Aim: To compare feasibility and safety after gastrointestinal checkup by standing-type magnetically controlled capsule endoscopy (SMCE) and conventional gastroscopy.
Methods: This was a prospective multicenter, blinded study that compared SMCE with gastroscopy in patients from April 2018 to July 2018. All patients first underwent SMCE and then subsequently had gastroscopy with i.v. anesthesia. We calculated the compliance rates of gastric lesion detection by SMCE using gastroscopy as the standard. Capsule retention rate, incidence of adverse events, and patient satisfaction were documented throughout the study.
Results: One hundred and sixty-one patients who completed SMCE and gastroscopy were included in the analysis. Positive compliance rate among SMCE and gastroscopy was 92.0% (95% CI: 80.77%-97.78%). Negative compliance rate was 95.5% (89.80%, 98.52%). Moreover, overall compliance rate was 94.41% (89.65%, 97.41%). Sixty-four pathological outcomes were identified. Of these 64 outcomes, 50 were detected by both procedures. The gastroscopy method neglected seven findings (such as five erosions, one polyp, and one ulcer). Furthermore, SMCE also overlooked seven lesions (i.e. one erosion, two polyps, one atrophy, and three submucosal tumors). Capsule retention or related adverse events were not reported.
Conclusion: Standing-type magnetically controlled capsule endoscopy provides equivalent agreement with gastroscopy and may be useful for screening of gastric illnesses without any anesthesia.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7318584 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/den.13520 | DOI Listing |
Gastroenterol Res Pract
December 2021
Department of Gastroenterology, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, Gansu Province, China.
In the past 20 years, several magnetically controlled capsule endoscopes (MCCE) have been developed for the evaluation of gastric lesions, including NaviCam (ANKON), MiroCam-Navi (Intromedic), Endocapsule MGCE (Olympus and Siemens), SMCE (JIFU), and FAMCE (Jinshan). Although limited to observing esophageal and duodenal lesions and lacking the ability of biopsy, MCCE has the advantages of comfort, safety, no anesthesia, no risk of cross-infection, and high acceptability. Several high-quality RCTs showed that the diagnostic accuracy of MCCE is comparable to the traditional gastroscopy.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFDig Endosc
May 2020
Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Gastroenterology, Department of Gastroenterology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Aim: To compare feasibility and safety after gastrointestinal checkup by standing-type magnetically controlled capsule endoscopy (SMCE) and conventional gastroscopy.
Methods: This was a prospective multicenter, blinded study that compared SMCE with gastroscopy in patients from April 2018 to July 2018. All patients first underwent SMCE and then subsequently had gastroscopy with i.
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!