Capillary refilling sign demonstrated by capsule endoscopy

Raju, Gottumukkala S.; Morris, Keith; Boening, Sharon; Carpenter, Deborah F.; Gómez, Guillermo A.

doi:10.1016/s0016-5107(03)02236-3

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, this area has a higher identification rate of lesions compared with other gastric areas. As noted in previous studies, antral lesions such as GAVE can be identified [18, 19]. Part of the visualisation also depends on the gastric emptying time, suggesting that if less time is spent in the stomach, this would mean lesser time for visualisation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 58%

Capsule Endoscopy of the Upper Gastrointestinal Tract – The Need for a Second Endoscopy

Peter

Heuss²,

Beglinger³

et al. 2005

Digestion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Aims: Capsule endoscopy (CE) has been recognised as an important investigational tool in the diagnosis of gastrointestinal disease. Studies have shown that CE can identify lesions in the upper gastrointestinal tract as well as in the small intestine. However, contrary to conventional oesophagogastroscopy results, the role of CE findings in the diagnostic algorithm of disorders such as gastrointestinal bleeding has not been well understood. We evaluated the frequency of lesions identified in the oesophagus and the stomach as well as their significance. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated patients who had undergone video CE over the last 2 years at our institution. Indication and findings in the oesophagus and the stomach were analysed and compared to previous oesophagogastroscopy findings. Patients in whom lesions were identified were followed up retrospectively for the significance of these findings. Results: 95 patients were included in the analysis (47 males, 48 females, mean ± SD age of 54.62 ± 19.2 years). The commonest indication for CE was gastrointestinal bleeding (45%), the second commonest anaemia (28%). CE identified significant lesions in the stomach of 11/95 (11.57%) patients. These lesions had been overlooked in 9/95 (9%) of patients by conventional oesophagogastroscopy prior to CE examination (p value < 0.05). Eight of 95 (8%) patients had oesophageal abnormalities detected by CE. The diagnosis changed the treatment of 8/11 (82%) patients with significant lesions. Conclusions: CE has an undefined role in evaluating upper gastrointestinal lesions. Significant lesions missed at oesophagogastroscopy were identified during CE examination. This study underpins the importance of a second conventional endoscopy in the diagnostic algorithm.

show abstract