the use of device-assisted enteroscopy in the management of small-bowel diseases. A panel of experts selected by the Spanish and Portuguese small-bowel study groups reviewed the available evidence focusing on the main indications of this technique, its role in the management algorithm of each indication, and its diagnostic and therapeutic yield. A set of recommendations was issued accordingly.

Role of Video Capsule Endoscopy as a Prelude to Deep Enteroscopy

Video capsule endoscopy and device-assisted enteroscopy are complementary technologies. Capsule endoscopy is a highly acceptable technology with high diagnostic yield that can guide a subsequent enteroscopy approach. This article aims to focus on the role of video capsule endoscopy as a prelude to deep enteroscopy with a focus on the strengths and limitations of either approach.

Diagnostic yield and therapeutic impact of novel motorized spiral enteroscopy in small-bowel disorders: a single-center, real-world experience from a tertiary care hospital (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Novel motorized spiral enteroscopy (NMSE) is a recent advancement in the field of enteroscopy and offers multiple features, including self-propulsion, better irrigation, and shorter enteroscope length with a larger channel. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy in terms of diagnostic yield and therapeutic success of NMSE in patients undergoing enteroscopy by antegrade and/or retrograde approaches for suspected small-bowel disease.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated consecutive patients with symptomatic small-bowel disease who underwent enteroscopy over a 6-month period. Diagnostic yield, therapeutic success, total enteroscopy rate (TER), technical success, total procedural time, depth of maximal insertion, and adverse events related to the NMSE procedure were noted.

RESULTS

Of 61 patients (mean age, 45.67 ± 15.37 years; 43 men) included for NMSE, 57 patients underwent successful enteroscopy with a technical success of 93.4%. The overall diagnostic yield was 65.5% (95% confidence interval, 52.31-77.27) and 70.1% (95% confidence interval, 56.60-81.57) in patients who underwent successful NMSE; TER was 60.6%: 31.1% by the antegrade approach and 29.5% by a combined antegrade and retrograde approach. Depth of maximal insertion and procedural time was of 465 cm (range, 100-650) and 40 minutes (range, 25-60), respectively, by the antegrade approach and 140 cm (range, 50-200) and 35 minutes (range, 30-60) by the retrograde route. Lesions were classified as inflammatory (n = 25), vascular (n = 10), and mass (n = 4). Biopsy specimens were obtained in 50.8% subjects, and 23% patients underwent therapeutic procedures. No major adverse events were seen.

CONCLUSIONS

NMSE is a promising technology, showing high efficacy as a diagnostic and therapeutic tool in the management of otherwise difficult-to-treat small-bowel disease.

Single-balloon and spiral enteroscopy may have similar diagnostic and therapeutic yields to double-balloon enteroscopy: Results from a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and prospective studies

BACKGROUND

Double-balloon, single-balloon, and spiral enteroscopy (DBE, SBE, and SE) have revolutionized the management of intestinal diseases. However, evidence about efficacies of these methods is lacking. We aimed to conduct a meta-analysis comparing the clinical outcomes among DBE, SBE, and SE.

METHODS

We searched randomized controlled trials and prospective studies in MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Chinese CQVIP database. Studies referencing the comparison of at least two of these three methods were included. Primary outcome was diagnostic yield. Other outcomes were therapeutic yield, total enteroscopy, examination time, time to maximum insertion, and depth of maximal insertion (DMI).

RESULTS

Eleven studies including 727 patients were identified: DBE vs SE (n = 6), DBE vs SBE (n = 4), and SBE vs SE (n = 1). The diagnostic and therapeutic yields did not differ significantly when comparing DBE with SE [odds ratio (OR) = 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.68-2.08; OR = 1.17, 95%CI: 0.61-2.23] and DBE with SBE (OR = 0.85, 95%CI: 0.55-1.33; OR = 1.71, 95%CI: 0.64 - 4.60). Total enteroscopy, examination time, time to maximum insertion, and DMI were similar between SBE and DBE. DBE was superior to SE with regard to DMI [mean difference (MD) = 36.76, 95%CI: 5.09-68.43], with longer time to maximum insertion (MD = 15.14, 95%CI: 12-18.27) and examination time (MD = 12.98, 95%CI: 9.57-16.38).

CONCLUSION

DBE and SBE have similar clinical outcomes. Compared with DBE, SE seems to have similar diagnostic and therapeutic yields, but shorter procedural time in cost of less depth of insertion. SE needs further evaluation vs SBE. DBE is recommended for complete enteroscopy.

Small Bowel Enteroscopy - A Joint Clinical Guideline from the Spanish and Portuguese Small Bowel Study Groups

The present evidence-based guidelines are focused on the use of device-assisted enteroscopy in the management of small-bowel diseases. A panel of experts selected by the Spanish and Portuguese small bowel study groups reviewed the available evidence focusing on the main indications of this technique, its role in the management algorithm of each indication and on its diagnostic and therapeutic yields. A set of recommendations were issued accordingly.

Endoscopic ultrasonography and small-bowel endoscopy: Present and future

Over the last decade, impressive technological advances have occurred in ultrasonography and small-bowel endoscopy. Nowadays, endoscopic ultrasonography is an essential diagnostic tool and a therapeutic weapon for pancreatobiliary disorders. Capsule endoscopy and device-assisted enteroscopy have quickly become the reference standard for the diagnosis of small-bowel luminal diseases, thereby leading to radical changes in diagnostic and therapeutic pathways. We herein provide an up-to-date overview of the latest advances in endoscopic ultrasonography and small-bowel endoscopy, focusing on the emerging paradigms and technological innovations that might improve clinical practice in the near future.

Device assisted enteroscopy in the elderly - A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Device assisted enteroscopy (DAE) is increasingly being carried out in elderly patients. This provides a challenge due to the underlying varied physiology and comorbidities these patients have.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search for studies on elderly patients undergoing DAE. We calculated the pooled diagnostic (DY) and therapeutic yields (TY), major adverse events, length of small bowel examined and sedation administered. These were also compared to younger patients.

