目的:探讨胶囊内镜在老年患者消化道疾病诊断中的应用。方法:对129例行OMOM胶囊内镜检查的患者资料行回顾性分析。结果:129例患者中完成胶囊内镜检查118例,发现异常103例,阳性检出率873%。发现食管、胃、小肠、结肠病变分别为3例、38例、92例、7例,占阳性发现率分别为29%、369%、893%、68%。完成胶囊内镜检查的91例消化道出血患者和25例腹痛、腹泻患者分别发现小肠病变75例(824%)和17例(68%)。其中黏膜下隆起及新生物、炎症病变和血管病变最为常见。检查过程中患者无任何不适。结论:OMOM胶囊内镜检查方法安全性好,对老年患者消化道疾病有较高的诊断价值。建议检查前对患者身体进行适当的评估,采取相应措施提高检查质量。
【摘要】 目的 探讨胶囊内镜对小肠疾病的诊断价值及顺应性和安全性。 方法 分析2009年4月-2010年3月对35例疑有小肠疾病者行胶囊内镜检查的临床资料。 结果 35例中发现小肠病变26例 （74.3%），包括血管畸形9例，间质瘤1例，息肉2例，小溃疡 1例，非特异性炎症 11例，寄生虫2例，其中 4例患者同时存在两种病变。所获取的图像质量良好。胶囊胃内运行平均时间为 62 min（5～460 min），小肠运行时间为 347 min（103～538 min），平均到达盲肠时间为384 min （120～540 min），平均记录时间为547 min（299～605 min），平均获取照片数为54 766张，胶囊排出体外时间平均为33 h（10～120 h）。受检者顺应性良好，无任何并发症发生。 结论 胶囊内镜是一种对小肠疾病具有较高的检出能力；其安全性高、顺应性好 。【Abstract】 Objective To investigate the diagnostic value of capsule endoscope for small intestine diseases, and to evaluate the compliance and security of capsule endoscopy. Methods The clinical data of 35 patients who underwent capsule endoscopy due to small bowel diseases between April 2009 and March 2010 were retrospectively analyzed. Results In the 35 patients, 26 (74.3%) had intestine diseases including vascular malformation in nine, interstitialoma in one, polyp in two, aphtha in one, non-specific inflammation in 11 and parasite in two; 4 patients had two lesions simultaneously. The quality of the obtained images was good. The average running time of the capsules in the stomach ranged from five to 460 minutes with an average time of 62 minutes. The running time of the capsules in the small intestine ranged from 103 to 538 minutes with an average of 347 minutes. The running time of the capsules arriving at the cecum ranged from 103 to 538 minutes with an average of 347 minutes. The time of the capsules egested out ranged from 10 to 120 hours with an average of 33 hours. The recording time ranged from 299 to 605 minuets with an average of 547 minutes. The mean acquired images were 54 766 pieces, The patients had good compliance, and none had any complications. Conclusion The capsule endoscopy had high security and good compliance. It has high detectivity in diagnosing small intestine diseases.
ObjectiveCapsule endoscopy (CE) has been widely used in the diagnosis of small bowel disease (SBD) in the world. To bring CE into the national health insurance directory, and intensify its popularization in primary hospitals, the government needs high quality health technology assessment (HTA) evidence for decision making. This study was aimed to comprehensively evaluate the effectiveness, safety, applicability and economics of CE in the diagnosis of SBD based on global review, to providing the best currently-available evidence for decision making. MethodsWe electronically searched The Cochrane Library (Issue 8, September 2013), PubMed, EMbase, INAHTA, VIP, CBM, CNKI and WanFang Data. We screened studies, extracted data, and evaluated quality independently, according to inclusion and exclusion criteria; and then we made final conclusion after comprehensive analysis. ResultsWe finally included 4 HTAs, 11 systematic reviews (SRs)/ Meta-analyses, 2 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 5 guidelines, and 10 economics studies for assessment. The results of HTAs, SRs/ meta-analyses and RCTs all showed that, the disease detection rate of CE was higher than that of many other traditional technologies, and that the main adverse event for CE was retention (0.7% to 3.0%), which were consistent with those of the guidelines' recommendations. Besides, the comprehensive results of economics studies showed the superiority of CE compared with other technologies. As the first choice, CE could significantly decrease potential costs, especially when used in outpatients. Conclusiona) Compared with similar technologies, CE indeed has advantages in diagnostic yield, safety and potential costs in the diagnosis of SBD. However, its application has certain limitations, which still needs to be verified by more high quality evidence about CE diagnosis accuracy. b) It is sug gested that, when the government approves the introduction of CE to hospitals, many factors must be considered, such as local disease burden, clinical demands, ability to pay, and staff configuration. At the same time, it is necessary to standardize training for medical technicians, to reduce economic loss caused by poor technical abilities of medicaltechnicians.
