BackgroundSmall-bowel angioectasias are frequently diagnosed with capsule endoscopy (CE) or balloon endoscopy however, major predictors have not been defined and the indications for endoscopic treatment have not been standardized. The aim of this study was to evaluate the predictors and management of small-bowel angioectasia.MethodsAmong patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB) who underwent both CE and double-balloon endoscopy at our institution, we enrolled 64 patients with small-bowel angioectasia (angioectasia group) and 97 patients without small-bowel angioectasia (non-angioectasia group). The angioectasia group was subdivided into patients with type 1a angioectasia (35 cases) and type 1b angioectasia (29 cases) according to the Yano-Yamamoto classification. Patient characteristics, treatment, and outcomes were evaluated.ResultsAge (P = 0.001), cardiovascular disease (P = 0.002), and liver cirrhosis (P = 0.003) were identified as significant predictors of small-bowel angioectasia. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified cardiovascular disease (odds ratio 2.86; 95 % confidence interval, 1.35–6.18) and liver cirrhosis (odds ratio 4.81; 95 % confidence interval, 1.79–14.5) as independent predictors of small-bowel angioectasia. Eleven type 1a cases without oozing were treated conservatively, and 24 type 1a cases with oozing were treated with polidocanol injection (PDI). Re-bleeding occurred in two type 1a cases (6 %). Seventeen type 1b cases were treated with PDI and 12 type 1b cases were treated with PDI combined with argon plasma coagulation (APC) or clipping. Re-bleeding occurred in five type 1b cases (17 %) that resolved after additional endoscopic hemostasis in all cases. There was one adverse event from endoscopic treatment (1.6 %).ConclusionsCardiovascular disease and liver cirrhosis were significant independent major predictors of small-bowel angioectasia. Type 1a angioectasias with oozing are indicated for PDI and type 1b angioectasias are indicated for PDI with APC or clipping.

PDI is an easy, safe, and effective method to treat small-bowel hemangiomas.

Background and Aim. The third-generation capsule endoscopy (SB3) was shown to have better image resolution than that of SB2. The aim of this study was to compare SB2 and SB3 regarding detectability of esophageal varices (EVs). Methods. Seventy-six consecutive liver cirrhosis patients (42 men; mean age: 67 years) received SB3, and 99 (58 men; mean age, 67 years old) received SB2. All patients underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy within 1 month prior to capsule endoscopy as gold standard for diagnosis. The diagnosis using SB3 and SB2 for EVs was evaluated regarding form (F0–F3), location (Ls, Lm, and Li), and the red color (RC) sign of EVs. Results. SB2 and SB3 did not significantly differ on overall diagnostic rates for EV. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of SB2/SB3 for EV diagnosis were, respectively, 65%/81%, 100%/100%, 100%/100%, and 70%/62%. However, the diagnostic rates for EV form F1 were 81% using SB3 and 52% using SB2 (P = 0.009). Further, the diagnostic rates for Ls/Lm varices were 79% using SB3 and 81% using SB2, and, for Li, varices were 84% using SB3 and 52% using SB2 (P = 0.02). Conclusion. SB3 significantly improved the detectability of EVs compared with SB2.

Background and Aim: The manner in which colorectal lesions are being detected with PillCam COLON2 capsule endoscopy (CCE2) has markedly improved in recent days. However, limited data are available on CCE2 for detecting laterally spreading tumors (LSTs). The aim of this study was to compare CCE2 with optical colonoscopy (OC), which is currently the gold standard used in the detection of LSTs. Methods: We performed a prospective, single-academic center study comparing CCE2 with OC in patients with LSTs diagnosed using OC, which was performed during the 3-month period prior to CCE2. We focused on the sensitivity and specificity of CCE2 for detecting LSTs. LSTs were classified into the LST-granular type (LST-G) or the LST-non-granular type (LST-NG). Results: Thirty patients (mean age 59.5 years) were enrolled. Of them, 21 LSTs (7 LST-Gs and 14 LST-NGs) were evaluated in this study. The mean diameter of the LSTs was 27 ± 15 mm (range 10-60 mm). Histopathological diagnoses of the LSTs were as follows: tubular adenoma, 12 cases (57%); sessile serrated adenoma/polyp (SSA/P), 4 cases (19%); Tis carcinoma, 1 case (5%); and T1 carcinoma, 4 cases (19 LSTs were found in the following locations: cecum, 1 case (5%); ascending colon, 6 cases (29%); transverse colon, 6 cases, (29%); descending colon, 1 case (5%); sigmoid colon, 3 cases (13%); and rectum, 4 cases (19%). The colon cleansing level was adequate in all cases. The sensitivity and specificity of CCE2 for detecting LSTs were 81 and 100% respectively. For detecting LST-Gs and LST-NGs, the sensitivity and specificity were 71 and 100%, and 86 and 100%, respectively. There were 4 false-negative cases (LST-G (18 mm), cecum; LST-G (20 mm), sigmoid colon; LST-NG (25 mm), transverse colon; LST-NG (20 mm), transverse colon). Conclusions: The sensitivity for detecting LSTs is lower with CCE2 than it is with OC, especially for LSTs located on the right colon or for SSA/P.

Background and Aims In patients with ongoing overt obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB), prompt detection of the bleeding source is crucial to treatment success. However, there is no consensus on the optimal timing of diagnostic capsule endoscopy (CE). We investigated the clinical utility of emergency CE for detecting the source of ongoing overt OGIB. Methods We retrospectively evaluated 146 consecutive patients who, between February 2009 and July 2018, underwent emergency CE at Hiroshima University Hospital to detect the source of ongoing overt OGIB. Patients with a bleeding source located outside the small bowel were excluded. The remaining 127 patients were stratified according to the timing of CE relative to the onset of bleeding: patients in group A (n = 15, 12 men; mean age: 75 years; age range: 62–83 years) underwent CE within 48 hours of bleeding onset, whereas patients in group B (n = 112, 73 men; mean age: 65 years; age range: 17–88 years) underwent CE at >48 hours after bleeding onset. All patients underwent double-balloon endoscopy, and the final diagnosis was compared against the CE findings. Results The CE lesion detection rate was significantly higher in group A (12/15 patients, 80%) than in group B (53/112 patients, 47%) (p = 0.0174). There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding the patients' background characteristics. Vascular lesions were the most frequent finding in both groups. The diagnostic concordance rate between emergency CE and double-balloon endoscopy was 100% in group A and 92.9% in group B. Rebleeding after endoscopic treatment was confirmed in only one patient in group B. Conclusions Emergency CE represents a useful diagnostic modality in patients with ongoing overt OGIB, potentially improving detection rates and reducing rebleeding risk.