A retrospective study in patients who underwent video capsule endoscopy (VCE) between 2006 and 2016 was conducted in the Clinic for gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Clinical Center of Serbia. A total of 245 patients underwent VCE. In 198 patients the indication was obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB), with 92 patients having overt and the other 106 occult bleeding. The remaining 47 patients underwent VCE due to suspected small bowel (SB) disease (i.e., Von Hippel-Lindau syndrome, familial adenomatous polyposis, Peutz Jeghers syndrome, Crohn's disease, prolonged diarrhea, abdominal pain, congenital lymphangiectasia, protein-losing enteropathy, tumors, refractory celiac disease, etc.). VCE identified a source of bleeding in 38.9% of patients (in the obscure overt group in 48.9% of patients, and in the obscure occult group in 30.2% of patients). The most common findings were angiodysplasias, tumors, Meckel's diverticulum and Crohn's disease. In the smaller group of patients with an indication other than OGIB, 38.3% of patients had positive VCE findings. The most common indication is OGIB, and the best candidates are patients with overt bleeding; patients with IBD should be evaluated in this setting.

This paper presents new perspectives on photonic technologies for capsule endoscopy. It first presents a review of conventional endoscopy (upper endoscopy and colonoscopy), followed by capsule endoscopy (CE), as well as their techniques, advantages, and drawbacks. The technologies for CEs presented in this paper include integration with the existing endoscopic systems that are commercially available. Such technologies include narrow-band imaging (NBI), photodynamic therapy (PDT), confocal laser endomicroscopy (CLE), optical coherence tomography (OCT), and spectroscopy in order to improve the performance of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract examination. In the context of NBI, two optical filters were designed and fabricated for integration into endoscopic capsules, allowing for the visualization of light centered at the 415 nm and 540 nm wavelengths. These optical filters are based on the principle of Fabry-Perot and were made of thin films of titanium dioxide (TiO2) and silicon dioxide (SiO2). Moreover, strategies and solutions for the adaptation of ECs for PDT are also discussed.

Location of bleeding can present a diagnostic challenge in patients without hematemesis more so than those with hematemesis.

To describe endoscopic diagnostic yields in both hematemesis and non-hematemesis gastrointestinal bleeding patient populations.

A retrospective analysis on a cohort of 343 consecutively identified gastrointestinal bleeding patients admitted to a tertiary care center emergency department with hematemesis and non-hematemesis over a 12-month period. Data obtained included presenting symptoms, diagnostic lesions, procedure types with diagnostic yields, and hours to diagnosis.

The hematemesis group (n = 105) took on average 15.6 h to reach a diagnosis versus 30.0 h in the non-hematemesis group (n = 231), (p = 0.005). In the non-hematemesis group, the first procedure was diagnostic only 53% of the time versus 71% in the hematemesis group (p = 0.02). 25% of patients in the non-hematemesis group required multiple procedures versus 10% in the hematemesis group (p = 0.004). Diagnostic yield for a primary esophagogastroduodenoscopy was 71% for the hematemesis group versus 50% for the non-hematemesis group (p = 0.01). Primary colonoscopies were diagnostic in 54% of patients and 12.5% as a secondary procedure in the non-hematemesis group. A primary video capsule endoscopy yielded a diagnosis in 79% of non-hematemesis patients (n = 14) and had a 70% overall diagnostic rate (n = 33).

Non-hematemesis gastrointestinal bleeding patients undergo multiple non-diagnostic tests and have longer times to diagnosis and then compared those with hematemesis. The high yield of video capsule endoscopy in the non-hematemesis group suggests a role for this device in this context and warrants further investigation.

