Search

Background: The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) has recently issued a technical review focused on small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE)., Aim: To compare SBCE current practice in Italy to ESGE technical recommendations., Material and Methods: A dedicated per-centre semi-quantitative questionnaire was prepared by a group of SBCE experts. One-hundred-fifty Centres were invited to participate in the data collection concerning SBCEs performed between June 2016 and June 2017. Data were compared with ESGE recommendations., Results: 120 Centres participated in the data collection. Current practices agreed with ESGE recommendations in 56.3% (9/16) of the issues evaluated. Differences between ESGE recommendations and current practice concerned the management of patients with pacemakers or cardiac implantable defibrillators (which was in agreement with ESGE recommendations in 31.7% and 15.8% of Centres, respectively), the SBCE setting (only 51% of SBCEs were performed as outpatients procedures), the assessment of capsule excretion (timing and modality were in agreement with ESGE recommendation in 20.0% of Centres), and in the involvement of trained nurses or fellows in training as pre-readers (7/120; 5.8%)., Conclusions: Although SBCE is widely used and largely available in Italy, there are still some technical, practical and organizational issues that can be modified to bridge the gap between current practice and ESGE guideline recommendations., (Copyright © 2018 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: In Lombardia, one of the 20 Italian administrative Regions, small-bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) was introduced in 2001. In January 2011, the Regional Health Authorities established a reimbursement for outpatient SBCE., Aim: To prospectively record data on SBCE between 2011-2013 and compare them to similar data retrospectively collected from the same geographical area (covering the period 2001-2008) and published in 2008., Methods: Consecutive SBCEs performed between January 2011 and December 2013 in Lombardia were prospectively collected., Results: In 3 years, 3142 SBCEs were collected; the diagnostic yield (DY) and the overall complication rate were 48.4 and 0.9%, respectively. The main indication was suspected small-bowel bleeding (76.6% of patients); complete small-bowel inspection was achieved in 2796 (89.0%) patients. SBCE was performed as an outpatient procedure in 1945 patients (61.9%). A significant increase in the rate of patients undergoing SBCE for suspected small-bowel bleeding was observed from 2001-2008 to 2011-2013 (67.3 vs. 76.1%; p < 0.001). There was an increase in the number of complete small-bowel examinations (81.2 vs. 89.0%; p < 0.001) and of outpatient SBCEs (6.7 vs. 61.9%; p < 0.001). Conversely, both the retention rate (2.1 vs. 0.8%; p < 0.001) and the rate of patients undergoing SBCE for Crohn's disease (11.5 vs. 5.5%; p < 0.001) decreased significantly. The overall DY remained stable (50.6 vs. 48.4%; p = 0.089)., Conclusion: Our study shows that, over 13 years, the SBCE safety profile and completion rate significantly improved over time; a change in the spectrum of clinical indications was also observed.

Background and Aims: Both Agile patency capsule (PC) and small-bowel cross-sectional imaging (SBCSI) techniques have been used to assess small-bowel patency in patients at high risk of capsule retention. The present study aimed to compare capsule retention rates in high-risk patients with negative PC or SBCSI., Materials and Methods: Between January 2011 and December 2013, consecutive patients undergoing small-bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) in the Lombardia region were prospectively entered into a dedicated registry. They were classified as being at high or low risk of capsule retention by the local investigator according to predefined clinical criteria. High-risk patients underwent either PC or SBCSI depending on local expertise and availability; those who tested negative underwent SBCE., Results: Out of 3117 patients (male/female: 1667/1450, mean age: 63.1±17.7), 2942 (94.4%) were classified as being at low risk and 175 (5.6%) were classified as being at high risk for capsule retention. Among 175 high-risk patients, 151 (86.3%) had negative PC and 24 (13.7%) had negative SBCSI: capsule retention occurred in two patients with negative SBCSI (8.3%) and in one patient (0.7%) with negative PC (P=0.049). The capsule retention rates in high-risk patients with negative PC and in low-risk patients (20/2942; 0.7%) were comparable (P=1.0)., Conclusion: The capsule retention rate is similar in low-risk and negative PC high-risk patients. Conversely, high-risk patients with negative SBCSI have a significantly higher capsule retention rate. Our data suggest that in high-risk patients, negative SBCSI examination is not reassuring and, when SBCE is indicated, PC should be performed.

