scholarly journals Colon Capsule Endoscopy in the Assessment of Mucosal Healing in Crohn’s Disease

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. S25-S32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isabella Papalia ◽  
Douglas Tjandra ◽  
Stephanie Quah ◽  
Christina Tan ◽  
Alexandra Gorelik ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Patients with Crohn’s disease (CD) undergo frequent endoscopic procedures, with visualization of the gastrointestinal mucosa central to treatment decision-making. Subsequently, a noninvasive alternative to optical colonoscopy (OC) would be welcomed. One such technology is capsule endoscopy, including the PillCam COLON 2 (PCC2), though research validating its use in ileocolonic CD is limited. This study aims to compare PCC2 with ileocolonoscopy (OC) in assessing mucosal CD through use of a standardized scoring system. Methods At an Australian tertiary hospital, same-day PCC2 and ileocolonoscopy results of 47 CD patients, with known nonstricturing disease, were prospectively collected and analyzed for correlation and agreement. Deidentified recordings were reported by a single expert gastroenterologist. Mucosal disease was quantified using the Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn’s Disease (SES-CD). The SES-CD results of paired endoscopic modalities were compared in total per bowel segment and per SES-CD variable. Results Of 47 PCC2 recordings, 68% were complete, fully assessing terminal ileum to rectum, and OC was complete in 89%. Correlation (r) between total SES-CD scores was strongest in the terminal ileum (r = 0.77, P < .001), with the SES-CD variable of “ulcer detection” showing the strongest agreement. The PCC2 (vs OC) identified additional ulcers in the terminal ileum; ascending, transverse, and descending colon; and rectum; scores were 5 (1), 5 (3), 1 (1), 2 (1), and 2 (2), respectively. Conclusions The PCC2 shows promise in assessing ileocolonic mucosa, especially in proximal bowel segments, with greater reach of visualization in the small bowel. Given the resource and safety considerations raised by the Coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, capsule endoscopy has particular significance. This article aims to contribute to the limited body of research surrounding the validity of capsule endoscopy technology in assessing ileocolonic mucosa in Crohn’s Disease patients. In doing so, an alternative option for patients enduring frequent endoscopies is given potential.

2017 ◽  
Vol 85 (5) ◽  
pp. AB283
Author(s):  
Salvatore Oliva ◽  
Salvatore Cucchiara ◽  
Fortunata Civitelli ◽  
Marina Aloi ◽  
Franca Viola ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. e000365 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Henry Bruining ◽  
Salvatore Oliva ◽  
Mark R Fleisher ◽  
Monika Fischer ◽  
Joel G Fletcher

IntroductionCrohn’s disease diagnosis and monitoring remains a great clinical challenge and often requires multiple testing modalities. Assessing Crohn’s disease activity in the entire gastrointestinal (GI) tract using a panenteric capsule endoscopy (CE) system could be used as an alternative to colonoscopy and cross-sectional imaging. This study assessed the accuracy and safety of panenteric CE in Crohn’s disease as compared with ileocolonoscopy (IC) and/or magnetic resonance enterography (MRE).MethodsA prospective, multicentre study was performed in subjects with established Crohn’s disease. Individuals with proven small bowel patency underwent a standardised bowel preparation, followed by CE ingestion and IC either the same or following day. MRE, IC, and CE interpretations were performed by blinded central readers using validated scoring systems. The primary endpoint was the overall sensitivity of CE vs MRE and/or IC in Crohn’s disease subjects.ResultsStudy enrolment included 158 subjects from 21 sites in the USA, Austria, and Israel. Of those, 99 were included in the analysis. Imaging modality scores indicated none to mild inflammation in the proximal small bowel and colon, but discrepant levels of inflammation in the terminal ileum. Overall sensitivity for active enteric inflammation (CE vs MRE and/or IC) was 94% vs 100% (p=0.125) and specificity was 74% vs 22% (p=0.001). Sensitivity of CE was superior to MRE for enteric inflammation in the proximal small bowel (97% vs 71%, p=0.021), and similar to MRE and/or IC in the terminal ileum and colon (p=0.500–0.625). There were seven serious adverse advents of which three were related to the CE device.ConclusionPanenteric CE is a reliable tool for assessing Crohn’s disease mucosal activity and extent compared with more invasive methods. This study demonstrates high performance of the panenteric CE as compared to MRE and/or IC without the need for multiple tests in non-stricturing Crohn’s disease.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov NCT03241368


2015 ◽  
Vol 81 (5) ◽  
pp. AB172
Author(s):  
Salvatore Oliva ◽  
Fortunata Civitelli ◽  
Emanuele Casciani ◽  
Francesca Maccioni ◽  
Giovanni Di Nardo ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document