Search in the Abstract Database

Search Abstracts 2013

* = Presenting author

P176. PillCam colon (C2) vs colonoscopy in the assessment of colon mucosa in patients with ulcerative colitis

M. San Juan Acosta1, A. Belda Cuesta1, Á. Caunedo1, F. Argüelles Arias1, L. Castro Laria1, B. Gómez Rodríguez1, M.L. Morales Barroso1, J. Romero Vázquez1, J.M. Herrerías Gutiérrez1, 1University Hospital Virgen Macarena, Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Seville, Spain

Background

The PillCam© colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) enables the study of colonic diseases in a safe and non-invasive way. Up to this date, the available studies have focused on the CCE accuracy to diagnose polyps, however there is only one study showing the PillCam colon (C2) capsule endoscopy accuracy in the assessment of colon mucosa in patients with Ulcerative Colitis (UC).

Aims:

  1. To assess the correlation between colon capsule endoscopy and the colonoscopy in the extent and degree of activity in patients with known diagnosis of ulcerative colitis.
  2. To evaluate the usefulness of the information provided by the colon capsule endoscopy in the patients studied.

Methods

Nineteen patients (8F / 11M, 49.42±16.99 years) with histological confirmed diagnosis of UC were included in the prospective, comparative and endoscopist-blinded study. Patients first underwent colon capsule endoscopy and 10 hours after a colonoscopy with superficial sedation midazolam 2–5 mg IV); they followed a standard colon preparation protocol. The assessment of the activity and the extent of the disease were determined respectively by the Mayo and the Montreal scales.

Results

C2 capsule could visualize the entire colon in 16 out of 19 patients (84.21%) and colonoscopy in 17 out of 19 (81.82%) (p = N.S). The causes of incomplete examination in the case of colon capsule endoscopy were: in 2 patients the battery ran out (hepatic flexure, transverse colon) and in 1 patient the capsule stayed in colonic diverticulum in splenic flexure, while incomplete colonoscopies were due to: intolerance in 2 patients (1 patient in descending colon and 1 in splenic flexure).

The statistical analysis compared both techniques and showed a match described as “very good” in terms of severity (kappa: 0.184, standard error 0.131) and extent (kappa: 0.709, standard error

Conclusion

Conclusions:

  • These preliminary data suggest that PillCam colon-C2 allow an assessment of the severity and extent of UC comparable to that obtained by colonoscopy.
  • A larger sample size at the end of this study would provide more consistent results.