Terminal ileum ileoscopy and histology in patients undergoing high-definition colonoscopy with virtual chromoendoscopy for chronic nonbloody diarrhea : a prospective, multicenter study

Background and aims: Ileo-colonoscopy is the procedure of choice for chronic nonbloody diarrhea (CNBD) of unknown origin. Histological evaluation at different colonic sites is mandatory to assess the presence of microscopic colitis. However, the value of routine ileal biopsy on normal-appearing mucosa as assessed by means of standard-resolution white-light ileoscopy is controversial given its reported low diagnostic yield. Hence, we have assessed for the first time the accuracy of retrograde ileoscopy using high-definition and dyeless chromoendoscopy (HD + DLC), thereby calculating the impact and cost of routine ileal biopsy in CNBD. Methods: Patients with CNBD of unknown origin were prospectively enrolled for ileo-colonoscopy with HD + DLC at five referral centers. Multiple biopsies were systematically performed on each colorectal segment and in the terminal ileum for histopathological analysis. Results: Between 2014 and 2017, 546 consecutive patients were recruited. Retrograde ileoscopy success rate was 97.6%. A total of 492 patients (mean age: 53 \ub1 18 years) fulfilled all the inclusion criteria: Following endoscopic and histopathological work-up, 7% had lymphoid nodular hyperplasia and 3% had isolated ileitis. Compared to the histopathology as the gold standard, retrograde ileoscopy with HD + DLC showed 93% sensitivity, 98% specificity and 99.8% negative predictive value. In patients with normal ileo-colonoscopy, ileum histology had no diagnostic gain and resulted in a cost of US $26.5 per patient. Conclusions: Retrograde ileoscopy with HD + DLC predicts the presence of ileitis in CNBD with excellent performance. The histopathological evaluation of the terminal ileum is the gold standard for the diagnostic assessment of visible lesions but has no added diagnostic value in CNBD patients with negative ileo-colonoscopy inspection using modern endoscopic imaging techniques

Nomenclature and semantic description of vascular lesions in small bowel capsule endoscopy: an international Delphi consensus statement

Background and study aims \u2002Nomenclature and descriptions of small bowel (SB) vascular lesions in capsule endoscopy (CE) are scarce in the medical literature. They are mostly based on the reader's opinion and thus differ between experts, with a potential negative impact on clinical care, teaching and research regarding SBCE. Our aim was to better define a nomenclature and to give a description of the most frequent vascular lesions in SBCE. Methods \u2002A panel of 18 European expert SBCE readers was formed during the UEGW 2016 meeting. Three experts constructed an Internet-based four-round Delphi consensus, but did not participate in the voting process. They built questionnaires that included various still frames of vascular lesions obtained with a third-generation SBCE system. The 15 remaining participants were asked to rate different proposals and description of the most common SB vascular lesions. A 6-point rating scale (varying from 'strongly disagree' to 'strongly agree') was used successive rounds. The consensus was reached when at least 80\u200a% voting members scored the statement within the 'agree' or 'strongly agree'. Results \u2002Consensual terms and descriptions were reached for angiectasia/angiodysplasia, erythematous patch, red spot/dot, and phlebectasia. A consensual description was reached for more subtle vascular lesions tentatively named "diminutive angiectasia" but no consensus was reached for this term. Conclusion \u2002An international group has reached a consensus on the nomenclature and descriptions of the most frequent and relevant SB vascular lesions in CE. These terms and descriptions are useful in daily practice, for teaching and for medical research purposes

Imaging alternatives to colonoscopy: CT colonography and colon capsule. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) Guideline – Update 2020

