Prospective cost analysis of early video capsule endoscopy versus standard of care in non-hematemesis gastrointestinal bleeding: a non-inferiority study

Clinical impact of capsule endoscopy on patients with suspected small bowel bleeding: Experience at a highly specialized hospital in Colombia

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

Capsule endoscopy is part of the diagnostic approach to patients with suspected small bowel bleeding and data on its clinical impact are still limited in developing countries. The primary aim of the present study was to determine its impact on subsequent diagnostic and therapeutic decisions.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted that included all the patients that underwent capsule endoscopy with the PillCam™ SB 3 Capsule system due to suspected small bowel bleeding treated at the Hospital Universitario Fundación Valle del Lili between January 2011 and December 2020.

RESULTS

A total of 158 patients met the inclusion criteria. Mean patient age was 63 years (interquartile range [IQR], 52-74), 53.6% of the patients were women, and high blood pressure was the most frequent comorbidity (43.7%). The main indication was overt bleeding (58.2%). Of all the capsule endoscopies carried out, 63.9% showed lesions that were potentially responsible for bleeding. Medical or surgical treatment was indicated in 63.3% of the case total. Rebleeding at 6 months occurred in 15 patients and there were 2 deaths due to gastrointestinal bleeding at 6 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Capsule endoscopy has a high impact on patients with suspected small bowel bleeding, with respect to clinical decision-making, as well as rebleeding, hospitalization, and mortality outcomes. The positivity rate of lesions potentially responsible for bleeding was similar to that reported in developed countries.

Very High Yield of Urgent Small-Bowel Capsule Endoscopy for Ongoing Overt Suspected Small-Bowel Bleeding Irrespective of the Usual Predictive Factors

Evidence for an urgent approach to ongoing overt suspected small-bowel bleeding (SSBB) is scarce. We aimed to analyze our series of urgent small-bowel capsule endoscopies (SBCEs) for ongoing overt SSBB and to identify factors associated with positive findings and outcomes. A retrospective study of all SBCEs performed in the first 48 h after admission for overt SSBB between January 2006 and February 2022 was performed. Descriptive and inferential analyses (univariate and multivariable) were performed. Eighty-three urgent SBCEs were performed for overt SSBB. Patients were mostly men (69.2%, median age 68) and were followed for a median of 58.2 months (range 5-176). The diagnostic yield was 80.7%; in 60.2%, blood was detected in the small bowel (SB), while in 50.6%, a bleeding lesion was identified, mostly angioectasia. Patients with diabetes mellitus or taking NSAIDs were more prone to present SB findings, yet the explanatory power was low. Endoscopic or surgical treatments were performed in 28.9% and 19.3%, respectively, with the "non-conservative" therapeutic yield being 56.6%. Rebleeding occurred in 20.5% and was associated in the multivariable analysis with the female gender and anticoagulants use. This cohort of urgent SBCE, the largest from a European center, reinforces the usefulness of SBCE for ongoing overt SSBB management. This prompt performance of this procedure is highly effective, regardless of patients' features.

Assessment of Video Capsule Endoscopy in the Management of Acute Gastrointestinal Bleeding During the COVID-19 Pandemic

IMPORTANCE

Evaluation of acute gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding using invasive endoscopic procedures comprising the standard of care (SOC)-upper endoscopy and colonoscopy-can expose the endoscopy staff to SARS-CoV-2. Video capsule endoscopy (VCE) does not generate aerosols and only requires 1 person to manage the procedure.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the safety of VCE for the initial evaluation of GI bleeding at the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic to identify signs of active bleeding while minimizing patient and personnel exposure, saving personal protective equipment, and avoiding invasive or unnecessary procedures.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A multicenter (UMass Memorial Medical Center and Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center) retrospective cohort study including 146 patients with COVID-19 who received VCE as the first-line diagnostic modality was conducted from March 15 to June 15, 2020, compared with SOC in January 2020 for evaluation of GI bleeding. The association between treatment and outcomes was estimated using multivariable regression adjusting for potential confounders. Propensity score matching was used to verify the results.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary end point was detection of active bleeding or stigmata of recent bleeding. Secondary end points included the number of patients requiring any invasive procedures, number of additional procedures, rates of rebleeding and rehospitalization, transfusion requirements, and mortality.

