Display options
Cite
Krok KL, Wagennar RR, Kantsevoy SV, et al. Esophageal capsule endoscopy is not the optimal technique to determine the need for primary prophylaxis in patients with cirrhosis. Arch Med Sci. 2016;12(2):365-71doi: 10.5114/aoms.2016.59263.
Krok, K. L., Wagennar, R. R., Kantsevoy, S. V., & Thuluvath, P. J. (2016). Esophageal capsule endoscopy is not the optimal technique to determine the need for primary prophylaxis in patients with cirrhosis. Archives of medical science : AMS, 12(2), 365-71. https://doi.org/10.5114/aoms.2016.59263
Krok, Karen L, et al. "Esophageal capsule endoscopy is not the optimal technique to determine the need for primary prophylaxis in patients with cirrhosis." Archives of medical science : AMS vol. 12,2 (2016): 365-71. doi: https://doi.org/10.5114/aoms.2016.59263
Krok KL, Wagennar RR, Kantsevoy SV, Thuluvath PJ. Esophageal capsule endoscopy is not the optimal technique to determine the need for primary prophylaxis in patients with cirrhosis. Arch Med Sci. 2016 Apr 01;12(2):365-71. doi: 10.5114/aoms.2016.59263. Epub 2016 Apr 12. PMID: 27186182; PMCID: PMC4848367.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Arch Med Sci. 2016 Apr 01;12(2):365-71. doi: 10.5114/aoms.2016.59263. Epub 2016 Apr 12.

Esophageal capsule endoscopy is not the optimal technique to determine the need for primary prophylaxis in patients with cirrhosis.

Archives of medical science : AMS

Karen L Krok, Rebecca Rankin Wagennar, Sergey V Kantsevoy, Paul J Thuluvath

Affiliations

  1. Division of Gastroenterology, Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, Pennsylvania, USA.
  2. Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
  3. Institute for Digestive Health and Liver Disease, Mercy Medical Center, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
  4. Institute for Digestive Health and Liver Disease, Mercy Medical Center, Baltimore, Maryland, USA; University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, USA.

PMID: 27186182 PMCID: PMC4848367 DOI: 10.5114/aoms.2016.59263

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Capsule endoscopy has been suggested as a potential alternative to endoscopy for detection of esophagogastric varices and severe portal hypertensive gastropathy (PHG). The aim of the study was to determine whether PillCam esophageal capsule endoscopy could replace endoscopy for screening purposes.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty-two patients with cirrhosis with no previous variceal bleeding had PillCam capsule endoscopy and video endoscopy performed on the same day. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV) of capsule endoscopy were compared to endoscopy for the presence and severity of esophageal and gastric varices, PHG and the need for primary prophylaxis. Patients' preference was assessed by a questionnaire.

RESULTS: Four (6%) patients were unable to swallow the capsule. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of capsule endoscopy for detecting any esophageal varices (92%, 50%, 92%, 50%), large varices (55%, 91%, 75%, 80%), variceal red signs (58%, 87%, 69%, 80%), PHG (95%, 50%, 95%, 50%), and the need for primary prophylaxis (91%, 57%, 78%, 80%) were not optimal, with only moderate agreement (κ) between capsule and upper GI endoscopy. Had only a capsule endoscopy been performed, 12 (21.4%) patients would have received inappropriate treatment. Capsule endoscopy also failed to detect (0/13) gastric varices. The majority of patients ranked capsule endoscopy as more convenient (69%) and their preferred (61%) method.

CONCLUSIONS: Despite the preference expressed by patients for capsule endoscopy, we believe that upper GI endoscopy should remain the preferred screening method for primary prophylaxis.

Keywords: capsule endoscopy; esophageal varices

References

  1. Ann Intern Med. 1982 May;96(5):565-9 - PubMed
  2. Endoscopy. 2006 Jan;38(1):31-5 - PubMed
  3. N Engl J Med. 1962 Jan 18;266:134-5 - PubMed
  4. Hepatology. 2008 May;47(5):1595-603 - PubMed
  5. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009 May;104(5):1112-8 - PubMed
  6. Int J Qual Health Care. 2003 Apr;15(2):139-46 - PubMed
  7. Arch Intern Med. 2001 Nov 26;161(21):2564-70 - PubMed
  8. J Hepatol. 2000;32(1 Suppl):141-56 - PubMed
  9. Am J Gastroenterol. 2001 Mar;96(3):833-7 - PubMed
  10. Gastroenterology. 1989 Jun;96(6):1552-9 - PubMed
  11. Hepatology. 2003 Feb;37(2):366-77 - PubMed
  12. Gastroenterology. 1975 Feb;68(2):211-21 - PubMed
  13. Br J Surg. 1973 Aug;60(8):646-9 - PubMed
  14. World J Surg. 1995 May-Jun;19(3):420-2; discussion 423 - PubMed
  15. Endoscopy. 2006 Jan;38(1):36-41 - PubMed
  16. World J Gastroenterol. 2008 Jul 28;14(28):4480-5 - PubMed
  17. Am J Gastroenterol. 2003 Apr;98(4):763-70 - PubMed
  18. Gastrointest Endosc. 1981 Nov;27(4):213-8 - PubMed
  19. Gastrointest Endosc. 2003 Oct;58(4):558-67 - PubMed
  20. Dig Liver Dis. 2008 Mar;40(3):216-23 - PubMed

Publication Types