Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Multicenter Study
, 11 (2), 253-260

Diagnostic Yield and Clinical Impact of Video Capsule Endoscopy in Patients With Chronic Diarrhea: A Korean Multicenter CAPENTRY Study

Affiliations
Multicenter Study

Diagnostic Yield and Clinical Impact of Video Capsule Endoscopy in Patients With Chronic Diarrhea: A Korean Multicenter CAPENTRY Study

Hyun Joo Song et al. Gut Liver.

Abstract

Background/aims: In some cases, chronic diarrhea is unexplained, and small bowel disorders may be one of the causes. The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic yield and clinical impact of video capsule endoscopy (VCE) in patients with chronic diarrhea.

Methods: We retrospectively analyzed records from October 2002 to August 2013 in the VCE nationwide database registry (n=2,964). Ninety-one patients from 15 medical centers (60 males and 31 females; mean age, 47±19 years) were evaluated for VCE as a result of chronic diarrhea.

Results: The duration of chronic diarrhea was 8.3±14.7 months. The positive diagnostic yield of VCE was 42.9% (39/91). However, 15.4% (14/91) exhibited an inconsistent result, and 41.8% (38/91) were negative. Abnormal findings consistent with chronic diarrhea included erosions/aphthous ulcers (19.8%), ulcers (17.6%), mucosal erythema (3.3%), edema (1.1%), and luminal narrowing (1.1%). The most common diagnoses were functional diarrhea associated with irritable bowel syndrome in 37 patients (40.7%) and Crohn's disease in 18 patients (19.8%). After VCE examination, the diagnosis was changed in 34.1% of the patients (31/91). Hematochezia (odds ratio [OR], 8.802; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.126 to 36.441) and hypoalbuminemia (OR, 4.811; 95% CI, 1.241 to 18.655) are predictive factors of a positive diagnostic yield.

Conclusions: VCE had a favorable diagnostic yield and clinical impact on the management of patients with chronic diarrhea.

Keywords: Capsule endoscopy; Chronic; Diarrhea.

Conflict of interest statement

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow chart of chronic diarrhea according to the results.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Positive, inconsistent and negative video capsule endoscopy findings of chronic diarrhea (black bar, positive; gray bar, inconsistent; white bar, negative).
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Changes in diagnosis before and after video capsule endoscopy. NSAIDs, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; CD, Crohn’s disease; Tbc, tuberculosis.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Video capsule endoscopy (VCE) findings of a 68-year-old male who had chronic diarrhea for 9 months with a 4-kg weight loss. Pre-VCE examinations via upper endoscopy and colonoscopy were negative, including abdominopelvic computed tomography findings (A). However, VCE indicated multiple ulcers with a cobblestone appearance from the mid-jejunum to proximal ileum (B, C). This case demonstrated a VCE confirmation of chronic diarrhea as a result of Crohn’s disease.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 4 PubMed Central articles

References

    1. Juckett G, Trivedi R. Evaluation of chronic diarrhea. Am Fam Physician. 2011;84:1119–1126. - PubMed
    1. Murray JA, Rubio-Tapia A. Diarrhoea due to small bowel diseases. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2012;26:581–600. doi: 10.1016/j.bpg.2012.11.013. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Pennazio M, Spada C, Eliakim R, et al. Small-bowel capsule endoscopy and device-assisted enteroscopy for diagnosis and treatment of small-bowel disorders: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Clinical Guideline. Endoscopy. 2015;47:352–376. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1391855. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bardan E, Nadler M, Chowers Y, Fidder H, Bar-Meir S. Capsule endoscopy for the evaluation of patients with chronic abdominal pain. Endoscopy. 2003;35:688–689. doi: 10.1055/s-2003-41520. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Keuchel M, Hagenmüller F. Video capsule endoscopy in the work-up of abdominal pain. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2004;14:195–205. doi: 10.1016/j.giec.2003.10.015. - DOI - PubMed
Feedback