Video Capsule Endoscopy and Deep Enteroscopy

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neil Marya ◽  
Veronica Baptista ◽  
Anupam Singh ◽  
Joseph Charpentier ◽  
David Cave

Until 2001, the nonsurgical evaluation of the small intestine was largely limited to the use of radiologic imaging (e.g., small bowel follow-through or enteroclysis). With the now widespread availability of video capsule endoscopy and deep enteroscopy since 2001, we are now able to visualize the length and most of the mucosa of the small intestine and manage small bowel lesions that were previously inaccessible except by surgical intervention. This review serves as an overview for these two procedures, detailing the indications and contraindications, proper timing of the procedure, technical aspects of the devices themselves, possible complications, and outcomes. Figures show endoscopic images that demonstrate multiple angioectasias, bleeding during capsule endoscopy, active Crohn disease of the small bowel, severe mucosal scalloping, small bowel carcinoid tumor, small bowel polyp associated with Peutz-Jeghers syndrome, and nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug enteropathy; serial x-rays of a patient with a patency capsule retained inside the small intestine; a computer image showing the distribution of small bowel tumors; and a pie chart displaying the breakdown of the distribution of benign and malignant tumors that can be found in the small intestine. Videos show multiple angioectasias, bleeding during capsule endoscopy, active Crohn disease of the small bowel, small bowel carcinoid tumor, and small bowel polyp associated with Peutz-Jeghers syndrome. This review contains 10 highly rendered figures, 5 videos, and 50 references.

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neil Marya ◽  
Veronica Baptista ◽  
Anupam Singh ◽  
Joseph Charpentier ◽  
David Cave

Until 2001, the nonsurgical evaluation of the small intestine was largely limited to the use of radiologic imaging (e.g., small bowel follow-through or enteroclysis). With the now widespread availability of video capsule endoscopy and deep enteroscopy since 2001, we are now able to visualize the length and most of the mucosa of the small intestine and manage small bowel lesions that were previously inaccessible except by surgical intervention. This review serves as an overview for these two procedures, detailing the indications and contraindications, proper timing of the procedure, technical aspects of the devices themselves, possible complications, and outcomes. Figures show endoscopic images that demonstrate multiple angioectasias, bleeding during capsule endoscopy, active Crohn disease of the small bowel, severe mucosal scalloping, small bowel carcinoid tumor, small bowel polyp associated with Peutz-Jeghers syndrome, and nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug enteropathy; serial x-rays of a patient with a patency capsule retained inside the small intestine; a computer image showing the distribution of small bowel tumors; and a pie chart displaying the breakdown of the distribution of benign and malignant tumors that can be found in the small intestine. Videos show multiple angioectasias, bleeding during capsule endoscopy, active Crohn disease of the small bowel, small bowel carcinoid tumor, and small bowel polyp associated with Peutz-Jeghers syndrome. This review contains 10 highly rendered figures, 5 videos, and 50 references.


Author(s):  
Douglas Yeung ◽  
Amir Sabet Sarvestani ◽  
Jonathan Yap ◽  
Yuri Inoue

Video capsule endoscopy (VCE) is a non-invasive method of visually examining the internal lumen of small intestine for inflammation and bleeding through a wireless camera contained in a small capsule. Currently, VCE technology is limited because it cannot map images to their specific locations in the small bowel. Furthermore, approximately 40% of identified problem areas are false positives, making bleeding difficult to find. Therefore, physicians can only estimate the location of inflammation and bleeding areas based on the elapsed time before performing a wired endoscopy. Our pill camera offers an innovative wireless imaging GPS-like location system, in an easy to swallow pill that accurately identifies and displays bleeding areas within the small intestine through an intuitive user interface, which results in a 50% reduction in clinical times, as well as improved diagnosis for potential investors and providers, thus resulting in a $500 cost reduction in physician fees per patient.


2007 ◽  
Vol 65 (5) ◽  
pp. AB90 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emanuele Rondonotti ◽  
Marco Pennazio ◽  
Italian Club for Capsule Endoscopy ◽  
European Capsule Endoscopy Group ◽  
Iberian Group of Capsule Endoscopy

2012 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 222-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jihane Achour ◽  
Ilham Serraj ◽  
Laila Amrani ◽  
Naima Amrani

2010 ◽  
Vol 105 ◽  
pp. S88
Author(s):  
Dhavan Parikh ◽  
Mohit Mittal ◽  
Amar Al-Juburi ◽  
Juan Garcia ◽  
Surinder Mann

Endoscopy ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 385-390 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Brown ◽  
C. Fraser ◽  
G. Schofield ◽  
S. Taylor ◽  
C. Bartram ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 418 ◽  
Author(s):  
May Min ◽  
Michael Noujaim ◽  
Jonathan Green ◽  
Christopher Schlieve ◽  
Aditya Vaze ◽  
...  

The diagnosis of small-bowel tumors is challenging due to their low incidence, nonspecific presentation, and limitations of traditional endoscopic techniques. In our study, we examined the utility of the mucosal protrusion angle in differentiating between true submucosal masses and bulges of the small bowel on video capsule endoscopy. We retrospectively reviewed video capsule endoscopies of 34 patients who had suspected small-bowel lesions between 2002 and 2017. Mucosal protrusion angles were defined as the angle between the small-bowel protruding lesion and surrounding mucosa and were measured using a protractor placed on a computer screen. We found that 25 patients were found to have true submucosal masses based on pathology and 9 patients had innocent bulges due to extrinsic compression. True submucosal masses had an average measured protrusion angle of 45.7 degrees ± 20.8 whereas innocent bulges had an average protrusion angle of 108.6 degrees ± 16.3 (p < 0.0001; unpaired t-test). Acute angle of protrusion accurately discriminated between true submucosal masses and extrinsic compression bulges on Fisher’s exact test (p = 0.0001). Our findings suggest that mucosal protrusion angle is a simple and useful tool for differentiating between true masses and innocent bulges of the small bowel.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document