Application of colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) to evaluate the whole gastrointestinal tract: a comparative study of single-camera and dual-camera analysis.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) was developed for the evaluation of colorectal pathology. In this study, our aim was to assess if a dual-camera analysis using CCE allows better evaluation of the whole gastrointestinal (GI) tract compared to a single-camera analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS We included 21 patients (12 males, mean age 56.20 years) submitted for a CCE examination. After standard colon preparation, the colon capsule endoscope (PillCam Colon™) was swallowed after reinitiation from its "sleep" mode. Four physicians performed the analysis: two reviewed both video streams at the same time (dual-camera analysis); one analyzed images from one side of the device ("camera 1"); and the other reviewed the opposite side ("camera 2"). We compared numbers of findings from different parts of the entire GI tract and level of agreement among reviewers. RESULTS A complete evaluation of the GI tract was possible in all patients. Dual-camera analysis provided 16% and 5% more findings compared to camera 1 and camera 2 analysis, respectively. Overall agreement was 62.7% (kappa = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.373-0.510). Esophageal (kappa = 0.611) and colorectal (kappa = 0.595) findings had a good level of agreement, while small bowel (kappa = 0.405) showed moderate agreement. CONCLUSION The use of dual-camera analysis with CCE for the evaluation of the GI tract is feasible and detects more abnormalities when compared with single-camera analysis.

High levels of Bifidobacteria are associated with increased levels of anthocyanin microbial metabolites: a randomized clinical trial.

The health benefits associated with the consumption of polyphenol-rich foods have been studied in depth, however, the full mechanism of action remains unknown. One of the proposed mechanisms is through microbiota interaction. In the present study, we aimed to explore the relationship between changes in fecal microbiota and changes in urinary phenolic metabolites after wine interventions. Nine participants followed a randomized, crossover, controlled interventional trial. After the washout period, they received red wine, dealcoholized red wine or gin for 20 days each. Polyphenol metabolites (n > 60) in urine were identified and quantified by UPLC-MS/MS and the microbial content of fecal samples was quantified by real-time quantitative PCR. Interventions with both red wine and dealcoholized red wine increased the fecal concentration of Bifidobacterium, Enterococcus and Eggerthella lenta, compared to gin intervention and baseline. When participants were categorized in tertiles of changes in fecal bacteria, those in the highest tertile of Bifidobacteria had higher urinary concentration changes in syringic acid, p-coumaric acid, 4-hydroxybenzoic acid and homovanillic acid (all anthocyanin metabolites) than those in tertile 1 (P < 0.05, all). In addition, changes of Bifidobacteria correlated positively with changes of these metabolites (r = 0.5-0.7, P < 0.05, all). Finally, the 68.5% changes in Bifidobacteria can be predicted by syringic acid and 4-hydroxybenzoic acid changes. This study confirms the important role of polyphenols as bacterial substrates and their modulatory capacity as an important field in the research of new products with prebiotic and probiotic characteristics for the food industry.

Application of colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) to evaluate the whole gastrointestinal tract: a comparative study of single-camera and dual-camera analysis.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) was developed for the evaluation of colorectal pathology. In this study, our aim was to assess if a dual-camera analysis using CCE allows better evaluation of the whole gastrointestinal (GI) tract compared to a single-camera analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS We included 21 patients (12 males, mean age 56.20 years) submitted for a CCE examination. After standard colon preparation, the colon capsule endoscope (PillCam Colon™) was swallowed after reinitiation from its "sleep" mode. Four physicians performed the analysis: two reviewed both video streams at the same time (dual-camera analysis); one analyzed images from one side of the device ("camera 1"); and the other reviewed the opposite side ("camera 2"). We compared numbers of findings from different parts of the entire GI tract and level of agreement among reviewers. RESULTS A complete evaluation of the GI tract was possible in all patients. Dual-camera analysis provided 16% and 5% more findings compared to camera 1 and camera 2 analysis, respectively. Overall agreement was 62.7% (kappa = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.373-0.510). Esophageal (kappa = 0.611) and colorectal (kappa = 0.595) findings had a good level of agreement, while small bowel (kappa = 0.405) showed moderate agreement. CONCLUSION The use of dual-camera analysis with CCE for the evaluation of the GI tract is feasible and detects more abnormalities when compared with single-camera analysis.