Clinical Experience with the PillCam Patency Capsule prior to Video Capsule Endoscopy: A Real-World Experience

Background. In patients with known or suspected risk factors for gastrointestinal stenosis, the PillCam patency capsule (PC) is given before a video capsule endoscopy (VCE) in order to minimize the risk of capsule retention (CR). CR is considered unlikely upon excretion of the PC within 30 hours, excretion in an undamaged state after 30 hours, or radiological projection to the colon. Methods. We performed a retrospective analysis of 38 patients with risk factors for CR, who received a PC from 02/2013 to 04/2015 at Klinikum Augsburg. Results. Sixteen of our 38 patients observed a natural excretion after a mean time of 34 hours past ingestion. However, only 8 patients observed excretion within 30 hours, as recommended by the company. In 20 patients passage of the PC into the colon was shown via RFID-scan or radiological imaging (after 33 and 45 hours, resp.). Only 2 patients showed a pathologic PC result. In consequence, 32 patients received the VCE; no CR was observed. Conclusion. Our data indicates that a VCE could safely be performed even if the PC excretion time is longer than 30 hours and the excreted PC was not screened for damage

Protoporphyrin IX distribution following local application of 5-aminolevulinic acid and its esterified derivatives in the tissue layers of the normal rat colon

Photodynamic diagnosis and especially therapy after sensitization with 5-aminolevulinic acid (ALA) is hampered by limitations of uptake and distribution of ALA due to its hydrophilic nature. Chemical modification of ALA into its more lipophilic esters seems to be promising to overcome these problems. The aim of the present study was to investigate the comparative kinetics of protoporphyrin IX (PPIX) fluorescence in rat colonic tissue after topical application of ALA and its esterified derivatives, ALA-hexylester (h-ALA), ALA-methylester (m-ALA) and ALA-benzylester (b-ALA). Fluorescence intensity induced by PPIX in normal colonic tissue was quantified using fluorescence microscopy at 1, 2, 4, 6 and 8 h after sensitization. Mucosa exhibited higher fluorescence levels compared to the underlying submucosa or smooth muscle. Peak fluorescence intensities were seen 4 h after local sensitization with 86.0 mol ml−1 ALA (513 ± 0.57 counts per pixel), 6.6 mol ml−1 m-ALA (508 ± 35.50) and 4.8 mol ml−1 h-ALA (532 ± 128.80), and 6 h after sensitization with 4.6 mol ml−1 b-ALA (468 ± 190.27). A 13–18 times lower concentration of ALA esters was required for fluorescence intensities reached with ALA alone. A similar degree of the fluorescence ratio between mucosa and muscularis (5–6:1) was detected for ALA and its derivatives. The time point of the maximum value of this ratio was consistent with peak fluorescence levels for ALA and each ALA-ester. The clinical feasibility and the advantages of topical ALA ester-based fluorescence for detection of malignant and premalignant lesions need further investigations. © 2001 Cancer Research Campaign   http://www.bjcancer.co

Clinical Study Clinical Experience with the PillCam Patency Capsule prior to Video Capsule Endoscopy: A Real-World Experience

Background. In patients with known or suspected risk factors for gastrointestinal stenosis, the PillCam patency capsule (PC) is given before a video capsule endoscopy (VCE) in order to minimize the risk of capsule retention (CR). CR is considered unlikely upon excretion of the PC within 30 hours, excretion in an undamaged state after 30 hours, or radiological projection to the colon. Methods. We performed a retrospective analysis of 38 patients with risk factors for CR, who received a PC from 02/2013 to 04/2015 at Klinikum Augsburg. Results. Sixteen of our 38 patients observed a natural excretion after a mean time of 34 hours past ingestion. However, only 8 patients observed excretion within 30 hours, as recommended by the company. In 20 patients passage of the PC into the colon was shown via RFID-scan or radiological imaging (after 33 and 45 hours, resp.). Only 2 patients showed a pathologic PC result. In consequence, 32 patients received the VCE; no CR was observed. Conclusion. Our data indicates that a VCE could safely be performed even if the PC excretion time is longer than 30 hours and the excreted PC was not screened for damage