1. ESGE/ESGAR recommend computed tomographic colonography (CTC) as the radiological examination of choice for the diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. ESGE/ESGAR do not recommend barium enema in this setting. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 2. ESGE/ESGAR recommend CTC, preferably the same or next day, if colonoscopy is incomplete. The timing depends on an interdisciplinary decision including endoscopic and radiological factors. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. ESGE/ESGAR suggests that, in centers with expertise in and availability of colon capsule endoscopy (CCE), CCE preferably the same or the next day may be considered if colonoscopy is incomplete. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 3. When colonoscopy is contraindicated or not possible, ESGE/ESGAR recommend CTC as an acceptable and equally sensitive alternative for patients with alarm symptoms. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. Because of lack of direct evidence, ESGE/ESGAR do not recommend CCE in this situation. Very low quality evidence. ESGE/ESGAR recommend CTC as an acceptable alternative to colonoscopy for patients with non-alarm symptoms. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. In centers with availability, ESGE/ESGAR suggests that CCE may be considered in patients with non-alarm symptoms. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 4. Where there is no organized fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based population colorectal screening program, ESGE/ESGAR recommend CTC as an option for colorectal cancer screening, providing the screenee is adequately informed about test characteristics, benefits, and risks, and depending on local service- and patient-related factors. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. ESGE/ESGAR do not suggest CCE as a first-line screening test for colorectal cancer. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 5. ESGE/ESGAR recommend CTC in the case of a positive fecal occult blood test (FOBT) or FIT with incomplete or unfeasible colonoscopy, within organized population screening programs. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. ESGE/ESGAR also suggest the use of CCE in this setting based on availability. Weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 6. ESGE/ESGAR suggest CTC with intravenous contrast medium injection for surveillance after curative-intent resection of colorectal cancer only in patients in whom colonoscopy is contraindicated or unfeasible. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. There is insufficient evidence to recommend CCE in this setting. Very low quality evidence. 7. ESGE/ESGAR suggest CTC in patients with high risk polyps undergoing surveillance after polypectomy only when colonoscopy is unfeasible. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. There is insufficient evidence to recommend CCE in post-polypectomy surveillance. Very low quality evidence. 8. ESGE/ESGAR recommend against CTC in patients with acute colonic inflammation and in those who have recently undergone colorectal surgery, pending a multidisciplinary evaluation. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 9. ESGE/ESGAR recommend referral for endoscopic polypectomy in patients with at least one polyp ≥6 mm detected at CTC or CCE. Follow-up CTC may be clinically considered for 6–9-mm CTC-detected lesions if patients do not undergo polypectomy because of patient choice, comorbidity, and/or low risk profile for advanced neoplasia. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.Source and scop

Surveillance of FAP: a prospective blinded comparison of capsule endoscopy and other GI imaging to detect small bowel polyps

Background: Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is a hereditary disorder characterized by polyposis along the gastrointestinal tract. Information on adenoma status below the duodenum has previously been restricted due to its inaccessibility in vivo. Ca

Small-bowel capsule endoscopy and device-assisted enteroscopy for diagnosis and treatment of small-bowel disorders: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Clinical Guideline

This Guideline is an official statement of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE). The Guideline was also reviewed and endorsed by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG). It addresses the roles of small-bowel capsule endoscopy and device-assisted enteroscopy for diagnosis and treatment of small-bowel disorders. Main recommendations 1 ESGE recommends small-bowel video capsule endoscopy as the first-line investigation in patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). 2 In patients with overt obscure gastrointestinal bleeding, ESGE recommends performing small-bowel capsule endoscopy as soon as possible after the bleeding episode, optimally within 14 days, in order to maximize the diagnostic yield (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). 3 ESGE does not recommend the routine performance of second-look endoscopy prior to small-bowel capsule endoscopy; however whether to perform second-look endoscopy before capsule endoscopy in patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding or iron-deficiency anaemia should be decided on a case-by-case basis (strong recommendation, low quality evidence). 4 In patients with positive findings at small-bowel capsule endoscopy, ESGE recommends device-assisted enteroscopy to confirm and possibly treat lesions identified by capsule endoscopy (strong recommendation, high quality evidence). 5 ESGE recommends ileocolonoscopy as the first endoscopic examination for investigating patients with suspected Crohn's disease (strong recommendation, high quality evidence). In patients with suspected Crohn's disease and negative ileocolonoscopy findings, ESGE recommends small-bowel capsule endoscopy as the initial diagnostic modality for investigating the small bowel, in the absence of obstructive symptoms or known stenosis (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). ESGE does not recommend routine small-bowel imaging or the use of the PillCam patency capsule prior to capsule endoscopy in these patients (strong recommendation, low quality evidence). In the presence of obstructive symptoms or known stenosis, ESGE recommends that dedicated small bowel cross-sectional imaging modalities such as magnetic resonance enterography/enteroclysis or computed tomography enterography/enteroclysis should be used first (strong recommendation, low quality evidence). 6 In patients with established Crohn's disease, based on ileocolonoscopy findings, ESGE recommends dedicated cross-sectional imaging for small-bowel evaluation since this has the potential to assess extent and location of any Crohn's disease lesions, to identify strictures, and to assess for extraluminal disease (strong recommendation, low quality evidence). In patients with unremarkable or nondiagnostic findings from such cross-sectional imaging of the small bowel, ESGE recommends small-bowel capsule endoscopy as a subsequent investigation, if deemed to influence patient management (strong recommendation, low quality evidence). When capsule endoscopy is indicated, ESGE recommends use of the PillCam patency capsule to confirm functional patency of the small bowel (strong recommendation, low quality evidence). 7 ESGE strongly recommends against the use of small-bowel capsule endoscopy for suspected coeliac disease but suggests that capsule endoscopy could be used in patients unwilling or unable to undergo conventional endoscopy (strong recommendation, low quality evidence)