RESULTS

Fourteen high quality articles on DAE in the elderly were included in this analysis (3289 total, 1712 elderly) patients. Nine of these studies were included in the final meta-analysis (681 elderly, 1577 young patients). The overall DY of DAE, double balloon enterosocpy (DBE) and single balloon enteroscopy (SBE) were 0.68 (p = 0.000001), 1.74 (p = 0.0001) and 1.90 (p = 0.009). The TY of DAE, DBE and SBE were 0.45 (p = 0.00001), 2.20 (p = 0.00001) and 2.36 (p = 0.00001). On comparison of elderly and young patients, DY (1.83; 95% CI: 1.49, 2.24; p = 0.00001) and TY (2.28; 95% CI: 1.79, 2.89) were better in elderly patients. There was no difference in adverse events in both groups (2.16; 95% CI: 0.82, 5.69, p = 0.12). Elderly patients were given less sedation than younger patients during DAE.

CONCLUSIONS

DAE has a higher DY and TY in the elderly than younger patients. DAE can be safely carried out in the elderly with less sedation.

Device-assisted enteroscopy: A review of available techniques and upcoming new technologies

The advent of video capsule endoscopy into clinical routine more than 15 years ago led to a substantial change in the diagnostic approach to patients with suspected small bowel diseases, often indicating a deep enteroscopy procedure for diagnostical confirmation or endoscopic treatment. Device assisted enteroscopy was developed in 2001 and for the first time established a practicable, safe and effective method for evaluation of the small bowel. Currently with double-balloon enteroscopy, single-balloon enteroscopy and spiral enteroscopy three different platforms are available in clinical routine. Summarizing, double-balloon enteroscopy seems to offer the deepest insertion depth to the small bowel going hand in hand with the disadvantage of a longer procedural duration. Manual spiral enteroscopy seems to be a faster procedure but without reaching the depth of the DBE in currently available data. Finally, single-balloon enteroscopy seems to be the least complicated procedure to perform. Despite substantial improvements in the field of direct enteroscopy, even nowadays deep endoscopic access to the small bowel with all available methods is still a complex procedure, cumbersome and time-consuming and requires high endoscopic skills. This review will give an overview of the currently available techniques and will further discuss the role of the upcoming new technology of the motorized spiral enteroscopy (PowerSpiral).

Diagnostic Value and Safety of Emergency Single-Balloon Enteroscopy for Obscure Gastrointestinal Bleeding

BACKGROUND

This study assesses the diagnostic performance of emergency single-balloon enteroscopy (SBE) for obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB) under general anesthesia versus conscious sedation.

STUDY

The data of 102 OGIB in-patients from June 2015 to June 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. The diagnosis and detection rates and adverse events were calculated overall and in relation to age, gender, type of operation and anesthesia, bleeding type, different times of examination, and SBE route. All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 24.0, and the diagnosis and detection rates were compared using the Chi-square test.

RESULTS

Among the 102 patients, 66 patients had positive findings, while 11 patients had suspected positive findings, and the diagnosis and detection rates were 64.7% and 75.5%, respectively. Ulcers (19.6%) and tumors (16.7%) were the most common causes of OGIB. There were no statistical differences in diagnosis and detection rates between the ages of ≥60 and <60 and between different genders. Patients with emergency SBE had higher diagnosis and detection rates (68.6% vs. 35.3%, P = 0.023; 80.0% vs. 47.1%, P = 0.016, respectively), when compared with nonemergency SBE patients. The diagnosis rate at 24 hours was higher than that at 2-7 days and one week (88.0% vs. 61.5%, P = 0.030; 88.0% vs. 53.8%, P = 0.007). For overt bleeding, the difference in diagnosis rates at 24 hours, 2-7 days, and one week was statistically significant (100.0% vs. 57.1%, P = 0.006; 100.0% vs. 57.1%, P = 0.006). For occult bleeding, the pairwise comparison revealed no statistical difference. Patients with general anesthesia had a higher detection rate, when compared to patients with conscious sedation (87.9% vs. 63.9%, P = 0.004). In addition, adverse events under general anesthesia were lower, when compared to adverse events under conscious sedation (28.8% vs. 69.4%, P = 0.020). There was no significant difference in adverse events at the different time points (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Emergency SBE under general anesthesia achieves higher diagnosis and detection rates, and fewer adverse events under conscious sedation, when compared to nonemergency SBE, regardless of the route. For patients with overt bleeding, it is easier to find lesions by emergency SBE within 24 hours.

Endoworm: A new semi-autonomous enteroscopy device

Using enteroscopes with therapeutic capacity to explore the small intestine entails certain limitations, including long exploration times, patient discomfort, the need for sedation, a high percentage of incomplete explorations and a long learning curve. This article describes the advances and setbacks encountered in designing the new Endoworm enteroscopy system, a semi-autonomous device consisting of a control unit and three cavities that inflate and deflate in such a way that the bowel retracts over the endoscope. The system can be adapted to any commercial enteroscope. Endoworm was tested in different intestine models: a polymethyl methacrylate rigid tube, an in vitro polyester urethane model, an ex vivo pig model and an in vivo animal model. The general behavior of the prototype was evaluated by experienced medical personnel. The mean distance covered through the lumen was measured in each cycle. The system was found to have excellent performance in the rigid tube and in the in vitro model. The ex vivo tests showed that the behavior depended largely on the mechanical properties of the lumen, while the in vivo experiments suggest that the device will require further modifications to improve its performance.

Small bowel bleeding: cause and the role of endoscopy and medical therapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The objective is to provide an overview on the cause of small bowel bleeding. We discuss the role of small bowel endoscopy in the management of small bowel bleeding and provide an outline of pharmacotherapy that can be additionally beneficial.

RECENT FINDINGS

Small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) is the initial diagnostic investigation of choice in small bowel bleeding. Computed tomography (CT) can be helpful in the context of small bowel tumours. Device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE) enables several therapeutic procedures such as argon plasma coagulation (APC) and haemoclip application. It can also guide further management with histology or by marking culprit lesions with India ink. A persistent rate of rebleeding despite APC is increasingly being reported. Pharmacotherapy has an emerging role in the management of small bowel bleeding. Somatostatin analogues are a well tolerated class of drugs that can play an additional role in the management of refractory bleeding secondary to small bowel angioectasias.

