Darier's disease with esophageal involvement

Abstract

Objective. Nowadays, capsule endoscopy (CE) is the first-line procedure after negative upper and lower gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy for obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB). Approximately, two-thirds of patients undergoing CE for OGIB will have a small-bowel abnormality. However, several patients who underwent CE for OGIB had the source of their blood loss in the stomach or in the colon. The aim of the present study is to determine the incidence of bleeding lesions missed by the previous gastroscopy/colonoscopy with CE and to evaluate the indication to repeat a new complete endoscopic workup in subjects related to a tertiary center for obscure bleeding before CE. Methods and methods. We prospectively reviewed data from 637/1008 patients underwent to CE for obscure bleeding in our tertiary center after performing negative gastroscopy and colonoscopy. Results. CE revealed a definite or likely cause of bleeding in stomach in 138/637 patients (yield 21.7%) and in the colon in 41 patients (yield 6.4%) with a previous negative gastroscopy and colonoscopy, respectively. The lesions found were outside the small bowel in only 54/637 (8.5%) patients. In 111/138 patients, CE found lesions both in stomach and small bowel (small-bowel erosions in 54, AVMs in 45, active small-bowel bleeding in 4, neoplastic lesions in 3 and distal ileum AVMs in 5 patients). In 24/41 (58.5%) patients, CE found lesions both in small bowel and colon (multiple small-bowel erosions in 15; AVMs in 8 and neoplastic lesion in 1 patients. All patients underwent endoscopic therapy or surgery for their nonsmall-bowel lesions. Conclusions. Lesions in upper or lower GI tract have been missed in about 28% of patients submitted to CE for obscure bleeding. CE may play an important role in identifying lesions missed at conventional endoscopy.     

Do Clinical Characteristics Predict the Presence of Small Bowel Angioectasias on Capsule Endoscopy?

Background and Aims  

Angioectasias (AVMs) are the most common vascular anomaly of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract, and these lesions are often associated with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB). It is unknown if the presence of upper and/or lower gastrointestinal AVMs are predictive of small bowel AVMs. The aims of this study are to define the small bowel segmental distribution of AVMs and to identify the factors predicting the presence of small bowel AVMs among a cohort of patients with a known history of AVMs in the upper and/or lower GI tracts who are undergoing capsule endoscopy (CE) for OGIB.     

Double Balloon Enteroscopy Detects Small Bowel Mass Lesions Missed by Capsule Endoscopy

BACKGROUND: Small bowel mass lesions (SBML) are a relatively common cause of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB). Their detection has been limited by the inability to endoscopically examine the entire small intestine. This has changed with the introduction of capsule endoscopy (CE) and double balloon enteroscopy (DBE) into clinical practice. STUDY AIM: To evaluate the detection of SBML by DBE and CE in patients with OGIB who were found to have SBML by DBE and underwent both procedures. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospectively collected database of all patients undergoing DBE for OGIB at seven North American tertiary centers was performed. Those patients who were found to have SBML as a cause of their OGIB were further analyzed. RESULTS: During an 18 month period, 183 patients underwent DBE for OGIB. A small bowel mass lesion was identified in 18 patients. Of these, 15 patients had prior CE. Capsule endoscopy identified the mass lesion in five patients; fresh luminal blood with no underlying lesion in seven patients, and non-specific erythema in three patients. Capsule endoscopy failed to identify all four cases of primary small bowel adenocarcinoma. CONCLUSIONS: Double balloon enteroscopy detects small bowel mass lesions responsible for OGIB that are missed by CE. Additional endoscopic evaluation of the small bowel by DBE or intraoperative enteroscopy should be performed in patients with ongoing OGIB and negative or non-specific findings on CE.     

Wireless capsule endoscopy for obscure gastrointestinal bleeding: a single-centre, one-year experience.

BACKGROUND: Wireless capsule endoscopy (CE) is increasingly being used in the investigation of obscure gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, but some studies have found that many of the bleeding lesions recognized by this technique are within the reach of conventional endoscopy. METHODS: The results of CE performed in the authors' centre in a 12 month period for obscure GI bleeding were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: Of the 46 patients with obscure GI bleeding, CE found a definite or probable cause in 19 (41%) and a possible cause in another 10 (22%), with an overall diagnostic yield of 63%. One of these lesions was found to be within reach of conventional gastroscopy, two were within reach of push enteroscopy, four were within reach of colonoscopy and one was within reach of retrograde enteroscopy through a stoma. The percentage of patients with a bleeding source within reach of routine endoscopy but missed during pre-CE endoscopy was significantly higher for those patients having endoscopy only in the community (30% [eight of 27]) versus in the authors' centre (0% [zero of 19]). CONCLUSIONS: CE was valuable for diagnosing bleeding lesions not only within the small bowel, but also in the stomach and colon. However, "second-look" endoscopy may be considered before ordering CE for obscure GI bleeding when local expertise is available.     

