A prospective, comparative study between push enteroscopy and wireless video capsule in patients with obscure digestive bleeding

Gossum, A. Van; François, Erik; Hittelet, Axel-Benoit; Schmit, Alain; Devière, Jacques

doi:10.1016/s0016-5085(03)00821-7

Cited by 46 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These results are supported by other studies published in abstract form. [23][24][25][26][27][28][29] Push enteroscopy has therapeutic potential unlike the capsule and is currently somewhat more widely available than capsule endoscopy and so perhaps should be considered first at the present time. Repeat gastroscopy and colonoscopy by an experienced operator may well be worth undertaking before investigating the small intestine.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wireless capsule endoscopy: a comparison with push enteroscopy in patients with gastroscopy and colonoscopy negative gastrointestinal bleeding

Mylonaki

Fritscher-Ravens²,

Swain³

2003

Gut

428

208

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wireless capsule endoscopy: a comparison with push enteroscopy in patients with gastroscopy and colonoscopy negative gastrointestinal bleeding

Mylonaki

Fritscher-Ravens²,

Swain³

2003

Gut

428

208

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…CE facilitates effective decision-making regarding subsequent investigations and treatments [4] . Diagnostic yield of CE for OGIB varied between 31% and 91% [9,[17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31] . Lema and Ruano-Ravina [32] reviewed the published studies of CE for OGIB and reported that sensitivity ranged from 79% to 95% and specificity from 75% to 100%.…”

Section: Indicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Five years’ experience with capsule endoscopy in a single center

Kav¹,

Bayraktar²

2009

WJG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Capsule endoscopy (CE) is a novel technology that facilitates highly effective and noninvasive imaging of the small bowel. Although its efficacy in the evaluation of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB) has been proven in several trials, data on uses of CE in different small bowel diseases are rapidly accumulating in the literature, and it has been found to be superior to alternative diagnostic tools in a range of such diseases. Based on literature evidence, CE is recommended as a first-line investigation for OGIB after negative bidirectional endoscopy. CE has gained an important role in the diagnosis and follow-up of Crohn's disease and celiac disease and in the surveillance of small bowel tumors and polyps in selected patients. Capsule retention is the major complication, with a frequency of 1%-2%. The purpose of this review was to discuss the procedure, indications, contraindications and adverse effects associated with CE. We also review and share our five-year experience with CE in various small bowel diseases. The recently developed balloon-assisted enteroscopies have both diagnostic and therapeutic capability. At the present time, CE and balloon-assisted enteroscopies are complementary techniques in the diagnosis and management of small bowel diseases.

show abstract

“…CE has a high diagnostic yield in OGIB, facilitates effective decision-making regarding subsequent investigations and treatments .Diagnostic yield of CE for OGIB varied between 31% and 91% (Adler et al,2004;Costamagna et al,2004;Ell et al,2002;Ersoy et al,2006;Ge et al,2004;Golder et al,2006;Hartmann et al 2003Hartmann et al ,2005Lewis & Swain,2002;Mata et al,2004;Panazio et al,2004;Scapa et al,2002;Saurin et al,2003;Saperas et al,2007;Van gossum et al,2003;Voderholzer et al,2003). The published studies of CE for OGIB were reviewed and reported that sensitivity ranged from 79% to 95% and specificity from 75% to 100% (Varela Lema & Ruano-Ravina, 2008 ).…”

Section: Obscure Gi Bleedingmentioning

confidence: 99%