Multicenter comparison of double-balloon enteroscopy and spiral enteroscopy

Background and Aim Spiral enteroscopy is a novel technique for small bowel exploration. The aim of this study is to compare double‐balloon and spiral enteroscopy in patients with suspected small bowel lesions. Methods Patients with suspected small bowel lesion diagnosed by capsule endoscopy were pro...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology 2013-06, Vol.28 (6), p.992-998
Main Authors: Rahmi, Gabriel, Samaha, Elia, Vahedi, Kouroche, Ponchon, Thierry, Fumex, Fabien, Filoche, Bernard, Gay, Gerard, Delvaux, Michel, Lorenceau-Savale, Camille, Malamut, Georgia, Canard, Jean-Marc, Chatellier, Gilles, Cellier, Christophe
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
capsule endoscopy
Double-Balloon Enteroscopy
Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal - methods
Female
Humans
Intestinal Diseases - pathology
Intestinal Diseases - surgery
Intestine, Small
Male
Middle Aged
Prospective Studies
spiral enteroscopy
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background and Aim Spiral enteroscopy is a novel technique for small bowel exploration. The aim of this study is to compare double‐balloon and spiral enteroscopy in patients with suspected small bowel lesions. Methods Patients with suspected small bowel lesion diagnosed by capsule endoscopy were prospectively included between September 2009 and December 2010 in five tertiary‐care academic medical centers. Results After capsule endoscopy, 191 double‐balloon enteroscopy and 50 spiral enteroscopies were performed. Indications were obscure gastrointestinal bleeding in 194 (80%) of cases. Lesions detected by capsule endoscopy were mainly angioectasia. Double‐balloon and spiral enteroscopy resulted in finding one or more lesions in 70% and 75% of cases, respectively. The mean diagnosis procedure time and the average small bowel explored length during double‐balloon and spiral enteroscopy were, respectively, 60 min (45–80) and 55 min (45–80) (P = 0.74), and 200 cm (150–300) and 220 cm (200–300) (P = 0.13). Treatment during double‐balloon and spiral enteroscopy was possible in 66% and 70% of cases, respectively. There was no significant major procedure‐related complication. Conclusion Spiral enteroscopy appears as safe as double‐balloon enteroscopy for small bowel exploration with a similar diagnostic and therapeutic yield. Comparison between the two procedures in terms of duration and length of small bowel explored is slightly in favor of spiral enteroscopy but not significantly.
ISSN:0815-9319
1440-1746
DOI:10.1111/jgh.12188