Aims:
Capsule endoscopy (CE) is considered the gold standard for the diagnosis of small
bowel bleeding (SBB). The CE Pillcam SB3 has a diagnostic yield above 80% for SBB.
CE OMOM offers an adequate diagnostic yield with a lower price.
The objective of this study is to compare the diagnostic yield of the Pillcam SB3
and OMOM CE in SBB.
Methods:
This is a prospective, comparative, observational, randomized and blinded study. Patients
with suspected SBB were included. All the patients were given randomly both CE (OMOM
Smart Capsule 2 and Pillcam SB3) with a difference of 24 hours between them and were
read by two endoscopists. Saurin's classification was used to divide the findings
into P2, P1 and P0. The diagnostic yield and functionality between the two CEs were
analyzed.
Results:
We included 20 patients with SBB, 45% female and 65.5 years old. Small bowel complete
visualization was achieved in 18 SB3 and in 19 OMOM (p = 0.548). The median intestinal
transit time was 355 with SB3 and 240 with OMOM (p = 0.445). The battery time was
significantly longer with SB3 (821 vs. 703 minutes, p < 0.001) and the download time
was shorter with the OMOM (31 vs. 117 minutes, p < 0.001). Both CEs presented a failure.
The cause of the bleeding was identified in 18 SB3 (90%) and 16 OMOM CE (80%) (p =
0.331). P2 lesions were observed in 12 SB3 (60%) and 11 OMOM (p = 0.749). P1 lesions
were identified in 3 patients with both capsules and extraintestinal lesions were
found in 3 patients with SB3 and in 2 with OMOM (p = 0.633).
Conclusions:
No significant differences were found between the two CEs for the identification of
the P2 lesions. Significant differences were observed in the battery life and the
download time of both ECs.