RESULTS

Among 146 patients, 92 (63.0%) were men; mean (SD) age was 64.93 (14.13) years in the COVID-19 group and 61.33 (13.39) years in the SOC group. Active bleeding or stigmata of recent bleeding was observed in 44 (59.5%) patients in the COVID-19 group compared with 18 (25.0%) in the SOC group (adjusted odds ratio, 5.23; 95% CI, 2.23 to 12.27). Only 36 patients (48.7%) in the COVID-19 group required any invasive procedure during the hospitalization compared with 70 (97.2%) in the SOC group (adjusted odds ratio, 0.01; 95% CI, 0.001 to 0.08). The mean (SD) number of invasive procedures was 0.59 (0.77) per patient in the COVID-19 group compared with 1.18 (0.48) per patient in the SOC group (adjusted difference, -0.54; 95% CI, -0.77 to -0.31). Both approaches appeared to be safe and there was no significant difference in transfusion requirements, rebleeding, rehospitalization, or in-hospital mortality. No mortality was attributed to GI bleeding in either group.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cohort study, first-line diagnostic evaluation of acute GI bleeding using VCE appeared to be a safe and useful alternative to the traditional approach of upper endoscopy and colonoscopy. Use of VCE was associated with increased detection of active bleeding and a reduced number of invasive procedures and unnecessary exposure of personnel to SARS-CoV-2 and use of personal protective equipment.

A new panenteric capsule endoscopy-based strategy in patients with melena and a negative upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: a prospective feasibility study

OBJECTIVE

patients presenting with melena and nondiagnostic esophagogastroduodenoscopy are usually investigated with colonoscopy and if negative, with small bowel capsule endoscopy. In this pilot study, we tested feasibility and performance of panenteric capsule endoscopy (PCE) in patients presenting with melena and negative esophagogastroduodenoscopy.

METHODS

Between January and December 2018, consecutive patients presenting with melena, clinically significant bleeding and negative esophagogastroduodenoscopy were invited to undergo PCE by swallowing PillCam Colon 2 (Medtronic Inc., Dublin, Ireland). PCE results, further diagnostic or therapeutic examinations, rebleeding rates at 30 days and 12 months were recorded.

RESULTS

Out of 128 patients with melena, 23 had negative esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Of them, 12 (8 female, mean age 76 years) underwent PCE, which allowed complete small bowel and colonic evaluation in 12 (100%) and 11 (91.7%) patients, respectively. The small bowel and colon cleansing were adequate in 100 and 83.3%, respectively. No PCE-related complications were observed. The PCE diagnostic yield was 83.3%: significant findings were located in the small bowel, colon or both in 5 (41.7%), 4 (33.3%) and 1 (8.3%) patients, respectively. Device-assisted enteroscopy was performed in 6 (50%) patients. Thirty days and 1 year rebleeding rates were 0 and 18.1%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In this proof-of-concept study, PCE was feasible and safe in patients with melena and negative esophagogastroduodenoscopy, identifying the bleeding site in 83% of patients. PCE lead to small bowel therapeutic interventions in 50% of patients, thus avoiding unnecessary standard colonoscopy. Further large prospective randomized studies investigating this strategy are warranted.

Summary of The Third Capsule Endoscopy Global Summit

In order to emphasize the epidemic prevention during capsule endoscopy examinations, exhibit the latest achievements of capsule endoscopy, and strengthen international exchanges and cooperation in capsule endoscopy products, quality control, R&D, clinical applications, and talents, The Third Capsule Endoscopy Global Summit was held in Chongqing, China. The summit invited foreign experts to live online and remotely broadcast special academic speeches. The invited domestic experts brought the latest academic reports on the spot. A total of 17 medical experts presented a number of latest technologies and academic achievements in the field of capsule endoscopy from five levels. Professor Xue-Liang Jiang, President of the World Chinese Digestive Society and Editor-in-Chief of the World Chinese Journal of Digestology, was invited to give a report on the clinical application of capsule endoscopy.