Push and Sonde Enteroscopy for the Diagnosis of Obsccre Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Objective: The combination of push and sonde enteroseopy permits endoscopic evaluation to extend the distal small bowel. Our objective was to determine the yields of both push and sonde enteroscopy in patients with obscure GI bleeding. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 553 small bowel examinations performed with an orally passed 135-cm pediatric colonoscope in combination with a 2750-cm per nasal sonde enteroscope to investigate the small bowel for sources of gastrointestinal bleeding of obscure origin. Results: The examination reached the distal Jejunum or beyond in over 90% of patients undergoing both push and sonde enteroscopy. The yield of these combined studies was 58% for identifying a possible source of gastrointestinal blood loss. In 40% of the examinations, the abnormality was found distal to tbe limits of routine upper gastrointestinal en-doscopy. In 26% of all examinations, the lesion was detectable only by sonde enteroscopy. The most common small bowel findings were mucosal vascular lesions (31% of all exams) and tumors (6%). No major endoscopic complications occurred, and patients tolerated the procedures well. Conclusions: The combination of push and sonde enteroscopy is a valuable tool in the evaluation of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding and may provide useful information necessary to formulate treatment plans aimed at cessation of bleeding.     

Diagnostic value of push-type enteroscopy: a report from India

OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the diagnostic value of push-type enteroscopy in relation to indications. METHODS: Ninety-nine consecutive patients (mean age, 42+/-15 yr; 65 men) with suspected small bowel disorders underwent push enteroscopy. The indications were chronic diarrhea (n = 54), obscure gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding (n = 21), abdominal pain (n = 10), abnormal radiological studies of small bowel (n = 5), iron deficiency anemia (n = 5), and others (n = 4). Push enteroscopy was performed using the Olympus SIF-10 (160-cm) enteroscope. RESULTS: Endoscopic examination of the jejunum was successful in all the patients, except one with a distal duodenal stricture. The length of the jejunum examined ranged from 10 to 70 cm. The time taken to complete the procedure varied from 2 to 30 min. Lesions were found in nine (42.8%) patients with obscure GI bleeding; six (28.5%) had worms (Ascaris lumbricoides [n = 3], Ankylostoma duodenale [n = 3]) in the jejunum, producing multiple erosions and bleeding points. In the chronic diarrhea group, a diagnosis was made in 13 (24%) patients on enteroscopic visualization and jejunal histology: celiac disease (n = 6), tropical sprue (n = 3), Crohn's disease (n = 1), secondary lymphangiectasia (n = 1), strongyloidiasis (n = 1), and nodular lymphoid hyperplasia with giardiasis (n = 1). In patients with abdominal pain, enteroscopy provided a diagnosis in one (10%) patient. No positive diagnosis could be made on enteroscopy in patients with iron deficiency anemia and abnormal radiological studies of small bowel. CONCLUSION: Push-type enteroscopy is a useful test in the evaluation of patients with obscure GI bleeding and chronic diarrhea. In developing countries, in patients with obscure GI bleeding, the presence of worms in the jejunum is an important finding on enteroscopy. Tropical sprue, giardiasis, and strongyloidiasis are distinct findings in patients with chronic diarrhea in the present series.     

The role of video capsule endoscopy for evaluating obscure gastrointestinal bleeding: usefulness of early use

Background We report our preliminary experience with the use of video capsule endoscopy (VCE) in 64 patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB) and suspected small intestine disease.Methods To be eligible for VCE, patients had to have undergone upper endoscopy, small bowel series, and colonscopy without discovering any source of bleeding. To find the best timing to perform VCE, the patients were retrospectively divided in two groups of 32 cases each: group 1 with patients who had been submitted to VCE within 15 days from OGIB diagnosis, and group 2 with patients who had been submitted to VCE at least 15 days after OGIB diagnosis.Results Lesions were found by VCE in 29 (91%) in group 1: angioectasia-like lesions of the small bowel in 12, some erosions of the ileum without signs of bleeding in 14, a polyp with erosions in 1, and a bleeding site where the surgery showed a tumor of the ileum in 2 patients. In 2 cases, VCE missed showing two small tumors that were revealed by laparoscopy in 1 case and by push enteroscopy in the other. In group 2, lesions were found by VCE in 11 (34%): angioectasia-like lesions of the small bowel in 6, some erosions in 3, a short segmental stenosis in 1, and two polyps in 1. In 1 case, VCE missed showing a small polyp in the jejunum that was revealed by push enteroscopy. In none of these cases was a bleeding site identified. VCE was well tolerated and able to acquire good images in patients with OGIB. It showed lesions in 91% of the patients in group 1 and 34% of cases in group 2.Conclusions Our data suggest that the optimal timing to perform VCE is within a few days after the occurrence of bleeding, possibly within 2 weeks.     

