Dataset Information

Detachable string magnetically controlled capsule endoscopy for detecting high-risk varices in compensated advanced chronic liver disease (CHESS1801): A prospective multicenter study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Gastroesophageal varices is a serious complication of compensated advanced chronic liver disease (cACLD). Primary prophylaxis to reduce the risk of variceal hemorrhage is recommended if high-risk varices (HRV) are detected. We performed this study to compare the accuracy, patients' satisfaction and safety of detection of HRV by detachable string magnetically controlled capsule endoscopy (DS-MCCE) with esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) as the reference.

Methods

We prospectively recruited participants with cACLD from 12 university hospitals (11 in China and one in the United Kingdom) between November 2018 and December 2019 (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03749954). All participants underwent DS-MCCE, followed by EGD within a week in a blinded fashion. Following endoscopy, and on the same day, participants were asked to fill in a satisfaction questionnaire regarding their experience.

Findings

A total of 105 eligible participants were enrolled. With EGD as the reference standard, the concordance index, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio of DS-MCCE in diagnosis of HRV were 0•90 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0•83-0•95), 92% (95% CI: 78-98%), 88% (95% CI: 78-95%), 80% (95% CI: 70-92%), 95% (95% CI: 90-100%), 7•91 (95% CI: 4•10-15•30), and 0•09 (95% CI: 0•03-0•30), respectively. The kappa score of 0•78 (95% CI: 0•65-0•90) suggested substantial agreement between DS-MCCE and EGD. Moreover, in participants undergoing EGD without sedation, the satisfaction of DS-MCCE was significantly better than that of EGD (p < 0•0001, d = 1•15 [95%CI: 0•88-1•42]). All participants confirmed the excretion of the capsule, and no adverse events occurred.

Interpretation

DS-MCCE is an accurate alternative to EGD for detecting HRV in cACLD, which is safe and associated with better satisfaction.

Funding

A full list of funding can be found in the Funding Support section.

SUBMITTER: Wang S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8315440 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:To assess the cleansing efficacy and safety of a new Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) bowel preparation regimen.This was a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled study comparing two CCE regimens. Subjects were asymptomatic and average risk for colorectal cancer. The second generation CCE system (PillCam® COLON 2; Medtronic, Yoqneam, Israel) was utilized. Preparation regimens differed in the 1st and 2nd boosts with the Study regimen using oral sulfate solution (89 mL) with diatrizoate meglumine and diatrizoate sodium solution ("diatrizoate solution") (boost 1 = 60 mL, boost 2 = 30 mL) and the Control regimen oral sulfate solution (89 mL) alone. The primary outcome was overall and segmental colon cleansing. Secondary outcomes included safety, polyp detection, colonic transit, CCE completion and capsule excretion ? 12 h.Both regimens had similar cleansing efficacy for the whole colon (Adequate: Study = 75.9%, Control = 77.3%; P = 0.88) and individual segments. In the Study group, CCE completion was superior (Study = 90.9%, Control = 76.9%; P = 0.048) and colonic transit was more often < 40 min (Study = 21.8%, Control = 4%; P = 0.0073). More Study regimen subjects experienced adverse events (Study = 19.4%, Control = 3.4%; P = 0.0061), and this difference did not appear related to diatrizoate solution. Adverse events were primarily gastrointestinal in nature and no serious adverse events related either to the bowel preparation regimen or the capsule were observed. There was a trend toward higher polyp detection with the Study regimen, but this did not achieve statistical significance for any size category. Mean transit time through the entire gastrointestinal tract, from ingestion to excretion, was shorter with the Study regimen while mean colonic transit times were similar for both study groups.A CCE bowel preparation regimen using oral sulfate solution and diatrizoate solution as a boost agent is effective, safe, and achieved superior CCE completion.

Project description:BackgroundCapsule endoscopy (CE) is safe and widely accepted for small bowel (SB) investigation and an alternative to colonoscopy in specific clinical circumstances. As the capsule is orally ingested, the potential risk of aspiration is undoubtedly a constant concern among clinicians. However, it is a rare occurrence and often reported as isolated cases. Therefore, this review systematically compiles all the available data on capsule aspiration in the literature with an aim to provide an update on this complication of CE.MethodsA systematic literature search was performed on PubMed with the search terms 'capsule endoscopy' AND 'aspiration', searched as keywords and MeSH. All observational cohort studies that reported aspiration among complications/outcomes, case reports and series on capsule aspiration were included. Manual citation search was performed. Two extractors reviewed abstract and full-text and performed data extraction.ResultsWe found 95 relevant articles, and cross-checking references led to the inclusion of an additional 19 articles. We removed 57 and ended with 57 references-with 63 cases of aspirated capsules. One death was reported. The median age was 78, and there was male preponderance. The most common indication for CE was anaemia, and only aspiration of small bowel CE (SBCE) was reported. 61.9% of the aspirations were symptomatic; the most common symptom was coughing. 69.8% of capsules ended in the bronchus, but only 4 cases experienced desaturation. Thirty-two patients needed intervention for retrieval; the aspiration was self-resolved in the remaining. Only four patients had a history of dysphagia. Thirteen instances of aspiration were detected due to real-time viewing, and 24 cases from reviewing the capsule data afterwards.ConclusionsWith only 63 cases of aspirated capsules reported in the literature, this event remains rare, is safely managed, and should not discourage patients from the procedure. The importance of careful patient selection is crucial to minimize the likelihood of aspiration and capsule administration should be approached with precautions.

Project description:Esophageal variceal bleeding is a severe complication of portal hypertension with significant morbidity and mortality. Although traditional screening and grading of esophageal varices has been performed by endogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), wireless video capsule endoscopy provides a minimally invasive alternative that may improve screening and surveillance compliance.The aim of the study was to perform a systematic review and structured meta-analysis of all eligible studies to evaluate the efficacy of wireless capsule endoscopy for screening and diagnosis of esophageal varices among patients with portal hypertension.Searches of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases were performed through December 2015. Bivariate and hierarchical models were used to compute the pooled sensitivity and specificity, and to plot the summary receiver operating characteristics curve with summary point and corresponding 95% confidence region. Bias of included studies was assessed using the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies-2.Seventeen studies from 2005 to 2015 were included in this meta-analysis (n=1328). The diagnostic accuracy of wireless capsule endoscopy in the diagnosis of esophageal varices was 90% [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.88-0.93]. The diagnostic pooled sensitivity and specificity were 83% (95% CI, 0.76-0.89) and 85% (95% CI, 0.75-0.91), respectively. The diagnostic accuracy of wireless capsule endoscopy for the grading of medium to large varices was 92% (95% CI, 0.90-0.94). The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 72% (95% CI, 0.54-0.85) and 91% (95% CI, 0.86-0.94), respectively, for the grading of medium to large varices. The use of capsule demonstrated only mild adverse events. A sensitivity analysis limited to only high quality studies revealed similar results.Wireless esophageal capsule endoscopy is well tolerated and safe in patients with liver cirrhosis and suspicion of portal hypertension. The sensitivity of capsule endoscopy is not currently sufficient to replace EGD as a first exploration in these patients, but given its high accuracy, it may have a role in cases of refusal or contraindication to EGD.