Video capsule endoscopy compared with standard endoscopy for the evaluation of small-bowel polyps in persons with familial adenomatous polyposis (with video).

BACKGROUND

Video capsule endoscopy (VCE) may be useful for surveillance of small-bowel polyps in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP).

OBJECTIVE

To compare VCE to standard endoscopy for diagnosing small-bowel polyps in a defined segment of small bowel (proximal to a tattoo) and the entire examined small bowel.

DESIGN

Prospective.

SETTING

Single tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS

Participants with FAP (n = 32). The majority were selected for their high number of proximal small-bowel polyps and prior endoscopic tattoo placement in the proximal small bowel.

INTERVENTIONS

VCE (interpreted by 2 readers), push enteroscopy (PE), and lower endoscopy (LE) to count and measure small-bowel polyps.

RESULTS

In the defined segment, VCE detected a median of 10.0 (interquartile range [IQR], 5.0-19.0) and 9.0 (IQR, 6.0-16.0) polyps for each reader compared with a median of 41.0 (IQR, 19.0-64.0) polyps on PE (P = .002). Agreement between the 2 methods was fair (kappa = 0.34, 0.36). Agreement between VCE and PE was poor to fair (kappa = 0.10, 0.22) for estimating the size of the largest polyp and poor (kappa = -0.20, -0.27) for detecting large polyps (> or =1 cm). In the entire examined small bowel, VCE diagnosed a median of 38.0 (IQR, 10.5-71.5) and 54.0 (IQR, 13.0-100.0) polyps for each reader compared with a median of 123.0 (IQR, 38.5-183.0) for combination endoscopy (PE and LE) (P < .001). Agreement between the 2 methods was fair to moderate (kappa = 0.21, 0.56).

LIMITATIONS

Participants selected for high polyp burden, and results may not be applicable to all patients with FAP.

CONCLUSIONS

VCE underestimates the number of small-bowel polyps in persons with FAP and does not reliably detect large polyps.