Is there a difference between capsule endoscopy and computed tomography as a first-line study in obscure gastrointestinal bleeding?

Jeon, Seong Ran; Jin-Oh, Kim; Gun, Kim Hyun; Hee, Lee Tae; Jun-Hyung, Cho; Ju, Park Eui; Seop, Lim Dae; Jung, Kim Wan; Min, Ko Bong; Young, Cho Joo; Seong, Lee Joon; Sung, Lee Moon
The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology
2014Jun ; 25 ( 3 ) :257-63.
저자 상세정보
Jeon, Seong Ran -
Jin-Oh, Kim -
Gun, Kim Hyun -
Hee, Lee Tae -
Jun-Hyung, Cho -
Ju, Park Eui -
Seop, Lim Dae -
Jung, Kim Wan -
Min, Ko Bong -
Young, Cho Joo -
Seong, Lee Joon -
Sung, Lee Moon -
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Capsule endoscopy (CE) is currently recommended as the first-line study in the evaluation of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB), while computed tomography (CT) is often thought of as complementary to CE. This study evaluated CT as a first-line study in OGIB and compared it with CE. MATERIALS AND

METHODS: Ninety-nine patients with OGIB who received both CE and CT were included. CT included conventional CT and CT enterography (CTE). Patients were divided into two groups: the CT before CE group (CT first group n=75) and the CE before CT group (CE first group n=24). The two groups were compared retrospectively.

RESULTS: Overt OGIB was present in 92% of patients. Mucosal lesions (46%) were the most common diagnoses, while tumors accounted for 7%. The diagnostic yield of CE was significantly higher than that of CT for both groups (CT first group, p<0.001; CE first group, p=0.013). In the CT first group, the diagnostic yield using both CT and CE (48/75; 64%) was significantly higher than that for CT alone (12/75; 16%, p=0.005). In the CE first group, the diagnostic yield with both CT and CE versus CE alone was 70.9% versus 62.5%, respectively, with a significant difference (p=0.045). CONCLUSION: There was no significant clinical difference associated with the order in which the tests were performed. However, CE and CT, when used together, had a significantly greater diagnostic yield than did CE or CT when used alone.
na
MESH
Adult, Aged, Angiodysplasia/complications/*diagnosis, *Capsule Endoscopy, Female, Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/*etiology, Gastrointestinal Neoplasms/complications/*diagnosis, Humans, Logistic Models, Male, Middle Aged, Multivariate Analysis, Peptic Ulcer/complications/*diagnosis, Retrospective Studies, *Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods
링크

주제코드
주제명(Target field)
연구대상(Population)
연구참여(Sample size)
대상성별(Gender)
질병특성(Condition Category)
연구환경(Setting)
연구설계(Study Design)
연구기간(Period)
중재방법(Intervention Type)
중재명칭(Intervention Name)
키워드(Keyword)
유효성결과(Recomendation)
The diagnostic yield of CE was significantly higher than that of CT for both groups (CT first group, p<0.001; CE first group, p=0.013).
연구비지원(Fund Source)
근거수준평가(Evidence Hierarchy)
출판년도(Year)
참여저자수(Authors)
대표저자
DOI
10.5152/tjg.2014.5498.
KCD코드
ICD 03
건강보험코드