Capsule endoscopy： Current status in obscure gastrointestinal bleeding

Capsule endoscopy (CE) is a safe, non invasive diagnostic modality for the evaluation of small bowel lesions. Obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB) is one of the most important indications of capsule endoscopy. Capsule endoscopy has a very high diagnostic yield especially if the bleeding is ongoing. This technique appears to be superior to other techniques for the detection of suspected lesions and the source of bleeding. Capsule endoscopy has been shown to change the outcome in patients with obscure gastrointestinal (GI) bleed.     

Small bowel bleeding

Opinion statement The management of patients with small bowel bleeding remains a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge. In most gastrointestinal bleeding episodes, the source of hemorrhage is localized to either the upper gastrointestinal tract or colon; however, in about 5% of cases, upper endoscopy and colonoscopy are nondiagnostic, and the small intestine is the site of bleeding. Patients with suspected small bowel source of bleeding may present with either occult blood loss or recurrent overt gastrointestinal hemorrhage requiring frequent blood transfusions and hospitalizations. Knowing the etiology and site of hemorrhage is essential prior to initiating appropriate therapy. The most common causes of small bowel bleeding are vascular ectasia, tumors, ulcerative diseases, and Meckel’s diverticula. For patients with severe obscure bleeding, push enteroscopy with a 220- to 250-cm enteroscope is strongly recommended. This procedure provides not only a thorough examination for diagnosis, but also allows for biopsy, tattooing, and hemostasis of lesions. If enteroscopy is nondiagnostic, capsule endoscopy is recommended. A diagnostic capsule endoscopy will direct appropriate medical, endoscopic, or surgical intervention, depending on whether the lesion is single or multiple, and whether the patient is a surgical candidate for intraoperative enteroscopy. Intraoperative enteroscopy should be strongly considered in patients with recurrent bleeding and a nondiagnostic evaluation. Laparoscopy and intraoperative enteroscopy is highly recommended in young patients (< 50 years of age) because there is an increased frequency of small bowel tumors and Meckel’s diverticulum which are amenable to surgical therapy.     

Management of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding: Comparison of guidelines between Japan and other countries

Small-bowel bleeding accounts for the majority of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding, but it is caused by various types of small bowel disease, upper gastrointestinal disease, and colorectal disease. For the diagnosis, history taking and physical examination are required, leading to a determination of what diseases are involved. Next, cross-sectional imaging, such as computed tomography, should be carried out, followed by the latest enteroscopy such as small bowel capsule endoscopy and deep enteroscopy according to the severity of hemorrhage and patient condition. After a comprehensive diagnosis, medical, enteroscopic, or surgical treatment should be selected. This article reviews recent advances in the endoscopic diagnosis of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding and compares perspectives of the management of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding in Japan with that in other countries.     

Double-balloon enteroscopy in patients with GI bleeding of obscure origin

BACKGROUND: Small-bowel bleeding is difficult to treat and diagnose. The recent introduction of wireless capsule endoscopy permits examination of the entire small intestine, but this method lacks tissue sampling and therapeutic capabilities. Recently, Yamamoto et al established a double-balloon insertion method for enteroscopy that allows examination of the entire small bowel and interventional options. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate double-balloon enteroscopy in patients with obscure GI bleeding. SETTING: Single-center prospective study. PATIENTS: Thirty-one consecutive patients with obscure GI bleeding (13 females, 18 males; mean age 56.4 +/- 3.2 years). Criteria for inclusion in the study were documented iron deficiency anemia (hemoglobin level <10 g/dL or a decrease of >2 g/dL over > or =2 months); upper endoscopy not revealing a site/cause of blood loss; and similarly uninformative lower endoscopy including examination of the terminal ileum. INTERVENTIONS: Endoscopic biopsy or therapy was performed as clinically indicated. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Diagnostic yield for patients with obscure GI bleeding and patient follow-up. RESULTS: Double-balloon enteroscopy was completed without complications in all patients. Bleeding points were identified in 23 patients (74.2%). In 21 (91.3%) of these 23 patients the cause of blood loss was identified and treated with no further bleeding at 8.5 +/- 0.6 months of follow-up. LIMITATIONS: Small number of patients. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that double-balloon enteroscopy is useful for evaluation and treatment of patients with GI bleeding of obscure origin.     

