Standing‐type magnetically guided capsule endoscopy versus gastroscopy for gastric examination: multicenter blinded comparative trial

Hua‐sheng Lai,Xin‐ke Wang,Jian‐qun Cai,Xin‐mei Zhao,Ze‐long Han,Jie Zhang,Zhen‐yu Chen,Zhi‐zhao Lin,Ping‐hong Zhou,Bing Hu,Ai‐min Li,Si‐de Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/den.13520

2019-10-10

Digestive Endoscopy

Abstract:ObjectivesTo compare the feasibility and safety after gastrointestinal checkup by standing‐type magnetically controlled capsule endoscopy (SMCE) and conventional gastroscopy.MethodsThis was a prospective multicenter, blinded study that compared SMCE with gastroscopy in patients for the duration of April 2018 to July 2018. All patients first went through SMCE and then subsequently underwent gastroscopy with intravenous anesthesia. We calculated the compliance rates of gastric lesion detection by SMCE using gastroscopy as the standard. The capsule retention rate, incidence of adverse events, and patient satisfaction were documented throughout the study.Results161 patients who completed the SMCE and gastroscopy were included in the analysis. The positive compliance rate among SMCE and gastroscopy was 92.0% (95%CI 80.77%–97.78%). The negative compliance rate was 95.5% (89.80%, 98.52%). Moreover, the overall compliance rate was 94.4% (89.65%, 97.41%). Sixty‐four pathological outcomes were identified. Out of those 64 outcomes, 50 were detected by both procedures. The gastroscopy method neglected seven findings (such as 5 erosions, 1 polyp, and 1 ulcer). Further, SMCE also overlooked seven lesions (such as 1 erosion, 2 polyps, 1 atrophy, and 3 submucosal tumors). Capsule retention or related adverse events were not reported.ConclusionSMCE provides an equivalent agreement to gastroscopy and may be useful for the screening of gastric illnesses without any anesthesia.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

gastroenterology & hepatology,surgery