Patients who need both capsule endoscopy (CE) and colonoscopy often undergo both examinations on the same day to avoid repeated bowel preparation and fasting. Sedation can relieve pain and is commonly used for colonoscopies but may influence the CE completion rate.To determine whether sedation with propofol influences the completion rate and small-bowel transit time (SBTT) of CE.From July 2014 to December 2014, patients (18-65 years old) who needed both CE and colonoscopy were assessed consecutively for enrollment in our study. Colonoscopies were performed with or without sedation based on patient preferences on the day of capsule ingestion. The completion rate, SBTT, and diagnostic yield of CEs were recorded. Patients' satisfaction and pain scores were also recorded.Sedation with propofol had no significant effect on CE completion rates (83.3% sedation group vs 81.8% nonsedation group, P = 0.86) but was associated with increased SBTT (403.6 ± 160.3 sedation group vs 334.5 ± 134.4 nonsedation group, P = 0.006). The diagnostic yields in the sedation and nonsedation groups were 69.4% and 65.9%, respectively (P = 0.74). The median satisfaction scores were 8.6 in the sedation group and 3.5 in the nonsedation group (P < 0.001). Median pain scores were 1.4 in the sedation group and 6.7 in the nonsedation group (P < 0.001).Sedation with propofol increased SBTT but had no effect on CE completion rates, suggesting that CE and colonoscopy with propofol can be performed on the same day (clinical trial registration number: ChiCTR-ONRC-14004866).

Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) is an orally ingested colon imaging tool used to evaluate patients with colonic disease. We evaluated the efficacy of CCE in helping physicians make decisions about patients with incomplete conventional colonoscopies (ICCs).

In a prospective study, we analyzed data from 34 patients with nonocclusive ICC who were eligible for CCE between May 2010 and April 2011; patients with colectomy, occlusive lesions, or inadequate bowel cleansing for the colonoscopy were excluded. Two experienced observers who were blinded to colonoscopy findings analyzed the CCE data. Four months later, medical records were reviewed to determine the effects of CCE on medical decision making. CCE was considered conclusive when the findings facilitated a medical decision.

Bowel cleanliness was good or excellent for 22 patients (64.7%). CCE exceeded the most proximal point reached by conventional colonoscopy in 29 patients (85.3%). CCE findings allowed formulation of a specific medical plan for 20 patients (58.8%); 12 (35.2%) had irrelevant or no lesions, so the study was concluded; 7 (20.5%) underwent polypectomy or surgery for advanced colorectal neoplasia; and 1 (3%) was treated for Crohn's disease. Inconclusive CCEs resulted from poor preparation of the bowel (n = 12) and excessively slow (n = 1) or rapid (n = 1) capsule transit.

CCE might be an alternative procedure to complete colon examination in patients with nonocclusive ICC.

More than 90% cases of chronic gastrointestinal bleeding can be diagnosed by upper endoscopy and/or colonoscopy, and therefore, obscure gastrointestinal bleeding has been defined as bleeding of unknown origin that persists after these conventional endoscopic evaluation. Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are rare tumors, but the most common form of mesenchymal tumors of the gastrointestinal tract. Small bowel is the second most common primary site for GISTs, and accounts for 2-10% of chronic bleeding sites. GISTs usually present as a sporadic and solitary tumor, and a minority of the cases of multiple GISTs are discovered as forms of hereditary or idiopathic tumor syndromes. Small bowel tumor has been difficult to diagnose because of absence of accurate and proper diagnostic tools. Recently developed wireless capsule endoscopy helps in the diagnostic work-up of small bowel diseases. We report a case of multiple jejunal GISTs presenting melena in a 39-year-old male, which was diagnosed with wireless capsule endoscopy.

Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) is a new, non-invasive technology.

To conduct a prospective, multicentre trial to compare CCE and colonoscopy in asymptomatic subjects enrolled in screening or surveillance programmes for the detection of colorectal neoplasia.

Patients underwent CCE on day one and colonoscopy (gold standard) on day two. CCE and colonoscopy were performed by independent endoscopists.

A total of 545 patients were recruited. CCE was safe and well-tolerated. Colon cleanliness was excellent or good in 52% of cases at CCE. Five patients with cancer were detected by colonoscopy, of whom two were missed by CCE. CCE accuracy for the detection of polyps ≥ 6 mm was 39% (95% CI 30-48) for sensitivity, 88% (95% CI 85-91) for specificity, 47% (95% CI 37-57) for positive predictive value and 85% (95% CI 82-88) for negative predictive value. CCE accuracy was better for the detection of advanced adenoma, in patients with good or excellent cleanliness and after re-interpretation of the CCE videos by an independent expert panel.