A meta-analysis of the yield of capsule endoscopy compared to other diagnostic modalities in patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding

OBJECTIVES: Due to its superior ability to examine the entire small bowel mucosa, capsule endoscopy (CE) has broadened the diagnostic evaluation of patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB). Published studies have revealed a numerically superior performance of CE in determining a source of OGIB compared with other modalities, but due to small sample sizes, the overall magnitude of benefit is unknown. Additionally, the types of lesions more likely to be found by CE versus alternate modalities are also unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the yield of small bowel findings with CE in patients with OGIB compared to other modalities using meta-analysis. METHODS: We performed a recursive literature search of prospective studies comparing the yield of CE to other modalities in patients with OGIB. Data on yield and types of lesions identified among various modalities were extracted, pooled, and analyzed. Incremental yield (IY) (yield of CE-yield of comparative modality) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) of CE over comparative modalities were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 14 studies (n = 396) compared the yield of CE with push enteroscopy for OGIB. The yield for CE and push enteroscopy was 63% and 28%, respectively (IY = 35%, p < 0.00001, 95% CI = 26-43%) and for clinically significant findings (n = 376) was 56% and 26%, respectively (IY = 30%, p < 0.00001, 95% CI = 21-38%). Three studies (n = 88) compared the yield of CE to small bowel barium radiography. The yield for CE and small bowel barium radiography for any finding was 67% and 8%, respectively (IY = 59%, p < 0.00001, 95% CI = 48-70%) and for clinically significant findings was 42% and 6%, respectively (IY = 36%, p < 0.00001, 95% CI = 25-48%). Number needed to test (NNT) to yield one additional clinically significant finding with CE over either modality was 3 (95% CI = 2-4). One study each compared the yield of significant findings on CE to intraoperative enteroscopy (n = 42, IY = 0%, p= 1.0, 95% CI =-16% to 16%), computed tomography enteroclysis (n = 8, IY = 38%, p= 0.08, 95% CI =-4% to 79%), mesenteric angiogram (n = 17, IY =-6%, p= 0.73, 95% CI =-39% to 28%), and small bowel magnetic resonance imaging (n = 14, IY = 36%, p= 0.007, 95% CI = 10-62%). Ten of the 14 trials comparing CE with push enteroscopy classified the types of lesions found on examination. CE had a 36% yield for vascular lesions versus 20% for push enteroscopy, with an IY of 16% (p < 0.00001, 95% CI = 9-23%). Inflammatory lesions were also found more often in CE (11%) than in push enteroscopy (2%), with an IY of 9% (p= 0.0001, 95% CI = 5-13%). There was no significant difference in the yield of tumors or "other" findings between CE and push enteroscopy. CONCLUSIONS: CE is superior to push enteroscopy and small bowel barium radiography for diagnosing clinically significant small bowel pathology in patients with OGIB. In study populations, the IY of CE over push enteroscopy and small bowel barium radiography for clinically significant findings is >or=30% with an NNT of 3, primarily due to visualization of additional vascular and inflammatory lesions by CE.     

Preoperative detection and localization of small bowel hemangioma: Two case reports

Among the various diagnostic modalities for small bowel hemangioma,video capsule endoscopy(VCE)and double-balloon enteroscopy( BE)can be recommended as part of the work-up in patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding(OGIB). BE is superior to VCE in the accuracy of diagnosis and therapeutic potential,while in most cases total enteroscopy cannot be achieved through only the antegrade or retrograde BE procedures.As treatment for small bowel bleeding,especially spout bleeding,localization of the lesion for the decision of BE insertion facilitates early treatment,such as endoscopic hemostatic clipping,allowing patients to avoid useless transfusion and the worsening of their disease into life-threatening status.Applying endoscopic India ink marking prior to laparoscopic surgical resection is a particularly useful technique for more minimally invasive treatment.We report two cases of small bowel hemangioma found in examinations for OGIB that were treated with combination of laparoscopic and endoscopic modalities.     

