TY - JOUR
T1 - Implementation of European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) recommendations for small-bowel capsule endoscopy into clinical practice
T2 - Results of an official ESGE survey
AU - Lazaridis, Lazaros Dimitrios
AU - Tziatzios, Georgios
AU - Toth, Ervin
AU - Beaumont, Hanneke
AU - Dray, Xavier
AU - Eliakim, Rami
AU - Ellul, Pierre
AU - Fernandez-Urien, Ignacio
AU - Keuchel, Martin
AU - Panter, Simon
AU - Rondonotti, Emanuele
AU - Rosa, Bruno
AU - Spada, Cristiano
AU - Jover, Rodrigo
AU - Bhandari, Pradeep
AU - Triantafyllou, Konstantinos
AU - Koulaouzidis, Anastasios
PY - 2021
Y1 - 2021
N2 -
Background We aimed to
document international practices in small-bowel capsule endoscopy
(SBCE), measuring adherence to European Society of Gastrointestinal
Endoscopy (ESGE) technical and clinical recommendations.
Methods Participants reached through the ESGE contact list completed a 52-item web-based survey.
Results 217 responded from 47
countries (176 and 41, respectively, from countries with or without a
national society affiliated to ESGE). Of respondents, 45 % had undergone
formal SBCE training. Among SBCE procedures, 91 % were performed with
an ESGE recommended indication, obscure gastrointestinal bleeding
(OGIB), iron-deficiency anemia (IDA), and suspected/established Crohn’s
disease being the commonest and with higher rates of positive findings
(49.4 %, 38.2 % and 53.5 %, respectively). A watchful waiting strategy
after a negative SBCE for OGIB or IDA was preferred by 46.7 % and
70.3 %, respectively. SBCE was a second-line exam for evaluation of
extent of new Crohn’s disease for 62.2 % of respondents. Endoscopists
adhered to varying extents to ESGE technical recommendations regarding
bowel preparation ( > 60 %), use in those with pacemaker holders
(62.5 %), patency capsule use (51.2 %), and use of a validated scale for
bowel preparation assessment (13.3 %). Of the respondents, 67 % read
and interpreted the exams themselves and 84 % classified exams findings
as relevant or irrelevant. Two thirds anticipated future increase in
SBCE demand. Inability to obtain tissue (78.3 %) and high cost (68.1 %)
were regarded as the main limitations, and implementation of artificial
intelligence as the top development priority (56.2 %).
Conclusions To some extent,
endoscopists follow ESGE guidelines on using SBCE in clinical practice.
However, variations in practice have been identified, whose implications
require further evaluation.
AB -
Background We aimed to
document international practices in small-bowel capsule endoscopy
(SBCE), measuring adherence to European Society of Gastrointestinal
Endoscopy (ESGE) technical and clinical recommendations.
Methods Participants reached through the ESGE contact list completed a 52-item web-based survey.
Results 217 responded from 47
countries (176 and 41, respectively, from countries with or without a
national society affiliated to ESGE). Of respondents, 45 % had undergone
formal SBCE training. Among SBCE procedures, 91 % were performed with
an ESGE recommended indication, obscure gastrointestinal bleeding
(OGIB), iron-deficiency anemia (IDA), and suspected/established Crohn’s
disease being the commonest and with higher rates of positive findings
(49.4 %, 38.2 % and 53.5 %, respectively). A watchful waiting strategy
after a negative SBCE for OGIB or IDA was preferred by 46.7 % and
70.3 %, respectively. SBCE was a second-line exam for evaluation of
extent of new Crohn’s disease for 62.2 % of respondents. Endoscopists
adhered to varying extents to ESGE technical recommendations regarding
bowel preparation ( > 60 %), use in those with pacemaker holders
(62.5 %), patency capsule use (51.2 %), and use of a validated scale for
bowel preparation assessment (13.3 %). Of the respondents, 67 % read
and interpreted the exams themselves and 84 % classified exams findings
as relevant or irrelevant. Two thirds anticipated future increase in
SBCE demand. Inability to obtain tissue (78.3 %) and high cost (68.1 %)
were regarded as the main limitations, and implementation of artificial
intelligence as the top development priority (56.2 %).
Conclusions To some extent,
endoscopists follow ESGE guidelines on using SBCE in clinical practice.
However, variations in practice have been identified, whose implications
require further evaluation.
U2 - 10.1055/a-1541-2938
DO - 10.1055/a-1541-2938
M3 - Article
C2 - 34320664
AN - SCOPUS:85113160955
SN - 0013-726X
VL - 53
SP - 970
EP - 980
JO - Endoscopy
JF - Endoscopy
IS - 9
ER -