Background: Data about strategies for improving the diagnostic ability of capsule endoscopy readers are lacking., Aim: (1) To evaluate the detection rate and the interobserver agreement among readers with different experience; (2) to verify the impact of a specific training (hands-on training plus expert tutorial) on these parameters., Methods: 17 readers reviewed 12 videos twice; between the two readings they underwent the training. The identified small bowel findings were described by a simplified version of Structured Terminology and classifies as clinically significant/non-significant. Findings identified by the readers were compared with those identified by three experts (Reference Standard)., Results: The Reference Standard identified 26 clinically significant findings. The mean detection rate of overall readers for significant findings was low (about 50%) and did not change after the training (46.2% and 46.4%, respectively). There was no difference in the detection rate among readers with different experience. The interobserver agreement with the Reference Standard in describing significant findings was moderate (k = 0.44; CI95%: 0.39-0.50) and did not change after the training (k = 0.44; CI95%: 0.38-0.49) or stratifying readers according to their experience., Conclusions: Both the interobserver agreement and the detection rate of significant findings are low, regardless of the readers' experience. Our training did not significantly increase the performance of readers with different experience., (Copyright © 2012 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

PillCam colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) is an innovative noninvasive, and painless ingestible capsule technique that allows exploration of the colon without the need for sedation and gas insufflation. Although it is already available in European and other countries, the clinical indications for CCE as well as the reporting and work-up of detected findings have not yet been standardized. The aim of this evidence-based and consensus-based guideline, commissioned by the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) is to furnish healthcare providers with a comprehensive framework for potential implementation of this technique in a clinical setting., (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)

Objective: A complete examination of the small intestine is possible by video capsule endoscopy (VCE). The aim of this study was to evaluate current indications for performing VCE in celiac disease., Methods: In all 84 celiac disease patients on a gluten-free diet who had undergone VCE were enrolled at five centers in Europe. The indications, findings and clinical impact of VCE were recorded by a structured questionnaire. VCE was also carried out in 34 consecutive patients with untreated celiac disease (controls) in another center., Results: Out of the 84 patients, 34 had overt symptoms and small intestinal histology compatible with refractory celiac disease. VCE was normal in 9 patients, and 7 had only proximal and one distal atrophy, 14 had intestinal ulcer and 2 an intestinal stricture. VCE was used in the adjustment of immunosuppressive treatment in 9 patients. In the remaining 50 patients, a VCE was performed because of less severe symptoms, 31 of which had an earlier histological recovery. The VCE showed proximal small bowel atrophy in 21 and distal atrophy in 3 patients, and 3 ulcers were seen. In this group the patients received mainly advice with a view to achieving better dietary compliance. Of the 34 newly detected celiac patients, 4 were normal, 27 proximal and 3 had distal small intestinal atrophy in the VCE., Conclusions: VCE has a definite impact on the management of refractory sprue. In the remaining patients with established celiac disease, the procedure plays a more limited role., (© 2012 The Authors. Journal of Digestive Diseases © 2012 Chinese Medical Association Shanghai Branch, Chinese Society of Gastroenterology, Renji Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine and Blackwell Publishing Asia Pty Ltd.)

