Diagnostic yield of video capsule endoscopy vs simple balloon enteroscopy in small intestinal disorders: A systematic review.

IF 1.4 Q4 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Eyad Gadour, Bogdan Miutescu, Hussein Hassan Okasha, Ana Maria Ghiuchici, Mohammed S AlQahtani
{"title":"Diagnostic yield of video capsule endoscopy <i>vs</i> simple balloon enteroscopy in small intestinal disorders: A systematic review.","authors":"Eyad Gadour, Bogdan Miutescu, Hussein Hassan Okasha, Ana Maria Ghiuchici, Mohammed S AlQahtani","doi":"10.4253/wjge.v17.i7.108264","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Small-bowel disorders, including obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB), Crohn's disease, and tumors, require accurate diagnostic approaches for effective treatment. Video capsule endoscopy (VCE) and simple balloon enteroscopy (SBE) are widely used; however, each modality has limitations, particularly regarding therapeutic intervention and diagnostic yield.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To evaluate diagnostic yields of various modalities for small bowel bleeding, analyze factors affecting heterogeneity, and improve understanding of clinical outcomes associated with different diagnostic approaches.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive search of four databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus) revealed over 600 citations related to the use of capsule endoscopy and balloon enteroscopy for diagnosing small intestine disorders with wall thickening. Based on predetermined eligibility criteria, seven moderate-to-high-quality retrospective studies were analyzed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of VCE and SBE in patients with small bowel disorders. Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies was applied to evaluate the risk of bias and overall methodological quality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Analysis of seven moderate-to-high-quality retrospective studies revealed comparable overall detection rates for small bowel lesions between VCE and SBE. VCE demonstrated superior performance in detecting vascular lesions. Conversely, SBE exhibited a higher efficacy in detecting ulcerative lesions. The overall diagnostic yield varied across studies, with VCE showing a range of 32%-83% for small bowel bleeding, whereas SBE demonstrated a higher overall detection rate of 69.7% compared to 57.6% for VCE (<i>P</i> < 0.05). Notably, SBE showed superior performance in diagnosing Crohn's disease, with a detection rate of 35%, compared to 11.3% for VCE (<i>P</i> < 0.001). The diagnostic concordance between VCE and SBE was influenced by the lesion type. Strong agreement was observed for inflammatory lesions (κ = 0.82, 95%CI: 0.75-0.89), whereas moderate agreement was noted for tumors (κ = 0.61, 95%CI: 0.52-0.70) and angiectasias (κ = 0.58, 95%CI: 0.49-0.67). SBE demonstrated significant advantages in therapeutic interventions, particularly in overt bleeding. Patient tolerability was generally higher for VCE, with a completion rate of 95% (95%CI: 92%-98%), compared to 85% for SBE (95%CI: 80%-90%). However, the capsule retention rate for VCE was 1.4% (95%CI: 0.8%-2.0%), necessitating subsequent intervention.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>VCE and SBE are complementary techniques for evaluating small intestinal disorders. Although VCE remains the initial test of choice for patients with stable OGIB, SBE should be considered in patients requiring therapeutic intervention. Thus, combining both modalities enhances diagnostic accuracy and patient management.</p>","PeriodicalId":23953,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy","volume":"17 7","pages":"108264"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12264748/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4253/wjge.v17.i7.108264","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Small-bowel disorders, including obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB), Crohn's disease, and tumors, require accurate diagnostic approaches for effective treatment. Video capsule endoscopy (VCE) and simple balloon enteroscopy (SBE) are widely used; however, each modality has limitations, particularly regarding therapeutic intervention and diagnostic yield.

Aim: To evaluate diagnostic yields of various modalities for small bowel bleeding, analyze factors affecting heterogeneity, and improve understanding of clinical outcomes associated with different diagnostic approaches.

Methods: A comprehensive search of four databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus) revealed over 600 citations related to the use of capsule endoscopy and balloon enteroscopy for diagnosing small intestine disorders with wall thickening. Based on predetermined eligibility criteria, seven moderate-to-high-quality retrospective studies were analyzed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of VCE and SBE in patients with small bowel disorders. Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies was applied to evaluate the risk of bias and overall methodological quality.