SUMMARY

SBCE is useful in determining the cause of small bowel bleeding. DAE offers an endoscopic therapeutic approach to small bowel bleeding replacing surgery and intraoperative enteroscopy. Pharmacotherapy, in addition to endotherapy, can play an important role in the management of multifocal, recurring bleeding small bowel lesions.

A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing the Depth of Maximal Insertion Between Anterograde Single-Balloon Versus Spiral Enteroscopy

BACKGROUND

Three device-assisted deep endoscopic platforms presently exist and are available for clinical use: double-balloon enteroscopy, single-balloon enteroscopy (SBE), and spiral enteroscopy (SE). In a retrospective study, SE was associated with a greater depth of maximal insertion (DMI) with similar diagnostic yields and procedure time as compared with SBE.

AIMS

This was a prospective, randomized comparison of SE and SBE with respect to DMI, diagnostic yield, procedure time, and rate of adverse events.

METHODS

Patients were prospectively randomized to undergo either anterograde SE or SBE. Patient demographics, indication for procedure, DMI, procedure time, therapeutic procedure time, adverse event, diagnostic findings, and therapeutic interventions were prospectively recorded. The primary outcome was DMI. Secondary outcomes included: procedure time; diagnostic yield; therapeutic yield and adverse event rates.

RESULTS

During the study period, 30 patients underwent deep enteroscopy (SE 13, SBE 17). The most common indication was gastrointestinal bleeding in both groups. There was no significant difference in the DMI between SE and SBE (330.0 ± 88.2 cm vs 285.3 ± 80.8 cm, P = .16). There was no difference between SE and SBE in procedure time (37.0 ± 10.5 vs 38.3 ± 12.4, P = .76), diagnostic yield (SE = 9 [69%] vs SBE = 7 [41%], P = .16), or therapeutic yield (SE = 6 [46%] vs SBE = 4 [24%], P = .26). There were no major adverse events in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

Spiral enteroscopy and SBE are similar with respect to DMI, diagnostic yield, therapeutic yield, procedure time, and rate of adverse events. Small numbers prevent giving a definitive judgment and future adequately powered prospective study is required to confirm these findings.

Balloon enteroscopy versus spiral enteroscopy for small-bowel disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Two novel enteroscopic procedures, balloon enteroscopy and spiral enteroscopy, have revolutionized the diagnostic and therapeutic approach to small-bowel disorders. These disorders that historically required surgical interventions are now investigated and managed nonsurgically. Only a few weakly powered studies have compared the outcomes of spiral enteroscopy and balloon enteroscopy. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of these 2 procedures.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and clinicaltrials.gov databases were searched for all studies published up to January 12, 2017 comparing the efficacy and safety of balloon enteroscopy (single or double) and spiral enteroscopy. Primary outcomes of interest were diagnostic and therapeutic success rates. Other outcomes included procedure length, depth of maximal insertion (DMI), rate of complete enteroscopy, and adverse events. We calculated Odds ratios (ORs) for categorical variables and mean difference (MD) for continuous variables. The Mantel-Haenszel method was used to analyze the data. Fixed and random effect models were used for <50% heterogeneity and >50% heterogeneity, respectively.

RESULTS

Eight studies met the inclusion criteria for this meta-analysis. A total of 615 procedures were analyzed, which included 394 balloon enteroscopy and 221 spiral enteroscopy procedures. There were no significant differences in diagnostic and therapeutic success rates (OR, 1.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], .86-1.88; P = .22; and OR, 1.23; 95% CI, .82-1.84; P = .32, respectively) between the 2 procedures. Similarly, DMI was not significantly different between the 2 groups (MD, 26.29; 95% CI, 20.92-73.49; P = .28). However, the procedure time was significantly shorter for the spiral enteroscopy group compared with the balloon enteroscopy group (MD, 11.26; 95% CI, 2.72-19.79; P = .010). A subgroup analysis comparing double balloon enteroscopy with spiral enteroscopy yielded similar results.

CONCLUSIONS

Both procedures achieved similar diagnostic and therapeutic outcomes and with similar depth of insertion. Spiral enteroscopy has the benefit of shorter procedural time.

An update on small bowel endoscopy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The breakthrough success of capsule endoscopy and device-assisted enteroscopy has inspired researchers to test and push the boundary of these technologies. The authors herein summarize the latest and most significant studies with clinical impact.

RECENT FINDINGS

Competing capsule endoscopy models have enriched the platform of this wireless device. The role of capsule endoscopy in Crohn's disease is expanding as we learn more of the significance of disease distribution and response to treatment. The benefit of capsule endoscopy in abdominal pain has previously been sceptical, but may have a role. Device-assisted enteroscopy demonstrates significant benefit in the management of patients with Crohn's disease and Peutz-Jeghers syndrome. On the contrary, long-term data suggest that endotherapy to small bowel angioectasia may not be as beneficial to patients as we once thought. The role of device-assisted enteroscopy in novel territory, including coeliac disease and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, continues to be tested.

SUMMARY

The limit of capsule endoscopy and enteroscopy is yet to be reached. Accumulating long-term data alludes to the benefits of our current practice while spawning novel indications for small bowel endoscopy.

Exploring the Small Bowel: Update on Deep Enteroscopy

Deep enteroscopy allows for the diagnosis and treatment of small bowel disorders that historically required operative intervention. There are a variety of endoscopic platforms using balloons and rotational overtubes to facilitate small bowel intubation and even allow for total enteroscopy. Obscure gastrointestinal bleeding is the most common indication for deep enteroscopy. By visualizing segments of the small bowel not possible through standard EGD or push enteroscopy, deep enteroscopy has an established high rate of identification and treatment of bleeding sources. In addition to obscure bleeding, other common indications include diagnosis and staging of Crohn's disease, evaluation of findings on capsule endoscopy and investigation of possible small bowel tumors. Large endoscopy databases have shown deep enteroscopy to be not only effective but safe. Recent research has focused on comparing the diagnostic rates, efficacy, and total enteroscopy rates of the different endoscopic platforms.

Intraoperative Enteroscopy: Is There Still a Role?