Although well-tolerated, CCE cannot replace colonoscopy as a first line investigation for screening and surveillance of patients at risk of cancer. Further studies should pay attention to colonic preparation (Clinicaltrial.gov number NCT00436514).

A capsule endoscope does not allow the examiner to observe a lesion from the desired direction in real time.

To develop a driving system for a self-propelling capsule endoscope (SPCE) by using a magnetic field.

Experimental endoscopic study in a live dog model.

A microactuator was developed with the aim of remote-control operation. We developed a driving system for SPCE by attaching a capsule endoscope to this medical microactuator and performed the following experiments. (1) We operated this SPCE by remote control in the stomach of a dog under sedation and obtained endoscopic images using a real-time monitoring system only. (2) We placed a hemostatic clip on the gastric mucosa and recorded images of this clip with the SPCE. (3) We also placed clips at 2 other sites in the stomach and asked the SPCE operator, who was unaware of the location of the clips, to identify the site, number, and color of the clips.

Evaluation of performance of a driving system for SPCE.

The operator was able to obtain endoscopic images with the SPCE in the stomach of a dog in vivo, in any desired direction, by remote control. SPCE produced clear images of the clips placed in the stomach. The operator was able to easily identify the site, number, and color of the clips.

Animal model.

Our trial suggests the possibility of clinical application of the driving system for an SPCE using a magnetic field.

Capsule endoscopy (CE) enables remote diagnostic inspection of the gastrointestinal tract without sedation and with minimal discomfort. Initially intended for small-bowel endoscopy, modifications to the original capsule have since been introduced for imaging of the esophagus and the colon. This review presents a research update on CE. Emphasis is placed on PillCam SB, PillCam ESO, and PillCam COLON (Given Imaging, Yoqneam, Israel) since the majority of published studies have investigated these devices. Discussion of initial reports on competing devices, such as EndoCapsule (Olympus, Tokyo, Japan) and MiroCam (IntroMedic Co., Seoul, Republic of Korea) are also included. The last section of this review outlines ongoing research and development directed at the identification of capsule location, control of capsule movement and expansion of the capability of microcameras to enhance the diagnostic power of CE. Research efforts aimed at endowing the capsule with a range of functionalities are also discussed, from tissue sampling for biopsy to optical biopsy and, in some cases, actual treatment (interventional CE), so that CE may ultimately replace both diagnostic and interventional flexible endoscopy.

Capsule endoscopy (CE) is a simple, safe, non-invasive, reliable technique, well accepted and tolerated by the patients, which allows complete exploration of the small intestine. The advent of CE in 2000 has dramatically changed the diagnosis and management of many diseases of the small intestine, such as obscure gastrointestinal bleeding, Crohn's disease, small bowel tumors, polyposis syndromes, etc. CE has become the gold standard for the diagnosis of most diseases of the small bowel. Lately this technique has also been used for esophageal and colonic diseases.

Since it was introduced in 2000, capsule endoscopy has become the gold standard for endoscopic examination of the small bowel in several clinical situations such as obscure gastrointestinal bleeding, suspicion of Crohn's disease, and surveillance of polyposis syndromes. In this technique a miniaturised endoscope, embedded in a swallowable capsule, is propelled through the gut by peristalsis and reaches the right colon in 5-8h. Images captured by the capsule are recorded on a hard drive in a belt worn by the patient. In addition to the extensive literature currently available on small bowel CE, new capsule devices are currently under evaluation for the examination of the colon with the purpose of screening for colorectal cancer, and of the oesophagus for screening for oesophageal varices and Barrett's oesophagus. These latter indications currently remain under evaluation. This review considers the technical aspects of capsule endoscopy and discusses the indications. Issues of safety and tolerance are also discussed.