Extracolonic findings with the PillCam Colon: is panendoscopy with capsule endoscopy closer?

Background and study aims: Colon capsules display images from the moment they are ingested, making the study of other extracolonic areas possible. The aim of this study was to analyze the significance of these extracolonic findings.

Patients and methods: In this single-center, prospective study, 165 patients underwent colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) between September 2009 and October 2012 to rule out colonic pathology. Images were recorded, without interruptions, from the moment the capsule was ingested until its battery ran out. The study was deemed complete when the capsule had traveled from the esophagus to excretion or until the hemorrhoidal plexus was observed.

Results: CCE was used for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening (81.2 %), to investigate for chronic diarrhea (9.7 %) and chronic iron deficiency anemia (6.1 %), and for patients with incomplete colonoscopy (3.0 %). The capsule returned findings in the esophagus in 52.1 % of patients, in the stomach in 45.5 % of patients, and in the small bowel in 70.7 % of patients, with the findings being considered relevant in 4.9 %, 9.7 %, and 22.6 % of patients, respectively. The whole extent of the digestive tract was fully recorded in 86.1 % of patients and the Z line could be fully observed in 57.6 % of patients. There were no adverse events.

Conclusions: CCE allows the recording of images from almost the whole extent of the digestive tract in most patients, enabling relevant pathologies to be identified in extracolonic areas, particularly the small bowel. Technical and procedural improvements are still necessary in order to achieve better observation of the stomach and esophagus.