Intraoperative enteroscopy (IOE) to explore obscure gastrointestinal bleeding is now rarely indicated. IOE allows complete small bowel exploration in 57% to 100% of cases, finds a bleeding source in 80% of cases, allows the recurrence-free management of gastrointestinal bleeding in 76% of cases, but carries a high morbidity and mortality. IOE only remains indicated to guide the intraoperative treatment of preoperatively identified small bowel lesions when nonoperative treatments are unavailable and/or when intraoperative localization by external examination is impossible.

Single-Balloon Enteroscopy

Single-balloon enteroscopy is among 3 device-assisted enteroscopy systems on the market. Compared with double-balloon enteroscopy, no significant difference in diagnostic yield was found. Additionally, no significant difference was found in oral and anal insertion depth, adverse events, or procedure times. Some studies observed lower complete enteroscopy rates, which have evidently no diagnostic impact. With a learning curve of around 30 procedures, the single-balloon endoscope is a safe endoscopic tool, which seems equally suitable for diagnostic and therapeutic interventions. Carbon dioxide should be used for single-balloon endoscopy procedures, especially in patients with a history of surgical abdominal interventions.

A multicenter experience of through-the-scope balloon-assisted enteroscopy in surgically altered gastrointestinal anatomy

BACKGROUND

Surgically altered gastrointestinal anatomy poses challenges for deep enteroscopy. Current overtube-assisted methods have long procedure times and utilize endoscopes with smaller working channels that preclude use of standard accessories. A through-the-scope balloon-assisted enteroscopy (TTS-BAE) device uses standard endoscopes with a large working channel to allow metallic and plastic stent insertion. We aim to determine the efficacy and safety of TTS-BAE in patients with altered surgical anatomy.

METHODS

A retrospective, multicenter study of TTS-BAE in altered anatomy patients at two USA and one German institution was performed between January 2013 and December 2014. Type of anatomy, procedure indication and duration, adverse events, and target, technical, and clinical success were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 32 patients (mean age 54 years, Caucasian 81.6%, female 42.1%, mean BMI 25.4 kg/m²) underwent 38 TTS-BAE procedures. Thirty-two percent of cases had a prior attempt at conventional enteroscopy which failed to reach the target site. The target was successfully reached in 23 (60.5%) cases. Of the 23 cases that reached the intended target, 22 (95.7%) achieved technical success and 21 (91.3%) achieved clinical success. The median procedure time was 43 min. Target, technical, and clinical success rates for TTS-BAE-assisted ERCP (n = 31) were 58.1, 54.8 and 54.8%. Seven self-expandable metallic stents (five biliary, two jejunal) were attempted, and all successfully deployed. Adverse events occurred in 4 (10.4%) cases, including one luminal perforation.

CONCLUSION

TTS-BAE is an alternative to overtube-assisted enteroscopy that is comparable in safety in patients with surgically altered anatomies. Technical success in the instances where the target had been reached was excellent. TTS-BAE confers an advantage over overtube-assisted enteroscopy as it can facilitate the deployment of self-expandable metallic stents in the biliary tree and deep small bowel.

Detection of suspected small bowel bleeding: challenges and controversies

Detection of small bowel (SB) bleeding remains a challenge to gastroenterologists, with a dearth of standardized recommendations regarding evaluation and management. Areas covered: A recursive literature search was performed using PubMed, Cochrane and Medline databases for original and review articles on SB and obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB). Based upon the available literature, this review outlines the main challenges and controversies, and provides a practical and cost-effective approach towards SB bleeding. Expert commentary: SB bleeding is suspected in patients with persistent or recurrent bleeding after negative bidirectional endoscopy, and unexplained iron deficiency anemia. Selection of test(s) should be individualized based upon patient presentation and suspicion for type of underlying lesion. Endoscopic or radiologic evaluation and treatment is the mainstay in the majority of patients, while pharmacologic agents may have a role in patients with refractory bleeding, and those unable to undergo evaluation.

Capsule Endoscopy and Deep Enteroscopy in Irritable Bowel Disease

In approximately one-third of Crohn's disease patients, the disease is confined to the small bowel, inaccessible to the reach of standard endoscopy. Thorough and complete evaluation of the small bowel is crucial in such patients for the initial diagnosis, prognostication, and disease monitoring. Video capsule endoscopy and device-assisted enteroscopy have revolutionized the ability to visualize the small-bowel mucosa. This article reviews the literature pertaining to the use of capsule endoscopy and deep enteroscopy in established Crohn's disease, including the major indications, applications, and safety issues.

New developments in small bowel enteroscopy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Endoscopic technology has evolved such that device-assisted enteroscopes (DAEs) are readily available and utilized to diagnose and treat patients with small bowel disease. In this review, we briefly discuss the DAE platforms and the expanding role for small bowel enteroscopy.

RECENT FINDINGS

The indications for small bowel endoscopy are rapidly increasing with new diagnostic and therapeutic maneuvers that are allowing patients to obtain treatments that would have otherwise required more invasive or higher risk procedures. The evolving utilization of DAE tools in patients with altered gastrointestinal anatomy and otherwise palliative conditions is allowing for more aggressive and therapeutic choices for patients who would otherwise have limited options.

SUMMARY

There are currently four different platforms for small bowel endoscopy each with different operational characteristics. The literature comparing double-balloon and single-balloon enteroscopy is relatively established, but there are still limited data evaluating the role of the two newer platforms (spiral and on-demand enteroscopy) in diagnostic and therapeutic small bowel endoscopy - a reflection of the potential and vast opportunities that are available in the field of small bowel enteroscopy.

Performance characteristics of retrograde single-balloon endoscopy: A single center experience

AIM: To evaluate the technical success, diagnostic yield (DY) and therapeutic potential of retrograde single balloon enteroscopy (rSBE).

METHODS: A retrospective review of 136 rSBE procedures performed at a tertiary academic referral center from January 2006 and September 2013 was completed. Patient characteristics including age, gender and inpatient status were collected. The indication for the procedure was categorized into one of three groups: Obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), evaluation for Crohn’s disease and abnormal imaging. Procedural characteristics including insertion depth (ID), procedure time, concordance with pre-procedural imaging and complications were also recorded. Lastly, DY, defined as the percentage of cases producing either a definitive diagnosis or findings that could explain clinical symptoms and therapeutic yield (TY), defined as the percentage of cases in which a definitive intervention was performed, were determined. Mucosal tattooing and biopsy alone were not included in the TY.