Long-Term Outcomes After Single-Balloon Enteroscopy in Patients with Obscure Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Background

Limited data exists on the long-term outcomes of patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB) following single-balloon enteroscopy (SBE).

Aim

To examine the long-term outcomes of patients undergoing SBE for OGIB.

Methods

Consecutive patients undergoing SBE for OGIB at a tertiary care center between 2008 and 2010 were retrospectively identified. Clinical data and SBE findings were extracted from the medical record. Recurrence of OGIB during follow-up through 2012 was assessed by a combination of chart review and telephone interviews.

Results

One hundred and forty-seven patients were included in the study. The overall diagnostic yield of SBE was 64.6 % (95/147 patients). Findings of SBE included vascular lesions (VLs, 53.7 %), small bowel neoplasm (2.7 %), inflammatory lesions (4.8 %), and normal SBE (35.4 %). One hundred and ten patients (56.4 % female, mean age 70.6 ± 11.3 years) were followed for an average 23.9 months after initial SBE. During follow-up, OGIB recurred in 39.5 % of patients in whom a source of OGIB was identified on SBE and 55.9 % of patients with normal findings on SBE. OGIB recurred in 47.6 % of patients in whom small bowel VLs were treated endoscopically. None of the 13 patients in whom a non-VL lesion was identified as the source of bleeding on SBE experienced recurrent bleeding (p = 0.019).

Conclusions

SBE is a safe and valuable method for managing patients with OGIB. More than 50 % of patients experienced no recurrent bleeding during 2 years of follow-up after SBE. The long-term management of OGIB due to small bowel VLs remains challenging.     

Investigation of the small bowel in gastrointestinal bleeding--enteroscopy and capsule endoscopy

The last frontier in luminal endoscopy has been conquered. Bleeding lesions in the small intestine can present a frustrating clinical problem, but recent advances have made investigating the small bowel easier and less invasive. Capsule endoscopy and double balloon enteroscopy are two new technologies that promise to lower the barrier to evaluation of the entire small intestine. Recent studies show that capsule endoscopy improves outcomes in patients who have OGIB. Although outcome studies regarding double balloon enteroscopy have not been performed, the opportunity to treat lesions throughout the small bowel without resorting to surgery is a tremendous advance. These improvements suggest that the corner may have been turned in the diagnosis and management of small bowel bleeding. Perhaps to the next generation of gastroenterologists, small bowel bleeding will not be obscure.     

Small bowel tumours: yield of enteroscopy.

A total of 258 patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding were referred for small bowel enteroscopy, a procedure which allows endoscopic evaluation of most of the small intestine. A small bowel tumour was found in 5% of patients. In 50% of patients no diagnosis could be made, but when the cause of obscure bleeding was discovered small bowel tumours were the single most common lesion in patients younger than 50 years. Small bowel tumours causing gastrointestinal bleeding may remain undetected despite extensive diagnostic evaluation. We conclude that small bowel tumours are the most common cause of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding in patients less than 50 years of age. Small bowel enteroscopy is diagnostic of small bowel tumours even when all previous diagnostic studies, including enteroclysis and angiography, are negative.     

Intraoperative enteroscopy in the management of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding

Obscure gastrointestinal bleeding has long been a diagnostic challenge because of the relative inaccessibility of small bowel to standard endoscopic evaluation. Intraoperative enteroscopy indications have been reduced by the development of deep enteroscopy techniques and video capsule endoscopy. In light of the current advances, this review aimed at evaluating the intraoperative enteroscopy technical aspects, study results and an ongoing role for intraoperative enteroscopy in obscure gastrointestinal bleeding management. Intraoperative enteroscopy allows complete small bowel exploration in 57–100% of cases. A bleeding source can be identified in 80% of cases. Main causes are vascular lesions (61%) and benign ulcers (19%). When a lesion is found, intraoperative enteroscopy allows successful and recurrence-free management of gastrointestinal bleeding in 76% of cases. The reported mortality is 5% and morbidity is 17%. The recurrence of bleeding is observed in 13–52% of cases. With the recent development of deep enteroscopy techniques, intraoperative enteroscopy remains indicated when small bowel lesions (i) have been identified by a preoperative work-up, (ii) cannot be definitively managed by angiographic embolization, endoscopic treatment or when surgery is required and (iii) cannot be localized by external examination during surgical explorations. Surgeons and endoscopists must exercise caution with intraoperative enteroscopy to avoid the use of a low yield, highly morbid procedure.     

