Abbonarsi

Motorized spiral enteroscopy versus double-balloon enteroscopy: a case-matched study - 19/01/23

Doi : 10.1016/j.gie.2022.09.030 
Webber Chan, MBBS, MRCP 1, 2, , Lim Kim Wei, MBBS, MRCP 1, 2, , Terence Tan, MBBS, MRCP 1, 2, Lim Gek Hsiang, MSc 3, Christopher Kong, MD 1, 2, Ennaliza Salazar, MBBS, MRCP 1, 2, Doreen Koay, MBBCh BAO, MRCP 1, Christopher Khor, MBBS, FRCP, FASGE 1, 2, Ravishankar Asokkumar, MBBS, FRCP, FASGE 1, 2,
1 Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore 
2 Division of Medicine, DUKE-NUS Graduate Medical School, Singapore 
3 Health Services Research Unit, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore 

Reprint requests: Ravishankar Asokkumar, MBBS, MRCP, FRCP, FASGE, Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Singapore General Hospital, 20 College Rd, Outram Campus, Singapore 169856.Department of Gastroenterology and HepatologySingapore General Hospital20 College RdOutram Campus169856Singapore

Abstract

Background and Aims

Motorized spiral enteroscopy (MSE) has been postulated to ease the complexities of the standard-of-care double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE). However, there are no comparative studies between MSE and DBE. This study aimed to compare the therapeutic outcomes and safety between MSE and DBE.

Methods

In this case-matched study, patients were matched 1:2 (MSE/DBE) by age, sex, body mass index, and American Society of Anesthesiology scores. Thirty-one patients who underwent MSE were compared with 62 patients who underwent DBE from 2014 to 2022. Our primary outcomes were to compare the technical and diagnostic success rates between DBE and MSE. Our secondary outcomes were to compare the therapeutic success and adverse event rates.

Results

The main indications for enteroscopy were suspected GI bleeding and positive radiologic findings. Prior abdominal surgery was reported in 35.5% and 22.6% of DBE and MSE patients, respectively. Most were antegrade enteroscopy (71%). We found no significant difference in the technical success (DBE 98.4% vs MSE 96.8%, P = .62), diagnostic success (DBE 66.1% vs MSE 54.8%, P = .25), and therapeutic success rates (DBE 62.8% vs MSE 52.9%, P = .62) between the groups. Adverse events occurred in 1 DBE and 11 MSE patients. Most were minor (n = 10, 25.6%). Two patients (5.1%) in the MSE group sustained deep lacerations in the proximal esophagus requiring hospitalization. One developed ileal perforation after MSE needing surgical repair.

Conclusions

In patients requiring enteroscopy, the diagnostic and therapeutic performance of MSE is similar to DBE. An increased frequency of adverse events was observed with MSE. There are some restrictions in the indication because of the design of MSE.

Il testo completo di questo articolo è disponibile in PDF.

Abbreviations : BMI, DBE, MSE


Mappa


 DISCLOSURE: The following author disclosed financial relationships: R. Asokkumar: Consultant for Apollo Endosurgery, USA. All other authors disclosed no financial relationships.


© 2023  American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Pubblicato da Elsevier Masson SAS. Tutti i diritti riservati.
Aggiungere alla mia biblioteca Togliere dalla mia biblioteca Stampare
Esportazione

    Citazioni Export

  • File

  • Contenuto

Vol 97 - N° 2

P. 314-324 - febbraio 2023 Ritorno al numero
Articolo precedente Articolo precedente
  • Patient-related adverse events and device failures associated with commercially available enteral or duodenal self-expanding metal stents: an analysis of the MAUDE database
  • Daxton Kennington, Daryl Ramai, Douglas G. Adler
| Articolo seguente Articolo seguente
  • Computer-assisted detection versus conventional colonoscopy for proximal colonic lesions: a multicenter, randomized, tandem-colonoscopy study
  • Thomas K.L. Lui, Dao Viet Hang, Stephen K.K. Tsao, Cynthia K.Y. Hui, Loey Lung Yi Mak, Michael K.L. Ko, Ka Shing Cheung, M.Y. Thian, R. Liang, Vivien W.M. Tsui, Chung Kwong Yeung, L.V. Dao, Wai K. Leung

Benvenuto su EM|consulte, il riferimento dei professionisti della salute.
L'accesso al testo integrale di questo articolo richiede un abbonamento.

Già abbonato a @@106933@@ rivista ?

@@150455@@ Voir plus

Il mio account


Dichiarazione CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM è registrato presso la CNIL, dichiarazione n. 1286925.

Ai sensi della legge n. 78-17 del 6 gennaio 1978 sull'informatica, sui file e sulle libertà, Lei puo' esercitare i diritti di opposizione (art.26 della legge), di accesso (art.34 a 38 Legge), e di rettifica (art.36 della legge) per i dati che La riguardano. Lei puo' cosi chiedere che siano rettificati, compeltati, chiariti, aggiornati o cancellati i suoi dati personali inesati, incompleti, equivoci, obsoleti o la cui raccolta o di uso o di conservazione sono vietati.
Le informazioni relative ai visitatori del nostro sito, compresa la loro identità, sono confidenziali.
Il responsabile del sito si impegna sull'onore a rispettare le condizioni legali di confidenzialità applicabili in Francia e a non divulgare tali informazioni a terzi.


Tutto il contenuto di questo sito: Copyright © 2026 Elsevier, i suoi licenziatari e contributori. Tutti i diritti sono riservati. Inclusi diritti per estrazione di testo e di dati, addestramento dell’intelligenza artificiale, e tecnologie simili. Per tutto il contenuto ‘open access’ sono applicati i termini della licenza Creative Commons.