RESULTS: A total of 136 rSBE procedures were identified. Mean patient age was 57.5 (± 16.2) years, 67 (49.2%) were male, and 110 (80.9%) procedures were performed on an outpatient basis. Indications for rSBE included GIB in 55 (40.4%), evaluation of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in 29 (21.3%), and imaging suggestive of pathology other than GIB or IBD in 43 (31.6%). Nine (6.6%) rSBEs were performed for other indications. Mean ID was 68.3 (± 39.3) cm proximal to the ileocecal valve and mean time to completion was 41.7 (± 15.5) min. Overall, 73 (53.7%) cases were diagnostic and 25 (18.4%) cases were therapeutic in which interventions (argon plasma coagulation, stricture dilatation, polypectomy, etc.) were performed. Pre-procedural imaging was performed in 88 (64.7%) patients. Endoscopic concordance of positive imaging findings was seen in 31 (35.2%) cases. Follow up data was available in 93 (68.4%) patients; 2 (2.2%) reported post-procedural abdominal pain within 30 d following rSBE. There were no other reported complications.

CONCLUSION: rSBE exhibits an acceptable diagnostic and TY, rendering it a safe and effective procedure for the evaluation and treatment of small bowel diseases.

Timing of single balloon enteroscopy: significant or not?

BACKGROUND

The development of balloon assisted enteroscopy (BAE) has revolutionized diagnostic and therapeutic modalities for small-bowel disorders. Although the role of emergent esophagogastroduodenoscopy and colonoscopy for upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding is well defined, there is scarce data with regard to emergent BAE for gastrointestinal bleeding.

STUDY

We performed a retrospective cohort study including 110 hospitalized patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding who underwent single balloon enteroscopy (SBE) between January 2010 and August 2013. Patients were divided into two groups based on procedures performed emergently (within 24 hours) versus non-emergently (greater than 24 hours). Data on patient demographics, hemodynamic characteristics, type of obscure bleed, lesions identified, location of lesions, endoscopic intervention performed, need for further surgical or radiological intervention, diagnostic and therapeutic yield, and adverse events were compared between groups. Independent samples t test and Fisher's exact test were used to assess the association between dependent and independent variables. For continuous data, the results were summarized as mean difference and 95 % confidence intervals (CI), and for binary as odds ratio and 95 %CI.

RESULTS

Although patients in the group where enteroscopy was performed within 24 hours had a significantly higher incidence of radiological intervention (10.0 % vs. 0.0 %, P = 0.019), the diagnostic and therapeutic yields between the two groups were not significantly different. Additionally, there were no statistically significant differences between the groups for overt and occult bleeding, transfusion requirements, type and location of lesions, endoscopic intervention performed, or adverse events. Hospital stay was shorter in the patients who had SBE within 24 hours of admission (6.2 vs. 11.3 days, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the diagnostic and therapeutic yields of SBE were not significantly different between patients having the procedure within 24 hours and those having it later, the early SBE group required more interventional radiology procedures. While endoscopists may not necessarily have to perform emergent assessment within 24 hours in patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB) for greater diagnostic or therapeutic yield, early intervention may allow for earlier stabilization and thus shorter hospital stays. Prospective studies further evaluating these findings are indicated.

Small Bowel Endoscopy

OPINION STATEMENT

The small bowel is a challenging area for endoscopic evaluation and therapy due to its length and angulated configuration. A small lumen diameter and segmental peristalsis made it a perfect fit for examination by a novel ingestible wireless camera in a capsule. The development of capsule endoscopy changed the diagnosis and management of bleeding lesions, ulcers, and tumors deep in the small bowel, allowing earlier diagnosis with excellent patient acceptance. Device-assisted enteroscopy revolutionized small bowel therapy, particularly management of bleeding, Peutz-Jeghers polyposis, and tumor marking for minimally invasive surgery. Small bowel stricture dilation in select patients is safe and effective. Tools for a spectrum of small bowel therapies are available but remain suboptimal to tackle lesions on angulated folds deep in the small bowel. Universal terminology to describe the endoscopic appearance of vascular lesions will facilitate studies of endoscopic and medical therapy. The future holds improvements in imaging, easier advancement through the small bowel, and therapeutic capacity. This review focuses on methods of small bowel endoscopy, therapy, and outcomes.

Enteroscopy

Noninvasive imaging with CT and magnetic resonance enterography or direct visualization with wireless capsule endoscopy can provide valuable diagnostic information and direct therapy. Enteroscopy technology and techniques have evolved significantly and allow diagnosis and therapy deep within the small bowel, previously attainable only with intraoperative enteroscopy. Push enteroscopy, readily available in most endoscopy units, plays an important role in the evaluation and management of lesions located up to the proximal jejunum. Currently available device-assisted enteroscopy systems, DBE, SBE, and spiral enteroscopy each have their technical nuances, clinical advantages, and limitations. Newer, on-demand enteroscopy systems appear promising, but further studies are needed. Despite slight differences in parameters such as procedural times, depths of insertion, and rates of complete enteroscopy, the overall clinical outcomes with all overtube-assisted systems appear to be similar. Endoscopists should therefore master the enteroscopy technology based on institutional availability and their level of technical expertise.

Deep enteroscopy with a conventional colonoscope: initial multicenter study by using a through-the-scope balloon catheter system

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The advent of capsule endoscopy has revolutionized evaluation of the small bowel. Capsule endoscopy has become the criterion standard as the initial examination to diagnose small-bowel abnormalities, but does not allow for tissue sampling or therapeutic intervention. Deep enteroscopy can be performed by using a balloon-assisted device or a spiral overtube for both diagnostic and therapeutic interventions of the small bowel. Deep enteroscopy is time-consuming and requires special endoscopes and accessories to perform the examination. We studied a novel through-the-scope balloon catheter system used for deep enteroscopy that uses a conventional colonoscope and standard accessories.

METHODS

We performed a 9-center, retrospective study using a novel TTS balloon system for small-bowel evaluation. The new through-the-scope device is an on-demand balloon catheter that is inserted through the instrument channel of a standard colonoscope and enables deep advancement into the small bowel in either the anterograde or retrograde approach. It consists of a balloon inflation/deflation system and a single-use balloon catheter designed for anchoring in the small bowel. The balloon is inflated to an anchoring pressure in the small intestine, and a repetitive push-pull technique is performed, with the endoscope sliding over the guiding catheter to the inflated balloon. The catheter may be removed and reinserted to allow for therapeutic intervention while maintaining the endoscope position.