Results: Analysis of seven moderate-to-high-quality retrospective studies revealed comparable overall detection rates for small bowel lesions between VCE and SBE. VCE demonstrated superior performance in detecting vascular lesions. Conversely, SBE exhibited a higher efficacy in detecting ulcerative lesions. The overall diagnostic yield varied across studies, with VCE showing a range of 32%-83% for small bowel bleeding, whereas SBE demonstrated a higher overall detection rate of 69.7% compared to 57.6% for VCE (P < 0.05). Notably, SBE showed superior performance in diagnosing Crohn's disease, with a detection rate of 35%, compared to 11.3% for VCE (P < 0.001). The diagnostic concordance between VCE and SBE was influenced by the lesion type. Strong agreement was observed for inflammatory lesions (κ = 0.82, 95%CI: 0.75-0.89), whereas moderate agreement was noted for tumors (κ = 0.61, 95%CI: 0.52-0.70) and angiectasias (κ = 0.58, 95%CI: 0.49-0.67). SBE demonstrated significant advantages in therapeutic interventions, particularly in overt bleeding. Patient tolerability was generally higher for VCE, with a completion rate of 95% (95%CI: 92%-98%), compared to 85% for SBE (95%CI: 80%-90%). However, the capsule retention rate for VCE was 1.4% (95%CI: 0.8%-2.0%), necessitating subsequent intervention.

Conclusion: VCE and SBE are complementary techniques for evaluating small intestinal disorders. Although VCE remains the initial test of choice for patients with stable OGIB, SBE should be considered in patients requiring therapeutic intervention. Thus, combining both modalities enhances diagnostic accuracy and patient management.

视频胶囊内窥镜与简单球囊肠镜对小肠疾病的诊断效果:系统综述。
背景:小肠疾病,包括隐蔽性消化道出血(OGIB)、克罗恩病和肿瘤,需要准确的诊断方法才能有效治疗。视频胶囊内窥镜(VCE)和简单气囊内窥镜(SBE)应用广泛;然而,每种模式都有局限性,特别是在治疗干预和诊断率方面。目的:评价小肠出血的各种诊断方法的诊断率,分析影响异质性的因素,提高对不同诊断方法相关临床结果的认识。方法:综合检索PubMed、Embase、Cochrane Library和Scopus四个数据库,发现600多篇与胶囊内窥镜和球囊内窥镜诊断小肠壁增厚相关的文献。基于预先确定的资格标准,分析了7项中等至高质量的回顾性研究,以评估VCE和SBE在小肠疾病患者中的诊断性能。应用诊断准确性研究的质量评估来评估偏倚风险和总体方法学质量。结果:对7项中等至高质量回顾性研究的分析显示,VCE和SBE对小肠病变的总体检出率相当。VCE在检测血管病变方面表现优异。相反,SBE在检测溃疡性病变方面表现出更高的功效。各研究的总体诊断率各不相同,VCE对小肠出血的检出率为32%-83%,而SBE的总体检出率为69.7%,而VCE的检出率为57.6% (P < 0.05)。值得注意的是,SBE在诊断克罗恩病方面表现优异,检出率为35%,而VCE的检出率为11.3% (P < 0.001)。VCE与SBE的诊断一致性受病变类型的影响。炎症性病变(κ = 0.82, 95%CI: 0.75-0.89)的一致性很强,而肿瘤(κ = 0.61, 95%CI: 0.52-0.70)和血管扩张(κ = 0.58, 95%CI: 0.49-0.67)的一致性中等。SBE在治疗干预中表现出显著的优势,特别是在明显出血方面。VCE的患者耐受性一般较高,完成率为95% (95% ci: 92%-98%),而SBE的完成率为85% (95% ci: 80%-90%)。然而,VCE的胶囊保留率为1.4% (95%CI: 0.8%-2.0%),需要后续干预。结论:VCE和SBE是小肠疾病评价的互补技术。虽然VCE仍然是稳定OGIB患者的首选试验,但在需要治疗干预的患者中应考虑SBE。因此,结合这两种方式可以提高诊断准确性和患者管理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
World Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
World Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
自引率
5.00%
发文量
1164
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信