Clinical usefulness and acceptability of small‐bowel capsule endoscopy with panoramic imaging compared with axial imaging in Japanese patients

Abstract

AbstractObjectivesWe aimed to evaluate the usefulness and acceptability of CapsoCam Plus (CapsoCam) in Japanese patients.MethodsThis retrospective single‐center study enrolled 930 patients with suspected small‐bowel bleeding (SSBB) who underwent capsule endoscopy. Thirty‐three patients using CapsoCam and PillCam SB3 (SB3) were matched using propensity score matching. The diagnostic yield and the acceptability of CapsoCam were evaluated.ResultsThere was no SSBB case where capsule endoscopy was performed within 48 h of bleeding. CapsoCam had a significantly higher observation rate of the entire small bowel (97% vs. 73%, p = 0.006) and Vater's papilla (82% vs. 15%, p < 0.001) than SB3. The reading time of CapsoCam was significantly longer than that of SB3 (30 vs. 25 min, p < 0.001), and CapsoCam's time from the capsule endoscopy swallowing to read completion was longer than that of SB3 (37 vs. 12 h, p < 0.001). The two groups showed no difference in the capsule endoscopy findings according to the P classification. Notably, 85% of the patients using CapsoCam reported examination distress as “not at all” or “almost not,” and 94% reported swallowing difficulty as “very easy” or “easy.”ConclusionsCapsoCam took time to read; however, it is a well‐tolerated examination with a high observation rate of Vater's papilla and entire small‐bowel mucosa. Detectability of bleeding sources was comparable in both modalities for cases of occult SSBB and overt SSBB more than 48 h after bleeding. CapsoCam is a useful modality for patients with SSBB.