RESULTS

A total of 98 patients were included; 52% were male, and the mean age was 55 years old (range 15-94 years). Indications included abdominal pain, iron-deficiency anemia, occult GI bleeding, diarrhea, abnormal capsule endoscopy, weight loss, protein losing enteropathy, retained foreign body, altered anatomy ERCP, and small-bowel strictures. Anterograde enteroscopy was performed in 65 patients. The average depth of insertion was 158 cm (range 50-350 cm) from the pylorus. Retrograde enteroscopy was performed in 33 cases. The average depth of insertion was 89 cm (range 20-150 cm) beyond the ileocecal valve. Overall, diagnostic yield was 44%. The average advancement time for the anterograde and retrograde enteroscopy cases was 15.5 minutes. There were no procedural adverse outcomes reported in the 98 cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The TTS advancing balloon is a safe and effective way to perform deep enteroscopy by using a conventional colonoscope without the need for an overtube. Procedure time is shorter than that of other forms of deep enteroscopy. Diagnostic yield and depth of insertion are on par with other forms of deep enteroscopy. This is the largest reported study using this novel technology to diagnose and treat small-bowel disease.

Prior capsule endoscopy improves the diagnostic and therapeutic yield of single-balloon enteroscopy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Although there is substantial literature addressing double-balloon enteroscopy, evidence is more limited with regard to the clinical utility of single-balloon enteroscopy (SBE) in evaluating and treating small-bowel diseases. We sought to determine the diagnostic and therapeutic yield of SBE in patients with suspected small-bowel disorders, as well as the impact of preceding capsule endoscopy (CE) on these outcomes.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database at a tertiary-care academic medical center between 2011 and 2013 for all patients referred for SBE.

RESULTS

A total of 150 patients underwent 170 SBE procedures during the study period. The most frequent indications for SBE included anemia, overt or occult gastrointestinal bleeding, and suspected mass. CE was performed prior to SBE in 113 of 150 patients (75%). The overall diagnostic yield for small-bowel disease by CE was 62%. Therapeutic interventions included hemostasis, polypectomy, and foreign body removal. Total diagnostic and therapeutic yield of SBE was 60 and 28%, respectively. The diagnostic yield of SBE with prior CE was 68 versus 44% for SBE without prior CE (P = 0.002). The therapeutic yield of SBE with prior CE was 35 versus 12% without prior CE (P = 0.001). One endoscopic complication was observed out of 170 procedures, and there were no deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

SBE appears to be a safe and effective technique for the diagnosis and treatment of small-bowel disease; however, we recommend performing a CE prior to SBE to improve the diagnostic and therapeutic yield of the procedure.

Monitored anesthesia care without endotracheal intubation is safe and efficacious for single-balloon enteroscopy

BACKGROUND

General endotracheal (GET) anesthesia is often used during single-balloon enteroscopy (SBE). However, there is currently limited data regarding monitored anesthesia care (MAC) without endotracheal intubation for this procedure.

AIMS

The aim of the study was to determine the safety and efficacy of MAC sedation during SBE and to identify risk factors for adverse events.

METHODS

All patients who underwent SBE and SBE-assisted endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography between June 2011 and July 2013 at a tertiary-care referral center were studied in a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database. Patients received MAC anesthesia or GET. The main outcome measurements were sedation-related adverse events, diagnostic yield, and therapeutic yield.

RESULTS

Of the 178 cases in the study, 166 cases (93 %) were performed with MAC and 12 (7 %) with GET. Intra-procedure sedation-related adverse events occurred in 17 % of cases. The most frequent event was transient hypotension requiring pharmacologic intervention in 11.8 % of procedures. In MAC cases, the diagnostic yield was 58.4 % and the therapeutic yield was 30.1 %. Anesthesia duration was strongly associated with the occurrence of a sedation-related adverse event (P = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

MAC is a safe and efficacious sedation approach for most patients undergoing SBE. Sedation-related complications in SBE are uncommon, but are more frequent in longer procedures.

Small bowel bleeding: a comprehensive review

The small intestine is an uncommon site of gastro-intestinal (GI) bleeding; however it is the commonest cause of obscure GI bleeding. It may require multiple blood transfusions, diagnostic procedures and repeated hospitalizations. Angiodysplasia is the commonest cause of obscure GI bleeding, particularly in the elderly. Inflammatory lesions and tumours are the usual causes of small intestinal bleeding in younger patients. Capsule endoscopy and deep enteroscopy have improved our ability to investigate small bowel bleeds. Deep enteroscopy has also an added advantage of therapeutic potential. Computed tomography is helpful in identifying extra-intestinal lesions. In cases of difficult diagnosis, surgery and intra-operative enteroscopy can help with diagnosis and management. The treatment is dependent upon the aetiology of the bleed. An overt bleed requires aggressive resuscitation and immediate localisation of the lesion for institution of appropriate therapy. Small bowel bleeding can be managed by conservative, radiological, pharmacological, endoscopic and surgical methods, depending upon indications, expertise and availability. Some patients, especially those with multiple vascular lesions, can re-bleed even after appropriate treatment and pose difficult challenge to the treating physician.

Evaluation and management of small-bowel tumors in the era of deep enteroscopy

In summary, small-intestine tumors are a rare phenomenon, but they are being discovered more frequently with newer diagnostic techniques. Prior studies of the small bowel were limited, making the diagnosis difficult. With the advent of CE and deep enteroscopy, gastroenterologists are finding these tumors at an earlier stage, thereby offering better management options for these patients. Although the incidence of small-bowel tumors has increased, the survival rates have remained the same. This may be a lag-time bias but could be a future area of research in this emerging field.

Review article: gastrointestinal angiodysplasia - pathogenesis, diagnosis and management

BACKGROUND

Angiodysplasia (AD) of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract is an important condition that can cause significant morbidity and -rarely - mortality.

