Emanuele Rondonotti1, Cristiano Spada2, Marco Pennazio3, Roberto de Franchis4, Sergio Cadoni5, Carlo Girelli6, Cesare Hassan7, Riccardo Marmo8, Maria Elena Riccioni9, Giuseppe Scarpulla10, Marco Soncini11, Maurizio Vecchi12, Renato Cannizzaro13. 1. Gastroenterology Unit, Ospedale Valduce, Como, Italy. Electronic address: ema.rondo@gmail.com. 2. Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Roma, Italy; Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Poliambulanza Foundation, Brescia, Italy. 3. Division of Gastroenterology U, San Giovanni AS University-Teaching Hospital, Torino, Italy. 4. University of Milan, Milan, Italy. 5. Digestive Endoscopy Unit, CTO Hospital, Iglesias, Italy. 6. Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Hospital of Busto Arsizio, Busto Arsizio, Italy. 7. Endoscopy Unit, Nuovo Regina Margherita Hospital, Rome, Italy. 8. Division of Gastroenterology, Curto Hospital, Polla, Italy. 9. Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Roma, Italy; Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Catholic University of Rome, Rome, Italy. 10. Gastroenterology Division, M. Raimondi Hospital, San Cataldo, Italy. 11. Digestive Physiopathology Unit ASST Santi Paolo e Carlo, Milan, Italy. 12. Dipartimento di Scienze Biomediche per la Salute, Università di Milano, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy. 13. Division of Oncological Gastroenterology, Centro di Riferimento Oncologico di Aviano (CRO) IRCCS, Aviano, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) has recently issued a technical review focused on small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE). AIM: To compare SBCE current practice in Italy to ESGE technical recommendations. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A dedicated per-centre semi-quantitative questionnaire was prepared by a group of SBCE experts. One-hundred-fifty Centres were invited to participate in the data collection concerning SBCEs performed between June 2016 and June 2017. Data were compared with ESGE recommendations. RESULTS: 120 Centres participated in the data collection. Current practices agreed with ESGE recommendations in 56.3% (9/16) of the issues evaluated. Differences between ESGE recommendations and current practice concerned the management of patients with pacemakers or cardiac implantable defibrillators (which was in agreement with ESGE recommendations in 31.7% and 15.8% of Centres, respectively), the SBCE setting (only 51% of SBCEs were performed as outpatients procedures), the assessment of capsule excretion (timing and modality were in agreement with ESGE recommendation in 20.0% of Centres), and in the involvement of trained nurses or fellows in training as pre-readers (7/120; 5.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Although SBCE is widely used and largely available in Italy, there are still some technical, practical and organizational issues that can be modified to bridge the gap between current practice and ESGE guideline recommendations.
BACKGROUND: The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) has recently issued a technical review focused on small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE). AIM: To compare SBCE current practice in Italy to ESGE technical recommendations. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A dedicated per-centre semi-quantitative questionnaire was prepared by a group of SBCE experts. One-hundred-fifty Centres were invited to participate in the data collection concerning SBCEs performed between June 2016 and June 2017. Data were compared with ESGE recommendations. RESULTS: 120 Centres participated in the data collection. Current practices agreed with ESGE recommendations in 56.3% (9/16) of the issues evaluated. Differences between ESGE recommendations and current practice concerned the management of patients with pacemakers or cardiac implantable defibrillators (which was in agreement with ESGE recommendations in 31.7% and 15.8% of Centres, respectively), the SBCE setting (only 51% of SBCEs were performed as outpatients procedures), the assessment of capsule excretion (timing and modality were in agreement with ESGE recommendation in 20.0% of Centres), and in the involvement of trained nurses or fellows in training as pre-readers (7/120; 5.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Although SBCE is widely used and largely available in Italy, there are still some technical, practical and organizational issues that can be modified to bridge the gap between current practice and ESGE guideline recommendations.