Literature DB >> 19690959

Impact of capsule endoscopy findings on patient outcomes.

Stephen Kim1, Prashant S Kedia, David L Jaffe, Nuzhat A Ahmad.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: There is limited data on the impact of capsule endoscopy (CE) findings on patient outcomes. The aim of our study is to evaluate the impact of CE findings on further diagnostic work-up, treatment, and symptom resolution.
METHODS: A retrospective chart review of patients who underwent CE at a single tertiary care center over a 3-year period was performed. CE findings were classified as positive, suspicious, or negative. Therapeutic interventions were medical, endoscopic, surgical, other, or none. Symptoms were considered resolved when the patient had cessation of symptoms for at least 6 months post-CE.
RESULTS: A total of 193 patients were studied. The overall diagnostic yield of CE was 37%. There were 97 (50%) patients who had further diagnostic testing following CE; (40 with positive, 22 with suspicious, 35 with negative CE findings). There were 76% patients who received treatment post-CE (59% with positive, 43% with suspicious, 49% with negative CE findings). Overall symptom resolution was seen in 71% of patients (59% with positive, 68% with suspicious, 70% with negative CE findings). There was no statistically significant difference in diagnostic work-up, treatment, and symptom resolution between patients with positive, suspicious, and negative findings. Patients with obscure overt GI bleeding were less likely to have further diagnostic work-up (P = 0.001), and had the highest rate of symptom resolution as compared to other indications (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: There is no significant difference in outcomes amongst patients with positive, suspicious, and negative CE findings. Patients with obscure overt GI bleeding had more favorable outcomes as compared to other indications.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19690959     DOI: 10.1007/s10620-009-0925-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dig Dis Sci        ISSN: 0163-2116            Impact factor:   3.199


  12 in total

Review 1.  Wireless capsule endoscopy.

Authors:  P Swain
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 23.059

2.  Comparison of capsule endoscopy to other modalities in small bowel.

Authors:  Shoshana Friedman
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am       Date:  2004-01

3.  A prospective two-center study comparing wireless capsule endoscopy with intraoperative enteroscopy in patients with obscure GI bleeding.

Authors:  Dirk Hartmann; Harald Schmidt; Georg Bolz; Dieter Schilling; Frank Kinzel; Axel Eickhoff; Winfried Huschner; Kathleen Möller; Ralf Jakobs; Peter Reitzig; Uwe Weickert; Klaus Gellert; Harald Schultz; Klaus Guenther; Hartmut Hollerbuhl; Klaus Schoenleben; Hans-Joachim Schulz; Juergen F Riemann
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 9.427

4.  A prospective study comparing video capsule endoscopy with double-balloon enteroscopy in patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding.

Authors:  Muhammed Hadithi; G Dimitri N Heine; Maarten A J M Jacobs; Adriaan A van Bodegraven; Adriaan A V Bodegraven; Chris J J Mulder
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 10.864

5.  Clinical usefulness of the endoscopic video capsule as the initial intestinal investigation in patients with obscure digestive bleeding: validation of a diagnostic strategy based on the patient outcome after 12 months.

Authors:  M Delvaux; I Fassler; G Gay
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 10.093

6.  Clinical impact of capsule endoscopy on further strategy and long-term clinical outcome in patients with obscure bleeding.

Authors:  Pieter Hindryckx; Thomas Botelberge; Martine De Vos; Danny De Looze
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2008-03-04       Impact factor: 9.427

7.  Double balloon enteroscopy detects small bowel mass lesions missed by capsule endoscopy.

Authors:  Andrew Ross; Shahab Mehdizadeh; Jeffrey Tokar; Jonathan A Leighton; Ahmad Kamal; Ann Chen; Drew Schembre; Gary Chen; Kenneth Binmoeller; Richard Kozarek; Irving Waxman; Charles Dye; Lauren Gerson; M Edwyn Harrison; Oleh Haluszka; Simon Lo; Carol Semrad
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2008-02-13       Impact factor: 3.199

8.  Capsule endoscopy's impact on clinical management and outcomes: a single-center experience with 145 patients.

Authors:  Elaine Toy; Micha Rojany; Rafiq Sheikh; Surinder Mann; Thomas Prindiville
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 10.864

9.  Small bowel: preliminary comparison of capsule endoscopy with barium study and CT.

Authors:  Amy K Hara; Jonathan A Leighton; Virender K Sharma; David E Fleischer
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2003-11-14       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Diagnostic yield of wireless capsule enteroscopy in comparison with computed tomography enteroclysis.

Authors:  W A Voderholzer; M Ortner; P Rogalla; J Beinhölzl; H Lochs
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 10.093

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  New vision in video capsule endoscopy: current status and future directions.

Authors:  Laurel R Fisher; William L Hasler
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2012-05-08       Impact factor: 46.802

Review 2.  Role of small bowel capsule endoscopy in the diagnosis and management of iron deficiency anemia in elderly: a comprehensive review of the current literature.

Authors:  Adnan Muhammad; Gitanjali Vidyarthi; Patrick Brady
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-07-14       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 3.  Small Bowel Malignancies in Patients Undergoing Capsule Endoscopy for Iron Deficiency Anemia.

Authors:  Su Hwan Kim; Ji Won Kim
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2021-12-31
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.