AIM

To provide an up-to-date comprehensive summary of the literature evaluating this disease entity with a particular focus on pathogenesis as well as current and emerging diagnostic and therapeutic modalities. Recommendations for treatment will be made on the basis of the current available evidence and consensus opinion of the authors.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed. The search strategy used the keywords 'angiodysplasia' or 'arteriovenous malformation' or 'angioectasia' or 'vascular ectasia' or 'vascular lesions' or 'vascular abnormalities' or 'vascular malformations' in the title or abstract.

RESULTS

Most AD lesions (54-81.9%) are detected in the caecum and ascending colon. They may develop secondary to chronic low-grade intermittent obstruction of submucosal veins coupled with increased vascular endothelial growth factor-dependent proliferation. Endotherapy with argon plasma coagulation resolves bleeding in 85% of patients with colonic AD. In patients who fail (or are not suitable for) other interventions, treatment with thalidomide or octreotide can lead to a clinically meaningful response in 71.4% and 77% of patients respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Angiodysplasia is a rare, but important, cause of both overt and occult GI bleeding especially in the older patients. Advances in endoscopic imaging and therapeutic techniques have led to improved outcomes in these patients. The choice of treatment should be decided on a patient-by-patient basis. Further research is required to better understand the pathogenesis and identify potential therapeutic targets.

An old problem with a new therapy: gastrointestinal bleeding in ventricular assist device patients and deep overtube-assisted enteroscopy

Conventional algorithms for diagnosis and treatment of gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) in patients with nonpulsatile ventricular assist devices (VADs) may take days to perform while patients require transfusions. We developed a new algorithm based on deep overtube-assisted enteroscopy (DOAE) to facilitate a rapid diagnosis and treatment. From 2004 to 2012, 84 patients who underwent VAD placement in our institution, were evaluated for episodes of GIB. Our new algorithm for the management of GIB using DOAE was evaluated by dividing the episodes into three groups: group A (traditional management without enteroscopy), group B (traditional management with enteroscopy performed >24 hours after presentation), and group C (new management algorithm with enteroscopy performed <24 hours after presentation). Gastrointestinal bleeding was observed in 14 (17%) of our study patients for a total of 45 individual episodes of which 28 met our criteria for subanalysis. Forty-one (84%) lesions were confined to the upper gastrointestinal tract with more than 91% of these lesions being arteriovenous malformations. Average number of transfusions in groups A, B, and C were 4.1, 6.3, and 1.3, respectively (p = 0.001). The number of days to treatment was significantly shorter in group C than group B (0.4 vs. 5.3 days, p = 0.0002). Our new algorithm for the management of GIB using DOAE targets the most common locations of bleeding found in this patient population. When performed early, DOAE has the potential to decrease the need for transfusions and allow for an early diagnosis of GIB in VAD recipients.

Enteroscopy in small bowel Crohn’s disease: A review

Crohn’s disease (CD) is a chronic inflammatory condition of the gastrointestinal tract resulting in inflammation, stricturing and fistulae secondary to transmural inflammation. Diagnosis relies on clinical history, abnormal laboratory parameters, characteristic radiologic and endoscopic changes within the gastrointestinal tract and most importantly a supportive histology. The article is intended mainly for the general gastroenterologist and for other interested physicians. Management of small bowel CD has been suboptimal and limited due to the inaccessibility of the small bowel. Enteroscopy has had a significant renaissance recently, thereby extending the reach of the endoscopist, aiding diagnosis and enabling therapeutic interventions in the small bowel. Radiologic imaging is used as the first line modality to visualise the small bowel. If the clinical suspicion is high, wireless capsule endoscopy (WCE) is used to rule out superficial and early disease, despite the above investigations being normal. This is followed by push enteroscopy or device assisted enteroscopy (DAE) as is appropriate. This approach has been found to be the most cost effective and least invasive. DAE includes balloon-assisted enteroscopy, [double balloon enteroscopy (DBE), single balloon enteroscopy (SBE) and more recently spiral enteroscopy (SE)]. This review is not going to cover the various other indications of enteroscopy, radiological small bowel investigations nor WCE and limited only to enteroscopy in small bowel Crohn’s. These excluded topics already have comprehensive reviews. Evidence available from randomized controlled trials comparing the various modalities is limited and at best regarded as Grade C or D (based on expert opinion). The evidence suggests that all three DAE modalities have comparable insertion depths, diagnostic and therapeutic efficacies and complication rates, though most favour DBE due to higher rates of total enteroscopy. SE is quicker than DBE, but lower complete enteroscopy rates. SBE has quicker procedural times and is evolving but the least available DAE today. Larger prospective randomised controlled trial’s in the future could help us understand some unanswered areas including the role of BAE in small bowel screening and comparative studies between the main types of enteroscopy in small bowel CD.

Deep enteroscopy: which technique will survive?

The advent of deep enteroscopy (DE) has dramatically changed diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to small bowel diseases. Unlike capsule endoscopy, which is unable to obtain biopsies or treat a disease, DE techniques have diagnostic and therapeutic capabilities. Double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE) was introduced in 2001, and single-balloon enteroscopy (SBE) and spiral enteroscopy (SE) were subsequently developed for small bowel investigation. In published reports comparing these different enteroscopy techniques, most comparative parameters (depth of insertion, complications, learning curve, diagnostic yield, and therapeutic yield) were comparable among DBE, SBE, and SE. However, the procedure duration appears to be shorter for SE than for DBE and SBE. The rate of complete enteroscopy is clearly superior for DBE, compared with SE and SBE. Because these results do not indicate an increase in diagnostic or therapeutic yield, the clinical impact of complete enteroscopy remains controversial. According to previous studies, the three DE methods seem to be equally effective and safe in the clinical setting. Although larger randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate the procedural characteristics and clinical impact, the selection of an enteroscopic technique should be based on availability and the endoscopist's experience.

Double- vs. single-balloon enteroscopy: single center experience with emphasis on procedural performance

PURPOSE

This study aims to compare double- (DBE) and single-balloon enteroscopy (SBE) in small bowel disorders with respect to procedural performance and clinical impact.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis at a tertial referral center included 1,052 DBEs and 515 SBEs performed in 904 patients over 7 years. Procedural and patients' characteristics were precisely analyzed.