Total peroral intraoperative enteroscopy for obscure GI bleeding using a dedicated push enteroscope: diagnostic yield and patient outcome.

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative enteroscopy is an effective diagnostic and therapeutic method in selected patients with obscure gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. The passage of a colonoscope orally and then rectally or the use of multiple enterotomies, has been used to completely inspect the small bowel. However, the development of dedicated enteroscopes allows complete inspection using the peroral route. AIM: The aim of the study was to assess the diagnostic yield, patient outcome, and success in reaching the terminal ileum using a video enteroscope passed orally during intraoperative enteroscopy. METHODS: The hospital charts of 12 patients who underwent intraoperative enteroscopy for GI bleeding of obscure origin and 2 patients with a known source (angioectasias) who underwent evaluation to determine extent were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: The terminal ileum was reached in 13 of 14 patients (jejunal stricture in 1 patient). Of the patients with bleeding of obscure origin (n = 12) a source was identified in 7 (angioectasias 4, lymphoma 1, carcinoid 1, nevuslike lesion 1). Surgical therapy was performed in these 7 patients and resulted in no further bleeding in 5. Bleeding recurred in 4 of the 5 patients who had no source identified during intraoperative enteroscopy. Of the 2 patients undergoing intraoperative enteroscopy to evaluate extent of angioectasias, additional angioectasias were found in 1 patient; both patients underwent surgical resection, and 1 patient had recurrent bleeding. Complications included serosal tears, 3 (2 requiring resection); avulsion of superior mesenteric vein, 1; postoperative congestive heart failure, 2; azotemia, 1; and prolonged ileus, 1. There were no deaths. CONCLUSIONS: The terminal ileum was reached 93% of the time with intraoperative enteroscopy. For patients with GI bleeding of obscure origin the diagnostic yield of intraoperative enteroscopy was 58%. Major operative morbidity occurred in 4 patients.     

A prospective two-center study comparing wireless capsule endoscopy with intraoperative enteroscopy in patients with obscure GI bleeding

BACKGROUND: Capsule endoscopy enables noninvasive diagnostic examination of the entire small intestine. However, sensitivity and specificity of capsule endoscopy have not been adequately defined. We, therefore, compared capsule endoscopy by using intraoperative enteroscopy as a criterion standard in patients with obscure GI bleeding. METHODS: Forty-seven consecutive patients with obscure GI bleeding (11 with ongoing overt bleeding, 24 with previous overt bleeding, and 12 with obscure-occult bleeding) from two German gastroenterologic centers were included. All patients who had a prior nondiagnostic evaluation, including upper endoscopy, colonoscopy with a retrograde examination of the distal ileum, and push enteroscopy, underwent capsule endoscopy followed by intraoperative enteroscopy. RESULTS: Capsule endoscopy identified lesions in 100% of the patients with ongoing overt bleeding, 67% of the patients with previous overt bleeding, and 67% of the patients with obscure-occult bleeding. Angiectasias were the most common source of bleeding (n = 22). Capsule endoscopy showed the source of bleeding in 74.4% of all patients. The method was more effective in patients with ongoing bleeding. Compared with intraoperative enteroscopy sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of capsule endoscopy were 95%, 75%, 95%, and 86%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Capsule endoscopy has high sensitivity and specificity to detect a bleeding source in patients with obscure GI bleeding. Thus, wireless capsule endoscopy can be recommended as part of the routine work-up in patients with obscure GI bleeding.     

Obscure gastrointestinal bleeding: role of videocapsule and double-balloon enteroscopy

Capsule endoscopy (CE), which allows the non-invasive visualisation of mucosa throughout the entire small bowel, has revolutionised the exploration of small-bowel diseases, and particularly the evaluation of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB) after a negative initial evaluation, including gastroscopy and colonoscopy. CE has a high negative predictive value and a higher diagnostic yield than all other modalities, such as radiology (small-bowel X-rays or computed tomography scan) or push enteroscopy. CE may be the preferred initial diagnostic choice in OGIB because of its non-invasive quality and better tolerance. Double-balloon enteroscopy, also known as push-and-pull enteroscopy, has recently been developed. It has made it possible not only to explore the small bowel but also to carry out therapeutic interventions deep in the small bowel without the need for surgical laparotomy. This exploration should be considered as a second-line exploration for OGIB in patients with a positive finding on CE requiring endoscopic follow-up for histology or intervention, and in patients in whom suspicion of a small-bowel lesion is high despite a negative CE.