Brief Article
Copyright ©2013 Baishideng Publishing Group Co., Limited. All rights reserved.
World J Gastroenterol. Oct 7, 2013; 19(37): 6188-6192
Published online Oct 7, 2013. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i37.6188
Screening pre-bariatric surgery patients for esophageal disease with esophageal capsule endoscopy
Ashish Shah, Erica Boettcher, Marianne Fahmy, Thomas Savides, Santiago Horgan, Garth R Jacobsen, Bryan J Sandler, Michael Sedrak, Denise Kalmaz
Ashish Shah, Erica Boettcher, Marianne Fahmy, Thomas Savides, Denise Kalmaz, Department of Gastroenterology, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093, United States
Santiago Horgan, Garth R Jacobsen, Bryan J Sandler, Michael Sedrak, Department of Minimally Invasive Surgery, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA 92103, United States
Author contributions: Shah A wrote and assisted in editing the manuscript; Boettcher E and Fahmy M helped by enrolling patients and collecting and analyzing; Savides T assisted in study design, editing the manuscript and reading capsule endoscopies; Horgan S, Jacobsen GR, Sandler BJ and Sedrak M performed the pre-bariatric screening esophagogastroduodenoscopies; Kalmaz D designed the study, assisted in editing the manuscript and read the capsule endoscopies.
Correspondence to: Denise Kalmaz, MD, Department of Gastroenterology, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive (MC 0956), La Jolla, CA 92093, United States. dkalmaz@ucsd.edu
Telephone: +1-858-6575278 Fax: +1-858-6575022
Received: April 8, 2013
Revised: June 15, 2013
Accepted: July 30, 2013
Published online: October 7, 2013
Processing time: 193 Days and 7.8 Hours
Abstract

AIM: To determine if esophageal capsule endoscopy (ECE) is an adequate diagnostic alternative to esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in pre-bariatric surgery patients.

METHODS: We conducted a prospective pilot study to assess the diagnostic accuracy of ECE (PillCam ESO2, Given Imaging) vs conventional EGD in pre-bariatric surgery patients. Patients who were scheduled for bariatric surgery and referred for pre-operative EGD were prospectively enrolled. All patients underwent ECE followed by standard EGD. Two experienced gastroenterologists blinded to the patient’s history and the findings of the EGD reviewed the ECE and documented their findings. The gold standard was the findings on EGD.

RESULTS: Ten patients with an average body mass index of 50 kg/m2 were enrolled and completed the study. ECE identified 11 of 14 (79%) positive esophageal/gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) findings and 14 of 17 (82%) combined esophageal and gastric findings identified on EGD. Fisher’s exact test was used to compare the findings and no significant difference was found between ECE and EGD (P = 0.64 for esophageal/GEJ and P = 0.66 for combined esophageal and gastric findings respectively). Of the positive esophageal/GEJ findings, ECE failed to identify the following: hiatal hernia in two patients, mild esophagitis in two patients, and mild Schatzki ring in two patients. ECE was able to identify the entire esophagus in 100%, gastric cardia in 0%, gastric body in 100%, gastric antrum in 70%, pylorus in 60%, and duodenum in 0%.

CONCLUSION: There were no significant differences in the likelihood of identifying a positive finding using ECE compared with EGD in preoperative evaluation of bariatric patients.

Keywords: Capsule endoscopy; Bariatric; Moderate sedation; Esophagogastroduodenoscopy; Esophageal capsule endoscopy

Core tip: This is the first prospective study that shows in pre-bariatric patients, capsule endoscopy can be used to identify positive esophageal disorders when compared to a sedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Further studies are needed to help define the role of esophageal capsule endoscopy as a tool for pre-operative evaluation.