Detection Rate and Clinical Relevance of Ink Tattooing during Balloon-Assisted Enteroscopy

Background and Aims. Balloon-assisted enteroscopy (BAE) is a well-established tool in the diagnosis and therapy of small bowel diseases. Ink tattooing of the small bowel is used to mark pathologic lesions or the depth of small bowel insertion. The purpose of this study was to determine the safety, the detection rate, and the clinical relevance of ink tattooing during BAE. Methods. We performed a retrospective analysis of all 81 patients who received an ink tattooing during BAE between 2010 and 2015. Results. In all patients, ink tattooing was performed with no complications. 26 patients received a capsule endoscopy after BAE. The tattoo could be detected via capsule endoscopy in 19 of these 26 patients. The tattoo of the previous BAE could be detected via opposite BAE in 2 of 11 patients. In 9 patients, ink tattooing influenced the choice of approach for reenteroscopy. In 7 patients, the tattoo was used for intraoperative localization and in 3 patients for intraoperative localization as well as for reenteroscopy. The intraoperative detection rate of the tattoo was 100%. Conclusion. Ink tattooing of the small intestine is a safe endoscopic procedure to mark the depth of scope insertion or a pathologic lesion during balloon-assisted enteroscopy

Role of gastrointestinal endoscopy in the screening of digestive tract cancers in Europe: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement

In Europe at present, but also in 2040, 1 in 3 cancer-related deaths are expected to be caused by digestive cancers. Endoscopic technologies enable diagnosis, with relatively low invasiveness, of precancerous conditions and early cancers, thereby improving patient survival. Overall, endoscopy capacity must be adjusted to facilitate both effective screening programs and rigorous control of the quality assurance and surveillance systems required

Cost-effectiveness of artificial intelligence for screening colonoscopy: a modelling study

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) tools increase detection of precancerous polyps during colonoscopy and might contribute to long-term colorectal cancer prevention. The aim of the study was to investigate the incremental effect of the implementation of AI detection tools in screening colonoscopy on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, and the cost-effectiveness of such tools. Methods: We conducted Markov model microsimulation of using colonoscopy with and without AI for colorectal cancer screening for individuals at average risk (no personal or family history of colorectal cancer, adenomas, inflammatory bowel disease, or hereditary colorectal cancer syndrome). We ran the microsimulation in a hypothetical cohort of 100 000 individuals in the USA aged 50–100 years. The primary analysis investigated screening colonoscopy with versus without AI every 10 years starting at age 50 years and finishing at age 80 years, with follow-up until age 100 years, assuming 60% screening population uptake. In secondary analyses, we modelled once-in-life screening colonoscopy at age 65 years in adults aged 50–79 years at average risk for colorectal cancer. Post-polypectomy surveillance followed the simplified current guideline. Costs of AI tools and cost for downstream treatment of screening detected disease were estimated with 3% annual discount rates. The main outcome measures included the incremental effect of AI-assisted colonoscopy versus standard (no-AI) colonoscopy on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, and cost-effectiveness of screening projected for the average risk screening US population. Findings: In the primary analyses, compared with no screening, the relative reduction of colorectal cancer incidence with screening colonoscopy without AI tools was 44·2% and with screening colonoscopy with AI tools was 48·9% (4·8% incremental gain). Compared with no screening, the relative reduction in colorectal cancer mortality with screening colonoscopy with no AI was 48·7% and with screening colonoscopy with AI was 52·3% (3·6% incremental gain). AI detection tools decreased the discounted costs per screened individual from $3400 to$3343 (a saving of $57 per individual). Results were similar in the secondary analyses modelling once-in-life colonoscopy. At the US population level, the implementation of AI detection during screening colonoscopy resulted in yearly additional prevention of 7194 colorectal cancer cases and 2089 related deaths, and a yearly saving of US$290 million. Interpretation: Our findings suggest that implementation of AI detection tools in screening colonoscopy is a cost-saving strategy to further prevent colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. Funding: European Commission and Japan Society of Promotion of Science