Colon Capsule Endoscopy represents a new diagnostic technology for colonic exploration. Despite the great enthusiasm around this new technique, only few studies are available in the literature, and reported results are still controversial and non-homogeneous. Current preparation protocols have led to discordant results. In January 2010, the first Italian Meeting on Colon Capsule Endoscopy was held. Aim of this Meeting was to critically evaluate the available results obtained by Colon Capsule Endoscopy in clinical studies, in order to identify the proper test indications, to propose a shared preparation protocol and Colon Capsule Endoscopy procedure. Studies published in literature were extensively reviewed and analysed during the Meeting. The available evidence served to propose recommendations for preparation protocols, proper test indications and Colon Capsule Endoscopy procedure. Possible perspectives were also critically analysed and are reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2010 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Although capsule endoscopy is the cornerstone for the evaluation of the small bowel in patients with obscure GI bleeding data about costs are lacking., Aim: To evaluate, from a third party payer point of view, whether performing capsule endoscopy as an outpatient instead of an inpatient procedure can reduce costs., Materials and Methods: The data source is a multicentre survey collecting data for 2921 patients; 1486 of them underwent capsule endoscopy for obscure GI bleeding or chronic unexplained iron-deficiency anaemia as inpatients (814 with positive, 211 with inconclusive and 461 with negative result). We estimated costs of inpatient procedures based on the diagnosis related groups (DRG) system, while those of outpatient procedures on reimbursement provided in five Italian regions., Results: We estimated that the cost for each inpatient undergoing capsule endoscopy is about € 1775.90. Assuming that all these patients had undergone the same procedure as outpatients, € 175.00-741.00 per patient (depending on the reimbursement and/or on diagnosis related group codes applied) would have been saved., Conclusions: Our estimate suggests that, from the third party payer's perspective and using the diagnosis related group reimbursement system, shifting capsule endoscopy from inpatient to outpatient procedure, would be potentially cost saving at least for patients referred for obscure GI bleeding or chronic unexplained anaemia., (Copyright © 2010 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aim: Data about small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) come from studies involving small and highly selected populations. The study aim was to describe extent of use, indications, results, complications, and practical issues of SBCE in clinical practice in a Northern Italian Region (Lombardia)., Materials and Methods: Twenty-three out of 29 invited centers fulfilled a specific questionnaire., Results: Between 2001 and 2008, 2921 procedures were performed and both the number of centers performing SBCE (from 5 to 29) and the number of SBCE (from 7.2 to 69.2 per month) increased steadily. The main indications for SBCE were: obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB) (43.4%), unexplained anemia (23.9%), suspected Crohn's disease (7.8%) and abdominal pain (5.3%). Overall, SBCE was positive in 50% of cases, negative in 36% and undefined in 14%. The highest diagnostic yields were observed in patients with OGIB (62.5%), polypoid syndromes (74.1%), known (54.8%) or suspected (47.3%) inflammatory bowel disease, while the yields were low in patients examined for chronic diarrhea (27.4%) and abdominal pain (14.9%), 61 patients (2.1%) experienced capsule retention. Thirty-two of them eventually excreted the capsule naturally while endoscopic or surgical retrieval was necessary in 29 (1%) (in two because of obstruction)., Conclusion: Over a period of 7 years the use of SBCE in Lombardia increased steadily confirming, in clinical practice, a high diagnostic yield and an acceptable safety profile.

These recommendations on video capsule endoscopy, an emerging technology with an impact on the practice of endoscopy, were developed by the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guidelines Committee. The first draft of each section was prepared by one or two members of the writing team, who were selected as experts on the content of that section on the basis of their published work. They used evidence-based methodology, performing MEDLINE and PubMed literature searches to identify relevant clinical studies. Abstracts from scientific meetings were included only if there was no published full paper on a particular topic. If there was disagreement, the first author of the Guideline made the final decision. Recommendations were graded according to the strength of the supporting evidence. The draft guideline was critically reviewed by all authors and submitted to the ESGE councillors for their critical review before approval of the final document. The ESGE Guidelines Committee acknowledges that this document is based on a critical review of the data available at the time of preparation and that further studies may be needed to clarify some aspects. Moreover, this Guideline may be revised as necessary to account for changes in technology, new data, or other aspects of clinical practice. This document should be regarded as supplying recommendations only to gastroenterologists in providing care to their patients. It is not a set of rules and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care, or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment. These recommendations must be interpreted according to the clinician's knowledge, expertise, and clinical judgment in the management of individual patients and, if necessary, a course of action that varies from recommendations must be undertaken., (Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart. New York.)

Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) with 3 to 6 biopsies in the descending duodenum is the gold standard for the diagnosis of celiac disease. At the time of the first diagnosis of celiac disease, an extensive evaluation of the small bowel is not recommended. However, video capsule endoscopy, because of its good sensitivity and specificity in recognizing the Endoscopic features of celiac disease, can be considered a valid alternative to EGD in patients unable or unwilling to undergo EGD with biopsies. Capsule endoscopy is also a possible option in selected cases with strong suspicion of celiac disease but negative first-line tests. In evaluating patients with refractory or complicated celiac disease, in whom a complete evaluation of the small bowel is mandatory (at least in refractory celiac disease type II patients) because of the possible presence of complications beyond the reach of conventional endoscopes, both capsule endoscopy and balloon-assisted enteroscopy have been found to be helpful. In these patients, capsule endoscopy offers several advantages: it is well tolerated, it allows inspection of the entire small bowel, and it is able to recognize subtle mucosal changes. However, in this setting, capsule endoscopy should ideally be coupled with imaging techniques that provide important information about the thickness of the wall of the intestine and about extraluminal abnormalities. Although deep enteroscopy (such as balloon enteroscopy) is expensive, time-consuming, and potentially risky in these frail patients, they may have a key role, because they make it possible to take tissue samples from deep in the small intestine.

Current guidelines recommend screening all cirrhotic patients by endoscopy, to identify patients at risk of bleeding who should undergo prophylactic treatment. However, since the prevalence of varices in cirrhotic patients is variable, universal screening would imply a large number of unnecessary endoscopies and a heavy burden for endoscopy units. In addition, compliance to screening programs may be hampered by the perceived unpleasantness of endoscopy. Predicting the presence of oesophageal varices by non-invasive means might increase compliance and would permit to restrict the performance of endoscopy to those patients with a high probability of having varices. Over the years, several studies have addressed this issue by assessing the potential of biochemical, clinical and ultrasound parameters, transient elastography, CT scanning and video capsule endoscopy. The platelet count/spleen diameter ratio, CT scanning and video capsule endoscopy have shown promising performance characteristics, although none of them is equivalent to EGD. These methods are perceived by patients as preferable to endoscopy and thus might increase adherence to screening programs. Whether this will compensate for the lower sensitivity of these alternative techniques, and ultimately improve the outcomes if more patients undergo screening, is the crucial question that will have to be answered in the future.

Until recently, diagnosis and management of small-bowel tumors were delayed by the difficulty of access to the small bowel and the poor diagnostic capabilities of the available diagnostic techniques. An array of new methods has recently been developed, increasing the possibility of detecting these tumors at an earlier stage. Capsule endoscopy (CE) appears to be an ideal tool to recognize the presence of neoplastic lesions along this organ, since it is non-invasive and enables the entire small bowel to be visualized. High-quality images of the small-bowel mucosa may be captured and small and flat lesions recognized, without exposure to radiation. Recent studies on a large population of patients undergoing CE have reported small-bowel tumor frequency only slightly above that reported in previous surgical series (range, 1.6%-2.4%) and have also confirmed that the main clinical indication to CE in patients with small-bowel tumors is obscure gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. The majority of tumors identified by CE are malignant; many were unsuspected and not found by other methods. However, it remains difficult to identify pathology and tumor type based on the lesion's endoscopic appearance. Despite its limitations, CE provides crucial information leading in most cases to changes in subsequent patient management. Whether the use of CE in combination with other new diagnostic (MRI or multidetector CT enterography) and therapeutic (Push-and-pull enteroscopy) techniques will lead to earlier diagnosis and treatment of these neoplasms, ultimately resulting in a survival advantage and in cost savings, remains to be determined through carefully-designed studies.

