Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Sep;48(5):399-404.
doi: 10.5946/ce.2015.48.5.399. Epub 2015 Sep 30.

Indications for Detection, Completion, and Retention Rates of Small Bowel Capsule Endoscopy Based on the 10-Year Data From the Korean Capsule Endoscopy Registry

Affiliations
Free PMC article

Indications for Detection, Completion, and Retention Rates of Small Bowel Capsule Endoscopy Based on the 10-Year Data From the Korean Capsule Endoscopy Registry

Yun Jeong Lim et al. Clin Endosc. .
Free PMC article

Abstract

Background/aims: Capsule endoscopy (CE) is widely used. However, CE has limitations including incomplete examination, inadequate bowel preparation, and retention. The aim of this study was to estimate the indications for and detection, completion, and retention rates of small intestine CE based on the 10-year data from the Korean Capsule Endoscopy Registry.

Methods: Twenty-four hospitals participated in this study. Clinical information, such as reasons for CE, method and quality of bowel preparation, and incomplete examination and capsule retention rates, was collected and analyzed.

Results: A total of 2,914 CEs were registered. The most common reason for CE was obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (59%). Significant lesions were detected in 66% of cases. Positive CE diagnosis occurred in 63% of cases. The preparation method did not significantly affect the quality of bowel preparation for CE. The overall incomplete rate was 33%, and was high in the elderly and those with poor bowel preparation. Capsule retention was 3% and high in patients with small bowel tumors and Crohn's disease and in children under 10 years of age.

Conclusions: CE is a valuable technique; while the overall detection rate is high, incompletion and retention rates are also relatively high. CE should be carefully considered in the elderly and children less than 10 years of age, as well as in patients with small bowel tumors and Crohn's disease.

Keywords: Capsule endoscopy; Completion; Intestine, small; Preparation; Retention.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no financial conflicts of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1. Quality of bowel preparation for capsule endoscopy. (A) Excellent, visualization of ≥90% of the mucosa, no or minimal fluid, debris, and bubbles. (B) Good, visualization of ≥90% of the mucosa, mild fluid, debris, and bubbles. (C) Fair, visualization of <90% of the mucosa, moderate fluid, debris, and bubbles. (D) Poor, visualization of <80% of the mucosa, excessive fluid, debris, and bubbles.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 10 articles

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Gut Image Study Group. Lim YJ, Moon JS, et al. Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (KSGE) guidelines for credentialing and granting previleges for capsule endoscopy. Korean J Gastrointest Endosc. 2008;37:393–402.
    1. Shim KN, Moon JS, Chang DK, et al. Guideline for capsule endoscopy: obscure gastrointestinal bleeding. Clin Endosc. 2013;46:45–53. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ell C, Remke S, May A, Helou L, Henrich R, Mayer G. The first prospective controlled trial comparing wireless capsule endoscopy with push enteroscopy in chronic gastrointestinal bleeding. Endoscopy. 2002;34:685–689. - PubMed
    1. Höög CM, Bark LÅ, Arkani J, Gorsetman J, Broström O, Sjöqvist U. Capsule retentions and incomplete capsule endoscopy examinations: an analysis of 2300 examinations. Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2012;2012:518718. - PMC - PubMed
    1. van Tuyl SA, den Ouden H, Stolk MF, Kuipers EJ. Optimal preparation for video capsule endoscopy: a prospective, randomized, single-blind study. Endoscopy. 2007;39:1037–1040. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources

Feedback