• References

• 1 Eliakim R, Fireman Z, Gralnek IM et al. Evaluation of the PillCam Colon capsule in the detection of colonic pathology: results of the first multicenter, prospective, comparative study. Endoscopy 2006; 38: 963-970
• 2 Schoofs N, Devière J, Van Gossum A. PillCam colon capsule endoscopy compared with colonoscopy for colorectal tumor diagnosis: a prospective pilot study. Endoscopy 2006; 38: 971-977
• 3 Van Gossum A, Munoz-Navas M, Fernandez-Urien I et al. Capsule endoscopy versus colonoscopy for the detection of polyps and cancer. NEJM 2009; 361: 264-270
• 4 Eliakim R, Yassin K, Niv Y et al. Prospective multicenter performance evaluation of the second-generation colon capsule compared with colonoscopy. Endoscopy 2009; 41: 1026-1031
• 5 Spada C, Hassan C, Munoz-Navas M et al. Second-generation colon capsule endoscopy compared with colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 74: 581-589
• 6 Spada C, Hassan C, Galmiche JP et al. Colon capsule endoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline. Endoscopy 2012; 44: 527-536
• 7 Sung J, Ho KY, Chiu HM et al. The use of Pillcam Colon in assessing mucosal inflammation in ulcerative colitis: a multicenter study. Endoscopy 2012; 44: 754-758
• 8 Ye CA, Gao YJ, Ge ZZ et al. PillCam COLON capsule endoscopy versus conventional colonoscopy for the detection of the severity and extent of ulcerative colitis. J Dig Dis 2012; 14: 117-124
• 9 Meister T, Heinzow HS, Domagk D et al. Colon capsule endoscopy versus standard colonoscopy in assessing disease activity of ulcerative colitis: a prospective trial. Tech Coloproctol 2013; 17: 641-646
• 10 Pioche M, de Leusse A, Filoche B et al. Prospective multicenter evaluation of colon capsule examination indicated by colonoscopy failure or anesthesia contraindication. Endoscopy 2012; 44: 911-916
• 11 Alarcón-Fernández O, Ramos-López L, de Ganzo ZA et al. Effects of colon capsule endoscopy on medical decision-making in patients with incomplete colonoscopies. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2012; 11: 534-540
• 12 Karagiannis S, Dücker C, Dautel P et al. Identification of the duodenal papilla by colon capsule endoscope. Z Gastroenterol 2010; 48: 753-755
• 13 Saurin JC, Delvaux M, Gaudin JL et al. Diagnostic value of endoscopic capsule in patients with obscure digestive bleeding: blinded comparison with video push-enteroscopy. Endoscopy 2003; 35: 576-784
• 14 Goldstein JL, Eisen GM, Lewis B et al. Video capsule endoscopy to prospectively assess small bowel injury with celecoxib, naproxen plus omeprazole, and placebo. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2005; 3: 133-141
• 15 Caunedo-Alvarez A, Gómez-Rodríguez BJ, Romero-Vázquez J et al. Macroscopic small bowel mucosal injury caused by chronic nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) use as assessed by capsule endoscopy. Rev Esp Enferm Dig 2010; 102: 80-85
• 16 Ramos L, Alarcón O, Adrian Z et al. One-day versus two-day cleansing for colon capsule endoscopy: a prospective randomized pilot study. Gastroenterol Hepatol 2014; 37: 101-106
• 17 Kakugawa Y, Saito Y, Saito S et al. New reduced volume preparation regimen in colon capsule endoscopy. World J Gastroenterol 2012; 18: 2092-2098
• 18 Hartmann D, Keuchel M, Philipper M et al. A pilot study evaluating a new low-volume colon cleansing procedure for capsule colonoscopy. Endoscopy 2012; 44: 482-486
• 19 Maunoury V, Savoye G, Bourreille A et al. Value of wireless capsule endoscopy in patients with indeterminate colitis (inflammatory bowel disease type unclassified). Inflamm Bowel Dis 2007; 13: 152-155
• 20 Mehdizadeh S, Chen G, Enayati PJ et al. Diagnostic yield of capsule endoscopy in ulcerative colitis and inflammatory bowel disease of unclassified type (IBDU). Endoscopy 2008; 40: 30-35
• 21 Gralnek IM, Rabinovitz R, Afik D et al. A simplified ingestion procedure for esophageal capsule endoscopy: initial evaluation in healthy volunteers. Endoscopy 2006; 38: 913-918
• 22 De Jonge PJ, Van Eijck BC, Geldof H et al. Capsule endoscopy for the detection of oesophageal mucosal disorders: a comparison of two different ingestion protocols. Scand J Gastroenterol 2008; 43: 870-877
• 23 Fernandez-Urien I, Borobio E, Elizalde I et al. Z-line examination by the PillCam SB: prospective comparison of three ingestion protocols. World J Gastroenterol 2010; 16: 63-68
• 24 Howden CW, Hornung CA. A systematic review of the association between Barrett’s esophagus and colon neoplasms. Am J Gastroenterol 1995; 90: 1814-1819
• 25 Ward EM, Wolfsen HC, Achem SR et al. Barrett’s esophagus is common in older men and women undergoing screening colonoscopy regardless of reflux symptoms. Am J Gastroenterol 2006; 101: 12-17
• 26 De Jonge PJ, van Blankenstein M, Looman CW et al. Risk of colorectal cancer in patients with Barrett’s esophagus: A Dutch population-based study. Am J Gastroenterol 2010; 105: 77-83
• 27 Bolino MC, Caro L, Cerisoli C. Barrett’s esophagus: is it a risk factor for colorectal cancer or an association between them does exist?. Am J Gastroenterol 2011; 106: 169
• 28 Swain P, Toor A, Volke F et al. Remote magnetic manipulation of a wireless capsule endoscope in the esophagus and stomach of humans (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 1290-1293
• 29 Keller J, Fibbe C, Volke F et al. Remote magnetic control of a wireless capsule endoscope in the esophagus is safe and feasible: results of a randomized, clinical trial in healthy volunteers. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 72: 941-946
• 30 Van Gossum A, Ibrahim M. Video capsule endoscopy: what is the future?. Gastroenterol Clin North Am 2010; 39: 807-826
• 31 Keller J, Fibbe C, Volke F et al. Inspection of the human stomach using remote-controlled capsule endoscopy: a feasibility study in healthy volunteers (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 22-28
• 32 Lien GS, Liu CW, Jiang JA et al. Magnetic control system targeted for capsule endoscopic operations in the stomach – design, fabrication, and in vitro and ex vivo evaluations. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2012; 59: 2068-2079
• 33 Keller J, Fibbe C, Rosien U et al. Recent advances in capsule endoscopy: development of maneuverable capsules. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2012; 6: 561-566