Background and Study Aim: Small-bowel tumors account for 1% - 3% of all gastrointestinal neoplasms. Recent studies with video capsule endoscopy (VCE) suggest that the frequency of these tumors may be substantially higher than previously reported. The aim of the study was to evaluate the frequency, clinical presentation, diagnostic/therapeutic work-up, and endoscopic appearance of small-bowel tumors in a large population of patients undergoing VCE., Patients and Methods: Identification by a questionnaire of patients with VCE findings suggesting small-bowel tumors and histological confirmation of the neoplasm seen in 29 centers of 10 European Countries., Results: Of 5129 patients undergoing VCE, 124 (2.4%) had small-bowel tumors (112 primary, 12 metastatic). Among these patients, indications for VCE were: obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (108 patients), abdominal pain (9), search for primary neoplasm (6), diarrhea with malabsorption (1). The main primary small-bowel tumor type was gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) (32%) followed by adenocarcinoma (20%) and carcinoid (15%); 66% of secondary small-bowel tumors were melanomas. Of the tumors, 80.6% were identified solely on the basis of VCE findings. 55 patients underwent VCE as the third procedure after negative bidirectional endoscopy. The lesions were single in 89.5% of cases, and multiple in 10.5%. Retention of the capsule occurred in 9.8% of patients with small-bowel tumors. After VCE, 54/124 patients underwent 57 other examinations before treatment; in these patients enteroscopy, when performed, showed a high diagnostic yield. Treatment was surgery in 95% of cases., Conclusions: Our data suggest that VCE detects small-bowel tumors in a small proportion of patients undergoing this examination, but the early use of this tool can shorten the diagnostic work-up and influence the subsequent management of these patients.

Currently, oesophago-gastroduodenoscopy is the standard method to diagnose the presence of oesophago-gastric varices and to estimate the risk of bleeding. It is recommended that all patients undergo endoscopic screening for varices at the time when cirrhosis is diagnosed. After screening endoscopy, patients with medium or large varices should be treated to prevent bleeding, while all other patients should undergo periodic surveillance endoscopy. However, at a given point in time a variable proportion of patients will not have varices, since the prevalence of varices is variable. Thus, screening all cirrhotic patients with endoscopy to detect the presence of varices implies a number of unnecessary endoscopies. In recent years a wealth of new methods have been proposed as alternatives to conventional oesophago-gastroduodenoscopy for the non-invasive or minimally invasive diagnosis of oesophageal varices. Three of these methods (the platelet count/spleen diameter ratio, Fibrotest and Fibroscan) are truly non-invasive. Of these, the former is promising and needs a proper validation, Fibrotest appears to be insufficiently precise, while Fibroscan needs further evaluation. Multidetector CT oesophagography and capsule endoscopy are not entirely "non-invasive", since the first requires air insufflation into the oesophagus via an orally passed tube, and the latter requires swallowing the capsule. Multidetector CT oesophagography is promising, but needs further evaluation; capsule endoscopy is safe and reliable and might be proposed as an alternative to oesophago-gastroduodenoscopy in patients unable or unwilling to undergo oesophago-gastroduodenoscopy.

Objectives: Duodenal biopsy is the current gold standard for diagnosis of celiac disease. Videocapsule endoscopy examines the entire small bowel and allows visualization of mucosal villi. We evaluated the potential of videocapsule endoscopy in assessing the severity and extent of mucosal changes in patients with suspected celiac disease., Methods: Consecutive patients with signs/symptoms suggesting celiac disease and positive anti-gliadin and/or anti-endomysial and/or anti-tissue transglutaminase antibodies underwent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and videocapsule endoscopy. Duodenal biopsies were classified according to modified Marsh's criteria. Capsule findings were evaluated for the presence of lesions compatible with celiac disease (scalloping of duodenal folds, fissures, flat mucosa, and mosaic appearance)., Results: Forty-three patients were studied. Duodenal histology was normal in 11 and compatible with celiac disease in 32. Using duodenal histology as the gold standard, the performance characteristics of capsule endoscopy for the diagnosis of celiac disease were: sensitivity 87.5% (95% CI 76.1-98.9%), specificity 90.9% (95% CI 81.0-100%), positive predictive value 96.5% (95% CI 90.1-100%), negative predictive value 71.4% (95% CI 55.8-87%), positive and negative likelihood ratios 9.6 and 0.14, respectively. Eighteen patients had mucosal changes extending beyond the duodenum, involving the entire small bowel in three. These patients tended to have more severe symptoms, but the difference was not statistically significant. Interobserver agreement for the diagnosis of celiac disease by capsule endoscopy ranged between 79.2 and 94.4%; kappa values ranged between 0.56 and 0.87., Conclusions: Videocapsule endoscopy shows good sensitivity and excellent specificity for the detection of villous atrophy in patients with suspected celiac disease.

