Magnetically Controlled Capsule Endoscopy Versus Conventional Gastroscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

A new artificial intelligence system for both stomach and small-bowel capsule endoscopy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Despite the benefits of artificial intelligence in small-bowel (SB) capsule endoscopy (CE) image reading, information on its application in the stomach and SB CE is lacking.

METHODS

In this multicenter, retrospective diagnostic study, gastric imaging data were added to the deep learning-based SmartScan (SS), which has been described previously. A total of 1069 magnetically controlled GI CE examinations (comprising 2,672,542 gastric images) were used in the training phase for recognizing gastric pathologies, producing a new artificial intelligence algorithm named SS Plus. A total of 342 fully automated, magnetically controlled CE examinations were included in the validation phase. The performance of both senior and junior endoscopists with both the SS Plus-assisted reading (SSP-AR) and conventional reading (CR) modes was assessed.

RESULTS

SS Plus was designed to recognize 5 types of gastric lesions and 17 types of SB lesions. SS Plus reduced the number of CE images required for review to 873.90 (median, 1000; interquartile range [IQR], 814.50-1000) versus 44,322.73 (median, 42,393; IQR, 31,722.75-54,971.25) for CR. Furthermore, with SSP-AR, endoscopists took 9.54 minutes (median, 8.51; IQR, 6.05-13.13) to complete the CE video reading. In the 342 CE videos, SS Plus identified 411 gastric and 422 SB lesions, whereas 400 gastric and 368 intestinal lesions were detected with CR. Moreover, junior endoscopists remarkably improved their CE image reading ability with SSP-AR.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that the newly upgraded deep learning-based algorithm SS Plus can detect GI lesions and help improve the diagnostic performance of junior endoscopists in interpreting CE videos.

Capsule endoscopy and panendoscopy: A journey to the future of gastrointestinal endoscopy

In 2000, the small bowel capsule revolutionized the management of patients with small bowel disorders. Currently, the technological development achieved by the new models of double-headed endoscopic capsules, as miniaturized devices to evaluate the small bowel and colon [pan-intestinal capsule endoscopy (PCE)], makes this non-invasive procedure a disruptive concept for the management of patients with digestive disorders. This technology is expected to identify which patients will require conventional invasive endoscopic procedures (colonoscopy or balloon-assisted enteroscopy), based on the lesions detected by the capsule, i.e., those with an indication for biopsies or endoscopic treatment. The use of PCE in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases, namely Crohn's disease, as well as in patients with iron deficiency anaemia and/or overt gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, after a non-diagnostic upper endoscopy (esophagogastroduodenoscopy), enables an effective, safe and comfortable way to identify patients with relevant lesions, who should undergo subsequent invasive endoscopic procedures. The recent development of magnetically controlled capsule endoscopy to evaluate the upper GI tract, is a further step towards the possibility of an entirely non-invasive assessment of all the segments of the digestive tract, from mouth-to-anus, meeting the expectations of the early developers of capsule endoscopy.

The use of magnet-controlled capsule endoscopy as the initial diagnostic tool in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND

The latest magnet-controlled capsule endoscopy (MCCE) system can examine the water-distended stomach, duodenum, and the small bowel. We assessed the use of MCCE as the first diagnostic tool in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB).

METHODS

This was a prospective cohort study that enrolled patients admitted with AUGIB from two teaching hospitals. Patients underwent MCCE as the initial diagnostic modality. Our primary endpoint was the diagnostic yield of MCCE. The subsequent care of these patients was guided by MCCE findings.

RESULTS

Of 100 enrolled patients, 99 (mean age 54 years, 70.7% men) with a median Glasgow-Blatchford score of 6 (IQR 3-9) underwent MCCE. In three patients, MCCE found active bleeding (two duodenal ulcers and Dieulafoy's lesion). The overall diagnostic yield of MCCE was 95.8% (92 lesions in 96 patients); five in the esophagus (Mallory Weiss tears 2, varices 1, and esophagitis 2), 51 in the stomach (gastric erosions 26, gastric ulcers 14, cancer 3, GIST 3, gastric polyps 3, antral vascular ectasia 1,angiodysplasia 1), 32 in the duodenum (ulcers 28, erosions 3, polyp 1), and four in the small bowel (ulcers 2, an erosion with a nonbleeding vessel 1, Meckel's diverticulum 1). Fifty-two (52.5%) patients were discharged without endoscopy. Forty-five (45.5%) patients underwent inpatient esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), which found an antral ulcer and six duodenal ulcers in addition.

