Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2019
Diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus and esophageal varices using a magnetically assisted capsule endoscopy system.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Beg Sabina, Card Tim, Warburton Samantha, Rahman Imdadur, Wilkes Emilie, White Jonathan, Ragunath Krish
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Magnetically assisted capsule endoscopy (MACE) potentially offers a comfortable, patient friendly, and community-based alternative to gastroscopy (EGD). This pilot study aims to explore whether this approach can be used to accurately diagnose Barrett's esophagus (BE) and esophageal varices.
METHOD: The MiroCam Navi capsule system was used to examine the upper GI tract in patients due to undergo a clinically indicated EGD. A total of 50 participants were enrolled: 34 had known pathology (17 BE, 17 esophageal varices [EV]) and 16 controls. Patients underwent the MACE procedure with the operator blinded to the indication and any previous endoscopic diagnoses. The subsequent EGD was performed by an endoscopist blinded to the MACE findings. Diagnostic yield, comfort, and patient preference between the 2 modalities were compared.
RESULTS: The mean age of the participants was 61 years, the male/female ratio was 2.1:1, the mean body mass index was 29.5 kg/m2, and the average chest measurement was 105.3 cm. Forty-seven patients underwent both procedures; 3 patients were unable to swallow the capsule. With the use of the magnet, it was possible to hold the capsule within the esophagus for a mean duration of 190 seconds and up to a maximum of 634 seconds. A correct real-time MACE diagnosis was made in 11 of 15 patients with EV (sensitivity 73.3% [95% confidence interval (CI), 44.9%-92.2%] and specificity 100% [95% CI, 89.1%-100%]) and 15 of 16 patients with BE (sensitivity 93.8% [95% CI, 69.8%-99.8%] and specificity of 100% [95% CI, 88.8%-100%]). MACE was considered more comfortable than conventional endoscopy (P < .0001); the mean score was 9.2 for MACE compared with 6.7 for EGD when assessed on a 10-point scale. No MACE- or EGD-related adverse events occurred.
CONCLUSION: This pilot study demonstrates that MACE is both safe and well tolerated by patients. Accuracy for the diagnosis of BE was high, and therefore MACE may have a role in screening for this condition. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02852161.).
METHOD: The MiroCam Navi capsule system was used to examine the upper GI tract in patients due to undergo a clinically indicated EGD. A total of 50 participants were enrolled: 34 had known pathology (17 BE, 17 esophageal varices [EV]) and 16 controls. Patients underwent the MACE procedure with the operator blinded to the indication and any previous endoscopic diagnoses. The subsequent EGD was performed by an endoscopist blinded to the MACE findings. Diagnostic yield, comfort, and patient preference between the 2 modalities were compared.
RESULTS: The mean age of the participants was 61 years, the male/female ratio was 2.1:1, the mean body mass index was 29.5 kg/m2, and the average chest measurement was 105.3 cm. Forty-seven patients underwent both procedures; 3 patients were unable to swallow the capsule. With the use of the magnet, it was possible to hold the capsule within the esophagus for a mean duration of 190 seconds and up to a maximum of 634 seconds. A correct real-time MACE diagnosis was made in 11 of 15 patients with EV (sensitivity 73.3% [95% confidence interval (CI), 44.9%-92.2%] and specificity 100% [95% CI, 89.1%-100%]) and 15 of 16 patients with BE (sensitivity 93.8% [95% CI, 69.8%-99.8%] and specificity of 100% [95% CI, 88.8%-100%]). MACE was considered more comfortable than conventional endoscopy (P < .0001); the mean score was 9.2 for MACE compared with 6.7 for EGD when assessed on a 10-point scale. No MACE- or EGD-related adverse events occurred.
CONCLUSION: This pilot study demonstrates that MACE is both safe and well tolerated by patients. Accuracy for the diagnosis of BE was high, and therefore MACE may have a role in screening for this condition. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02852161.).