Background: Capsule enteroscopy is considered the gold standard for evaluating patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding. The costs of capsule enteroscopy examination, however, make it uncertain whether the clinically relevant diagnostic gain is also associated with cost savings., Aim: To evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of capsule enteroscopy in patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding., Methods: Retrospective study was carried out in nine Italian gastroenterology units from 2003 to 2005. Data on 369 consecutive patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding were collected. The diagnostic yield of capsule enteroscopy vs. other imaging procedures was evaluated as a measure of efficacy. The values of Diagnosis Related Group 175 (euro 1884.00 for obscure-occult bleeding and euro 2141.00 for obscure-overt bleeding) were calculated as measures of economic outcomes in the cost analysis., Results: Obscure and occult gastrointestinal bleeding was recorded in 177 patients (48%) with a mean duration of anemia history of 17.6+/-20.7 months. Among patients, 60.9% had had at least one hospital admission, 21.2% at least two, and 1.2% of obscure bleeders up to nine admissions. Overall, 58.4% of patients had positive findings with capsule enteroscopy compared with 28.0% with other imaging procedures (P<0.001). The mean cost of a positive diagnosis with capsule enteroscopy was euro 2090.76 and that of other procedures was euro 3828.83 with a mean cost saving of euro 1738.07 (P<0.001) for one positive diagnosis., Conclusions: Capsule enteroscopy is a cost-saving approach in the evaluation of patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding.

Capsule endoscopy is a new technology that was recently introduced into clinical practice for the diagnosis of gastrointestinal diseases. As of today, three different capsule types have been produced, designed for the exploration of the small bowel (PillCam SB), the esophagus (PillCam ESO) and the colon (PillCam Colon). The PillCam SB has gained widespread acceptance as a powerful tool for the diagnosis of bleeding from the small bowel as well as for other indications. The PillCam ESO has been used to study patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease, for the screening of Barrett's esophagus, and for the screening and surveillance of esophageal varices in patients with cirrhosis. The results of the pilot studies carried out with this capsule have been encouraging. Large-scale studies are ongoing. The evaluation of the potential of the PillCam Colon capsule is still in its infancy: the two pilot studies published showed that this capsule can produce high-quality images of the colon. The potential of this capsule for clinical purposes, such as colon cancer screening, needs to be evaluated., (2007 S. Karger AG, Basel)

Abstract: Background: Capsule enteroscopy is a non-invasive diagnostic tool for the study of the small bowel. Due to the risk of capsule retention, capsule enteroscopy is contraindicated in patients with suspected small bowel strictures. The Given® Patency Capsule is a disintegration time-controlled capsule developed to identify patients with strictures that may cause capsule enteroscopy retention. The presence of the patency capsule within the patient''s body can be detected by a radio-frequency scanner. Aim of the study: To evaluate safety and usefulness of the patency capsule in preventing capsule retention in patients at high risk. Patients and methods: Thirty-two patients were studied. Indications for patency capsule were: (A) Crohn''s disease (18), (B) previous intestinal surgery (7), (C) previous obstruction (1), A+B (3), A+C (1), B+C (2). Patients were evaluated with the scanner at 72h from ingestion. Results: At 72h, 24 patients had already excreted the intact capsule in the stool. Of these, two experienced abdominal pain during capsule passage. In the other eight patients, the scanner detected the presence of the patency capsule. Four of them excreted the capsule intact in the stool after 72–96h, the remaining four never found the capsule in the stool. The 26 patients who excreted the patency capsule intact without experiencing abdominal pain were deemed eligible for the capsule enteroscopy procedure, which was performed uneventfully in the 25 who agreed to undergo the examination. Conclusions: The patency capsule is useful to identify, among patients at high risk, those who can be submitted to capsule enteroscopy without risks of capsule retention. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]