CONCLUSIONS

In stable patients with AUGIB, MCCE can be used as a diagnostic tool. EGD should follow in patients with an inadequate view of the duodenum.

Inadequate gastric preparation and its associated factors for magnetically controlled capsule endoscopy

Goals: To explore factors associated with inadequate gastric preparation for MCE. Background: Factors associated with inadequate gastric preparation for magnetically controlled capsule endoscopy (MCE) remains unclear. Study: Data of patients who underwent MCE from June 2021 to July 2022 were prospectively collected. The gastric cleanliness score (GCS) of the six stomach regions (gastric cardia, fundus, body, angulus, antrum, and pylorus) was recorded. Patients with GCS score ≥18 were defined as the adequate preparation. Factors related to inadequate gastric preparation were analyzed using a logistic regression model with estimated odds ratios (OR). Results: The mean GCS score of 211 patients was 17.01 ± 2.82. In the multivariable analysis, proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use (OR 3.57; 95% CI 1.69-7.95; p < 0.01) and premedication time after administering simethicone <30 min (OR 2.86; 95% CI 1.10-7.39; p = 0.03) were independent risk factors for inadequate gastric preparation. Comparing the gastric cleanliness of different locations, the median GCS of the lower stomach [10.00, IQR (9.50, 11.00)] was significantly higher than that of the upper stomach [7.00, IQR (6.00, 8.00)] (p <0.001). Conclusion: PPI use and inadequate premedication time (<30 min) may reduce the quality of gastric preparation for MCE. The type, dose, duration of medication, and discontinuation time of PPIs was well worth further exploration. Appropriate control of the type and time of premedication may be the key to improving overall gastric cleanliness.

[Recent research on the application of defoamers in children undergoing digestive endoscopy]

Endoscopy is a common tool for the diagnosis and treatment of gastrointestinal disorders in children. The presence of bubbles in the gastrointestinal tract is one of the important factors affecting the clarity of endoscopic visual field, and the application of defoamers can significantly reduce bubbles in the gastrointestinal tract, improve the quality of gastrointestinal preparation, and further increase disease detection rate. Various studies have been conducted on gastrointestinal preparation before endoscopy in children, but there still lacks a uniform protocol for the application of defoamers. This article summarizes the use of defoamers in children before digestive endoscopy and related research advances and points out that existing studies on defoamers have a small sample size and that there are still controversies over the selection and timing of administration, so as to provide a reference for in-depth research on defoamers in the future.

Indications, Detection, Completion and Retention Rates of Capsule Endoscopy in Two Decades of Use: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Capsule endoscopy (CE) has become a widespread modality for non-invasive evaluation of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract, with several CE models having been developed throughout the years. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate performance measures such as completion, detection and retention rates of CE. Methods: Literature through to August 2021 was screened for articles regarding all capsule types: small bowel, double-headed capsule for the colon or PillCam^®Crohn’s capsule, magnetically-controlled capsule endoscopy, esophageal capsule and patency capsule. Primary outcomes included detection rate (DR), completion rate (CR) and capsule retention rate (RR). DR, CR and RR were also analyzed in relation to indications such as obscure GI bleeding (OGIB), known/suspected Crohn’s disease (CD), celiac disease (CeD), neoplastic lesions (NL) and clinical symptoms (CS). Results: 328 original articles involving 86,930 patients who underwent CE were included. OGIB was the most common indication (n = 44,750), followed by CS (n = 17,897), CD (n = 11,299), NL (n = 4989) and CeD (n = 947). The most used capsule type was small bowel CE in 236 studies. DR, CR and RR for all indications were 59%, 89.6% and 2%, respectively. According to specific indications: DR were 55%, 66%, 63%, 52% and 62%; CR were 90.6%, 86.5%, 78.2%, 94% and 92.8%; and RR were 2%, 4%, 1%, 6% and 2%. Conclusions: Pooled DR, CR and RR are acceptable for all capsule types. OGIB is the most common indication for CE. Technological advancements have expanded the scope of CE devices in detecting GI pathology with acceptable rates for a complete examination.