BACKGROUND AND AIM: Capsule enteroscopy (CE) is recommended in the management of complicated celiac disease (CD). However, published data are derived from axial-view capsule systems. No data are available on the use of lateral/panoramic view capsules. This study aimed at evaluating the diagnostic yield and efficacy of the lateral/panoramic versus the axial view capsule system in CD. METHODS:Consecutive CD patients were enrolled in a prospective monocentric study. Each patient ingested an axial (PillCam SB3) and a lateral/panoramic (CapsoCam Plus) view capsule with a 3-h interval in a randomized order. Two experts blindly evaluated the CE carried out. A third expert reviewed the videos in cases of discordance. RESULTS:Twenty-five CD patients were enrolled (four males, age at CE 51.2 ± 16.6 years, age at CD diagnosis 41.7 ± 20.6, years on a gluten-free diet [GFD] 9.6 ± 9.4). Indications at CE were refractory CD in nine cases, non-responsiveness to GFD in 10 and GFD non-compliance in six. A positive finding was evidenced in 15 (60%) and 13 (52%) cases by CapsoCam and PillCam respectively (not significant). Atrophy was detected by both capsules. Considering the percentage of the small-bowel mucosa presenting atrophy signs, mean values were 22% ± 35 and 20% ± 29 for lateral/panoramic and axial systems, respectively (not significant). Compared to duodenal histology, PillCam correctly identified 80% of patients with SB atrophy, whereas CapsoCam identified 73% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Lateral/panoramic view CE is effective in the detection of small-bowel atrophy in CD and presents good sensitivity and specificity when compared to histology.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Capsule enteroscopy (CE) is recommended in the management of complicated celiac disease (CD). However, published data are derived from axial-view capsule systems. No data are available on the use of lateral/panoramic view capsules. This study aimed at evaluating the diagnostic yield and efficacy of the lateral/panoramic versus the axial view capsule system in CD. METHODS: Consecutive CDpatients were enrolled in a prospective monocentric study. Each patient ingested an axial (PillCam SB3) and a lateral/panoramic (CapsoCam Plus) view capsule with a 3-h interval in a randomized order. Two experts blindly evaluated the CE carried out. A third expert reviewed the videos in cases of discordance. RESULTS: Twenty-five CDpatients were enrolled (four males, age at CE 51.2 ± 16.6 years, age at CD diagnosis 41.7 ± 20.6, years on a gluten-free diet [GFD] 9.6 ± 9.4). Indications at CE were refractory CD in nine cases, non-responsiveness to GFD in 10 and GFD non-compliance in six. A positive finding was evidenced in 15 (60%) and 13 (52%) cases by CapsoCam and PillCam respectively (not significant). Atrophy was detected by both capsules. Considering the percentage of the small-bowel mucosa presenting atrophy signs, mean values were 22% ± 35 and 20% ± 29 for lateral/panoramic and axial systems, respectively (not significant). Compared to duodenal histology, PillCam correctly identified 80% of patients with SB atrophy, whereas CapsoCam identified 73% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Lateral/panoramic view CE is effective in the detection of small-bowel atrophy in CD and presents good sensitivity and specificity when compared to histology.