Refine
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Keywords
- Cleanliness level (1)
- Colon capsule endoscopy (1)
- Colonic neoplasms (1)
- Complementation rate (1)
- Control (1)
- Endoscopy (1)
- Incomplete colonoscopy (1)
- Low volume prep (1)
- Moviprep (1)
- Phospho-soda (1)
Institute
- Medizin (2)
Background/Aims: Reliable and especially widely accepted preventive measures are crucial to further reduce the incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC). Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) might increase the screening numbers among patients unable or unwilling to undergo conventional colonoscopy. This registry trial aimed to document and determine the CCE indications, findings, complications, and adverse events in outpatient practices and clinics throughout Germany.
Methods: Patients undergoing CCE between 2010 and 2015 were enrolled in this prospective multicenter registry trial at six German centers. Patient demographics, outcomes, and complications were evaluated.
Results: A total of 161 patients were included. Of the CCE evaluations, 111 (68.9%) were considered successful. Pathological findings in the colon (n=92, 60.1%) and in the remaining gastrointestinal tract (n=38, 24.8%) were recorded. The main finding was the presence of polyps (n=52, 32.3%). Furthermore, five carcinomas (3.1%) were detected and histologically confirmed later. Adequate bowel cleanliness was more likely to be achieved in the outpatient setting (p<0.0001). Interestingly, 85 patients (55.6%) chose to undergo CCE based on personal motivation.
Conclusions: CCE seems to be a reliable and safe endoscopic tool for screening for CRC and detecting other diseases. Its patient acceptance and feasibility seems to be high, especially in the outpatient setting.
Aim: To evaluate the ability of PillCamColon2 to visualize colonic segments missed by incomplete optical colonoscopy (OC) and to assess the diagnostic yield.
Methods: This prospective multicentre study included 81 patients from nine centres who underwent second-generation colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) following incomplete OC performed by an experienced gastroenterologist (> 1000 colonoscopies). Patients with stenosis were excluded. According to patient preferences, CCE was performed the following day (protocol A) after staying on clear liquids and 0.75 L Moviprep in the morning or within 30 d after new split-dose Moviprep (protocol B). Boosts consisted of 0.75 L and 0.25 L Moviprep, and phospho-soda was given as a rescue if the capsule was not excreted after seven hours.
Results: Seventy-four patients were analysed (51% of them in group A; 49% in group B). Bowel cleansing was adequate in 67% of cases, and CCE could visualize colonic segments missed by incomplete colonoscopy in 90% of patients under protocol A and 97% of patients under protocol B (P = 0.35, n.s.). Significant polyps including adenocarcinoma were detected in 24% of cases. Detection rates for all polyps and significant polyps per patient were similar in both protocols. Polyps were found predominantly in the right colon (86%) in segments that were not reached by OC. Extracolonic findings - such as reflux esophagitis, suspected Barrett esophagus, upper GI-bleeding, gastric polyps, gastric erosions and angiectasia - were detected in eight patients. PillCamColon2 capsule was retained in the ileum of one patient (1.4%) without symptoms and removed during an uneventful resection for unknown Crohn’s disease that was diagnosed as the cause of anemia, which was the indication for colonoscopy. CCE was well tolerated. One patient suffered from self-limiting vomiting after consuming the phospho-soda.
Conclusion: Second-generation CCE using a low-volume preparation is useful after incomplete OC, and it allows for the detection of additional relevant findings, but cleansing efficiency could be improved.