OBJECTIVE: Video capsule endoscopy fails to visualize the caecum in about 20% of patients. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of different bowel preparations on video capsule endoscopy gastric- (GTT) and small-bowel transit time (SBTT) and the rate of caecal visualization. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We retrospectively examined 186 consecutive capsule endoscopy videos undertaken over a 3-year period, excluding cases with diabetes mellitus or gastric surgery (n=28), cases with unknown bowel preparation and those with unreadable data CDs (n=27). Sixty-seven (36%) patients were prepared with a liquid diet (CL), 54 (29%) with sodium phosphate (PS) and 65 (35%) with polyethylene glycol (PEG). Two independent, experienced investigators examined the videos. RESULTS: No difference was found in GTT among CL, PS and PEG preparations (25, 6.7-116.2 min, 34.75, 4.1-125 min, 35, 6.1-128.6 min, respectively, p=0.29). The caecum was visualized in 56/67 (83.6%), 44/54 (81.5%) and 53/65 (81.5%) patients who received CL, PS and PEG, respectively (p=0.9). In the cases where capsule endoscopy reached the caecum, no difference was observed in SBTT among patients that received CL, PS and PEG (264.4+/-85.9 min, 296.7+/-79.5 min, 291.3+/-84 min, respectively, p=0.11). CONCLUSIONS: Bowel preparations for capsule endoscopy do not have a significant effect on gastric and small-bowel video capsule transit time and the rate of caecum visualization.
OBJECTIVE: Video capsule endoscopy fails to visualize the caecum in about 20% of patients. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of different bowel preparations on video capsule endoscopy gastric- (GTT) and small-bowel transit time (SBTT) and the rate of caecal visualization. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We retrospectively examined 186 consecutive capsule endoscopy videos undertaken over a 3-year period, excluding cases with diabetes mellitus or gastric surgery (n=28), cases with unknown bowel preparation and those with unreadable data CDs (n=27). Sixty-seven (36%) patients were prepared with a liquid diet (CL), 54 (29%) with sodium phosphate (PS) and 65 (35%) with polyethylene glycol (PEG). Two independent, experienced investigators examined the videos. RESULTS: No difference was found in GTT among CL, PS and PEG preparations (25, 6.7-116.2 min, 34.75, 4.1-125 min, 35, 6.1-128.6 min, respectively, p=0.29). The caecum was visualized in 56/67 (83.6%), 44/54 (81.5%) and 53/65 (81.5%) patients who received CL, PS and PEG, respectively (p=0.9). In the cases where capsule endoscopy reached the caecum, no difference was observed in SBTT among patients that received CL, PS and PEG (264.4+/-85.9 min, 296.7+/-79.5 min, 291.3+/-84 min, respectively, p=0.11). CONCLUSIONS: Bowel preparations for capsule endoscopy do not have a significant effect on gastric and small-bowel video capsule transit time and the rate of caecum visualization.
Authors: Cemal Yazici; John Losurdo; Michael D Brown; Scott Oosterveen; Robert Rahimi; Ali Keshavarzian; Leila Bozorgnia; Ece Mutlu Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2012-09-28 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Konstantinos Triantafyllou; John Dervenoulas; Panagiotis Tsirigotis; Spiros D Ladas Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2008-02-07 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Thomas Flass; Suhong Tong; Daniel N Frank; Brandie D Wagner; Charles E Robertson; Cassandra Vogel Kotter; Ronald J Sokol; Edith Zemanick; Frank Accurso; Edward J Hoffenberg; Michael R Narkewicz Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-02-06 Impact factor: 3.240