Lei Ian Io, Agache Alexandra, Robertson Alexander, Thorndal Camilla, Deding Ulrik, Arasaradnam Ramesh, Koulaouzidis Anastasios
Gastroenterology, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
Gastroenterology, University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, England, UK.
BMJ Open Gastroenterol. 2025 May 11;12(1):e001800. doi: 10.1136/bmjgast-2025-001800.
Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) has emerged as a promising alternative for investigating lower gastrointestinal symptoms. However, its adoption has been limited due to concerns about cost-effectiveness, significantly influenced by follow-up endoscopy rates (FERs). Understanding CCE's FERs is crucial for its integration into routine clinical practice. We synthesised the evidence to evaluate the overall rate of further investigation in CCE.
A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.
Medline, Embase, and PubMed were searched through 15 August 2024.
Studies included reporting FERs after CCE, including subsequent endoscopic procedures and radiological imaging. There were no language restrictions or limitations in CCE referral indications, patient recruitment criteria, or pathologies investigated.
All studies were independently screened and extracted two times by four reviewers. A random-effects model was used for meta-analysis and meta-regression to identify key contributing factors.
2850 participants from 19 studies were included in the analysis. Compared with the key performance indicators for FERs in colonoscopy (0.10-0.15) and CT colonography (0.25), the pooled FER for CCE was found to be 0.42 (95% CI 0.34 to 0.50). The meta-regression analysis identified complete transit rates and adequate bowel cleansing quality as factors inversely associated with FERs. Furthermore, the CCE2 capsule demonstrated a higher reinvestigation risk than CCE1, likely due to its improved diagnostic accuracy. Although CCE indications were associated with lower FERs, subgroup analysis did not reach statistical significance with high heterogeneity.
This study highlights significant FERs for CCE and identifies key contributing factors, emphasising the importance of appropriate patient selection to reduce reinvestigation needs. Future research should focus on improving completion rates, bowel preparation protocols, and refining CCE indications. This will minimise environmental impact and enhance cost-effectiveness and patient satisfaction.
CRD42024567959.
结肠胶囊内镜检查(CCE)已成为一种有前景的用于调查下消化道症状的替代方法。然而,由于对成本效益的担忧,其应用受到限制,而成本效益又受到后续内镜检查率(FERs)的显著影响。了解CCE的FERs对于将其纳入常规临床实践至关重要。我们综合证据以评估CCE中进一步检查的总体发生率。
按照系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目指南进行系统评价和Meta分析。
检索Medline、Embase和PubMed至2024年8月15日。
纳入报告CCE后FERs的研究,包括后续的内镜检查程序和放射影像学检查。CCE转诊指征、患者招募标准或所调查的病理情况均无语言限制或局限。
所有研究由4名评审员独立筛选并提取两次。采用随机效应模型进行Meta分析和Meta回归以确定关键影响因素。
19项研究中的2850名参与者纳入分析。与结肠镜检查(0.10 - 0.15)和CT结肠成像(0.25)的FER关键绩效指标相比,发现CCE的合并FER为0.42(95%CI 0.34至0.50)。Meta回归分析确定全肠道通过率和充分的肠道清洁质量是与FER呈负相关的因素。此外,CCE2胶囊显示出比CCE1更高的再次检查风险,可能是由于其诊断准确性提高。尽管CCE指征与较低的FER相关,但亚组分析因异质性高未达到统计学显著性。
本研究突出了CCE显著的FERs并确定了关键影响因素,强调了适当选择患者以减少再次检查需求的重要性。未来研究应专注于提高完成率、肠道准备方案以及优化CCE指征。这将使环境影响最小化,并提高成本效益和患者满意度。
PROSPERO注册号:CRD42024567959。