Capsule endoscopy capture rate: has 4 frames-per-second any impact over 2 frames-per-second?

AIM: To compare the current capsule and a new prototype at 2 and 4 frames-per-second, respectively, in terms of clinical and therapeutic impact. METHODS: One hundred patients with an indication for capsule endoscopy were included in the study. All procedures were performed with the new device (SB24). After an exhaustive evaluation of the SB24 videos, they were then converted to "SB2-like" videos for their evaluation. Findings, frames per finding, and clinical and therapeutic impact derived from video visualization were analyzed. Kappa index for interobserver agreement and χ (2) and Student's t tests for qualitative/quantitative variables, respectively, were used. Values of P under 0.05 were considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Eighty-nine out of 100 cases included in the study were ultimately included in the analysis. The SB24 videos detected the anatomical landmarks (Z-line and duodenal papilla) and lesions in more patients than the "SB2-like" videos. On the other hand, the SB24 videos detected more frames per landmark/lesion than the "SB2-like" videos. However, these differences were not statistically significant (P > 0.05). Both clinical and therapeutic impacts were similar between SB24 and "SB2-like" videos (K = 0.954). The time spent by readers was significantly higher for SB24 videos visualization (P < 0.05) than for "SB2-like" videos when all images captured by the capsule were considered. However, these differences become non-significant if we only take into account small bowel images (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: More frames-per-second detect more landmarks, lesions, and frames per landmark/lesion, but is time consuming and has a very low impact on clinical and therapeutic management.

Diagnostic yield and clinical outcomes after capsule endoscopy in 100 consecutive patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding.

OBJECTIVES: The endoscopic capsule is a useful tool for visualizing the small bowel in patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding. In this study the authors evaluated the diagnostic aid provided by the endoscopic capsule, the factors predicting a significant finding and their impact on the patients' clinical evolution. METHODS: A total of 100 patients (52 men and 48 women, average age 64.4 years) underwent capsule endoscopy. Of this group, 52 patients presented with obscure-overt bleeding and 48 with obscure-occult bleeding. After an average follow-up time of 11.4 months, the clinical outcome was evaluated in 95 patients. RESULTS: The endoscopic capsule identified significant findings in 68% of patients. The most common diagnosis (33.8%) was angiodysplasias. The most important factor predicting significant findings was the previous need for transfusion in the overt bleeding group. As the result of the findings, a specific intervention was made in 75.8% of patients. At the end of follow-up, the clinical outcome was considered positive in 71.6% of patients. Capsule retention occurred in one patient, who required surgery. CONCLUSION: In patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding, capsule endoscopy provides a high degree of diagnostic aid. The best candidates for this procedure are patients with obscure-overt bleeding who have required blood transfusions. Capsule endoscopy has a positive influence on an important proportion of patients, whether oriented towards new diagnostic techniques or towards a definitive treatment.