Objective To systematically review the efficacy and safety of polyethylene glycol and sodium phosphate in bowel preparation of capsule endoscopy. Methods We searched CNKI, CBM, WanFang Data, PubMed, EMbase, and The Cochrane Library (Issue 6, 2016) up to June 2016, to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about polyethylene glycol and sodium phosphate in bowel preparation of capsule endoscopy. Two reviewers independently screened literatures, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies, and then meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.0 software. Results A total of six RCTs involving 531 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: compared with the sodium phosphate solution group, the polyethylene glycol solution group had poor intestinal cleansing effect (OR=0.43, 95%CI 0.21 to 0.88,P=0.02), higher incidence of adverse reaction (OR=3.20, 95%CI 1.13 to 9.06,P=0.03); but shorter gastric retention time (OR=–11.61, 95%CI –13.71 to –9.51,P<0.000 01) and residence time in the small intestine (OR=–4.17, 95%CI –7.74 to –0.60,P=0.02). Conclusion The efficacy of oral polyethylene glycol is poor in cleaning effect and adverse reaction than sodium phosphate solution, but better in the digestive tract residence time for capsule endoscopy. Due to the limited quality and quantity of included studies, the above conclusion is still needed to be proved by more high-quality studies.
Objective To summarize the research progress of magnetic-controlled capsule endoscopy (MCCE) in application for gastric diseases. Method By searching the literatures in domestic and foreign database, the latest literatures on the application of MCCE for gastric diseases were reviewed. Results Compared with traditional gastroscopy, the diagnostic accuracy of MCCE was comparable to that of traditional gastroscopy, and there was no serious complications had been reported in use of MCCE. In addition, MCCE had advantages of comfort, safety, and prevention of cross-infection. However, it could not be used for biopsy and treatment. With the constant technical innovation, application of MCCE would be more extensive in future. Conclusions The diagnostic accuracy of MCCE in gastric diseases is high. Compared with traditional gastroscopy, it has more advantages. The shortcomings of MCCE can be improved with the development of science and technology, and it can be used for the initial screening of gastric diseases.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the diagnostic value of capsule endoscopy and enteroscopy in small intestinal diseases.MethodsPubMed, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang Data, and VIP databases were electronically searched to collect studies on the diagnosis of intestinal diseases by capsule endoscopy and enteroscopy from inception to August 31st, 2020. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed risk bias of included studies. Meta-analysis was then performed by using RevMan 5.3 and Meta-DiSc software.ResultsA total of 20 studies were included. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio and diagnostic odds ratio for capsule endoscopy were 0.86 (95%CI 0.83 to 0.87), 0.81 (95%CI 0.78 to 0.84), 117.07 (95%CI 37.98 to 360.92), 7.20 (95%CI 2.81 to 18.45), 0.11 (95%CI 0.06 to 0.21), and those for enteroscopy were 0.89 (95%CI 0.87 to 0.90), 0.91 (95%CI 0.89 to 0.93), 196.99 (95%CI 72.63 to 534.26), 13.26 (95%CI 5.00 to 35.14), 0.12 (95%CI 0.07 to 0.21). The areas under the working characteristic curve (SROC) of capsule endoscopy and enteroscopy were 0.9692 and 0.9783, respectively.ConclusionsBoth capsule endoscopy and enteroscopy have high specificity and sensitivity in the diagnosis of small intestinal diseases, and enteroscopy has higher clinical value in the diagnosis of some small intestinal diseases than capsule endoscopy. Due to limited quantity and quality of the included studies, the above conclusions are required to be verified by more high-quality studies.