Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2008
How good is capsule endoscopy for detection of periampullary lesions? Results of a tertiary-referral center.
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.
Clarke John O, Giday Samuel A, Magno Priscilla, Shin Eun Ji, Buscaglia Jonathan M, Jagannath Sanjay B, Mullin Gerard E
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Ampullary adenomas are increasingly being recognized, particularly in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. A capsule endoscopy (CE) is routinely recommended for surveillance of small-intestinal polyposis. Performance characteristics of CE for the detection of periampullary lesions are unclear.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of CE to detect the major duodenal papilla.
DESIGN AND PATIENTS: A total of 146 consecutive CE studies were reviewed by 2 CE gastroenterologists at 5 frames per second. Primary outcome was visualization of the major duodenal papilla. Discrepancies were reviewed by 5 CE gastroenterologists.
SETTING: A tertiary-referral center.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The ability of CE to detect the duodenal papilla.
RESULTS: Among 146 consecutive CE studies, 21 were excluded: capsule retention (3), patient age <18 years (6), duplicate study (8), and prior surgery disrupting duodenal anatomy (4). Of the remaining 125 studies, indications were the following: obscure GI bleeding (45.6%), iron deficiency anemia (19.2%), abdominal pain (17.6%), diarrhea (10.4%), and Crohn's disease (4.8%). In total, 13 major duodenal papillae were visualized. The median time of detection was 31 seconds after the first duodenal image. This translates to a CE sensitivity of 10.4% for detection of the major papilla.
LIMITATION: Papilla position was not verified by an EGD.
CONCLUSIONS: CE has limited sensitivity to visualize the major papilla and lesions in the periampullary small intestine. Nondiagnostic CE studies must not be relied upon as proof that small-bowel lesions do not exist. Consideration should be given for an enteroscopy or side-viewing duodenoscopy in cases where significant clinical concern exists for unrecognized periampullary lesions. The current recommendations about surveillance for small-bowel polyposis should be revised.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of CE to detect the major duodenal papilla.
DESIGN AND PATIENTS: A total of 146 consecutive CE studies were reviewed by 2 CE gastroenterologists at 5 frames per second. Primary outcome was visualization of the major duodenal papilla. Discrepancies were reviewed by 5 CE gastroenterologists.
SETTING: A tertiary-referral center.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The ability of CE to detect the duodenal papilla.
RESULTS: Among 146 consecutive CE studies, 21 were excluded: capsule retention (3), patient age <18 years (6), duplicate study (8), and prior surgery disrupting duodenal anatomy (4). Of the remaining 125 studies, indications were the following: obscure GI bleeding (45.6%), iron deficiency anemia (19.2%), abdominal pain (17.6%), diarrhea (10.4%), and Crohn's disease (4.8%). In total, 13 major duodenal papillae were visualized. The median time of detection was 31 seconds after the first duodenal image. This translates to a CE sensitivity of 10.4% for detection of the major papilla.
LIMITATION: Papilla position was not verified by an EGD.
CONCLUSIONS: CE has limited sensitivity to visualize the major papilla and lesions in the periampullary small intestine. Nondiagnostic CE studies must not be relied upon as proof that small-bowel lesions do not exist. Consideration should be given for an enteroscopy or side-viewing duodenoscopy in cases where significant clinical concern exists for unrecognized periampullary lesions. The current recommendations about surveillance for small-bowel polyposis should be revised.