Page 83 - Read Online
P. 83

Page 6 of 7             O’Grady et al. Mini-invasive Surg 2022;6:34  https://dx.doi.org/10.20517/2574-1225.2022.22

               should they develop abdominal symptoms post-VCE, as well as recommendations regarding future
               potential MRI, may suffice in asymptomatic cases without clear evidence of capsule excretion. In cases of
               confirmed Crohn’s disease, perhaps a more cautious approach is wise until further data are available.


               In conclusion, a PFA is often requested following small bowel video capsule endoscopy to rule out capsule
               retention. This is particularly so in cases where the capsule is not seen to reach the caecum within the
               recording window. We question the value of PFA in asymptomatic patients where the capsule is not seen to
               pass the ileocaecal valve. In total, 28 cases were identified from a 688 cohort of capsule studies where PFA
               was required to exclude capsule retention. No cases of unexpected capsule retention over a five-year period
               were identified. No intervention was required in any case. Our data suggest that 14-day PFA may no longer
               be required for small bowel capsules not seen to reach the large bowel in asymptomatic cases. Careful
               screening of referrals and use of patency capsule and cross-sectional imaging may further reduce the risk of
               capsule retention. In the future, larger prospective studies should be considered to further evaluate these
               findings and address new guideline implementation.


               DECLARATIONS
               Authors’ contributions
               Study design, data collection, interpretation, and drafting of the manuscript: O’Grady J, Bennett S, Kaar A,
               Nolan L, O’Neill J, Quinlivan L, Buckley M

               Availability of data and materials
               Not applicable.


               Financial support and sponsorship
               None.


               Conflicts of interest
               All authors declared that there are no conflicts of interest.


               Ethical approval and consent to participate
               Approval for this study was granted by the Cork university affiliated hospitals clinical ethics review board
               (reference number: ECM 4 (p) 11/5/2021).

               Consent for publication
               Not applicable.

               Copyright
               © The Author(s) 2022.

               REFERENCES
               1.       Iddan G, Meron G, Glukhovsky A, Swain P. Wireless capsule endoscopy. Nature 2000;405:417.  DOI  PubMed
               2.       Rondonotti E, Spada C, Adler S, et al. Small-bowel capsule endoscopy and device-assisted enteroscopy for diagnosis and treatment of
                   small-bowel disorders: European society of gastrointestinal endoscopy (ESGE) technical review. Endoscopy 2018;50:423-46.  DOI
                   PubMed
               3.       Zammit S, Sidhu R. Capsule endoscopy-recent developments and future directions. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2021;15:127-37.
                   DOI  PubMed
               4.       Rondonotti E. Capsule retention: prevention, diagnosis and management. Ann Transl Med 2017;5:198.  DOI  PubMed  PMC
               5.       Sachdev MS, Leighton JA, Fleischer DE, et al. A prospective study of the utility of abdominal radiographs after capsule endoscopy for
                   the diagnosis of capsule retention. Gastrointest Endosc 2007;66:894-900.  DOI  PubMed
               6.       Al-Bawardy B, Locke G, Huprich JE, et al. Retained capsule endoscopy in a large tertiary care academic practice and radiologic
   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88