RESULTS

Significantly more patients with anemia and gastrointestinal bleeding were investigated by DBE (P < 0.01). Oral insertion depth and length of investigated small bowel in the combined approach were significantly higher in the DBE compared to the SBE group (245 ± 65.3 vs. 218 ± 62.6 and 355 ± 101.9 vs. 319 ± 91.2, respectively; P < 0.001, each). By analyzing only recent years of enteroscopy (2008-2011), no difference in small bowel visualization could be observed. The anal insertion depths and complete enteroscopy rates (CER) were comparable. Procedure times were significantly shorter within the SBE procedure (oral: 50 vs. 40 min; anal: 55 vs. 46 min, P < 0.001) and the usage of sedation was significantly less (propofol: P < 0.001; pethidine: P < 0.05). Diagnostic yield was significantly higher in the SBE, compared to the DBE group (61.7 vs. 48.2 %; P < 0.001). The rate of severe adverse events was close to zero.

CONCLUSION

Both enteroscopy techniques are safe diagnostic tools and proved to be indispensable in the daily gastroenterological practice. The lower insertion depths, but higher diagnostic yield, of SBE may reflect the more focused selection of patients scheduled for small bowel diagnostics in recent years.

Feasibility of spiral enteroscopy in Japanese patients: study in two tertiary hospitals

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Despite recent advances in enteroscopy, such as balloon enteroscopy, accessing the small intestine remains challenging. Spiral enteroscopy is a novel technique in which an endoscope is fitted with a rotating overtube that has a soft spiral fin at the tip. Whereas spiral enteroscopy is beginning to be carried out in Western countries, it is not common in many Asian countries. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of spiral enteroscopy in Japanese patients.

METHODS

We prospectively conducted spiral enteroscopy in patients with suspected or known small bowel disease. All procedures were carried out using a spiral overtube. The main outcome measurements of the study were diagnosis rate, endoscopic intervention rate, and complication rate.

RESULTS

Thirty-two patients underwent spiral enteroscopy. Spiral enteroscopy diagnosed 16 patients (50%) with small intestinal lesions, including six malignant lymphomas (19%), three erosions or ulcers (9%), three polyps (9%), two angioectasias (6%), one carcinoma (3%), and one submucosal tumor (3%). Additionally, four patients underwent endoscopic interventions (13%). Mallory-Weiss syndrome occurred in one patient (3%). No perforation occurred in any patient (0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our initial experience of spiral enteroscopy suggests that it can be introduced safely, but it is relatively invasive and technically demanding. More experience is needed to conduct spiral enteroscopy easily and safely.

Multicenter comparison of double-balloon enteroscopy and spiral enteroscopy

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Spiral enteroscopy is a novel technique for small bowel exploration. The aim of this study is to compare double-balloon and spiral enteroscopy in patients with suspected small bowel lesions.

METHODS

Patients with suspected small bowel lesion diagnosed by capsule endoscopy were prospectively included between September 2009 and December 2010 in five tertiary-care academic medical centers.

RESULTS

After capsule endoscopy, 191 double-balloon enteroscopy and 50 spiral enteroscopies were performed. Indications were obscure gastrointestinal bleeding in 194 (80%) of cases. Lesions detected by capsule endoscopy were mainly angioectasia. Double-balloon and spiral enteroscopy resulted in finding one or more lesions in 70% and 75% of cases, respectively. The mean diagnosis procedure time and the average small bowel explored length during double-balloon and spiral enteroscopy were, respectively, 60 min (45-80) and 55 min (45-80) (P=0.74), and 200 cm (150-300) and 220 cm (200-300) (P=0.13). Treatment during double-balloon and spiral enteroscopy was possible in 66% and 70% of cases, respectively. There was no significant major procedure-related complication.

CONCLUSION

Spiral enteroscopy appears as safe as double-balloon enteroscopy for small bowel exploration with a similar diagnostic and therapeutic yield. Comparison between the two procedures in terms of duration and length of small bowel explored is slightly in favor of spiral enteroscopy but not significantly.

Intraoperative enteroscopy in the management of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding

Obscure gastrointestinal bleeding has long been a diagnostic challenge because of the relative inaccessibility of small bowel to standard endoscopic evaluation. Intraoperative enteroscopy indications have been reduced by the development of deep enteroscopy techniques and video capsule endoscopy. In light of the current advances, this review aimed at evaluating the intraoperative enteroscopy technical aspects, study results and an ongoing role for intraoperative enteroscopy in obscure gastrointestinal bleeding management. Intraoperative enteroscopy allows complete small bowel exploration in 57-100% of cases. A bleeding source can be identified in 80% of cases. Main causes are vascular lesions (61%) and benign ulcers (19%). When a lesion is found, intraoperative enteroscopy allows successful and recurrence-free management of gastrointestinal bleeding in 76% of cases. The reported mortality is 5% and morbidity is 17%. The recurrence of bleeding is observed in 13-52% of cases. With the recent development of deep enteroscopy techniques, intraoperative enteroscopy remains indicated when small bowel lesions (i) have been identified by a preoperative work-up, (ii) cannot be definitively managed by angiographic embolization, endoscopic treatment or when surgery is required and (iii) cannot be localized by external examination during surgical explorations. Surgeons and endoscopists must exercise caution with intraoperative enteroscopy to avoid the use of a low yield, highly morbid procedure.

Evaluation of the small bowel in inflammatory bowel disease

Crohn's disease is a chronic inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) that can affect the entire GI tract, and adequate visualization of the small bowel is imperative for both diagnosis and management. Magnetic resonance and computed tomography enterography have gradually replaced barium-based studies. Magnetic resonance enterography has the distinct advantage of avoiding ionizing radiation to which many patients with IBD are overexposed. Endoscopy-based techniques, including capsule endoscopy and device-assisted enteroscopy, allow direct visualization of the small bowel mucosa. Deep enteroscopy has the additional benefit of allowing sampling of the mucosa for histological analysis. Small intestine contrast ultrasound is rapidly gaining credence as an excellent, radiation-free imaging technique, but is not available in all countries. Other imaging modalities, such as positron emission tomography and leucocyte scintigraphy, continue to be studied and may have a role in specific circumstances. This review summarizes the evidence for the various techniques for evaluating the small bowel in IBD.