Role of wireless capsule endoscopy in inflammatory bowel

Capsule endoscopy (CE) offers state-of-the-art imaging of the small bowel. In Crohn's disease its clinical role is still uncertain. This report analyses the usefulness of CE in patients with suspected Cronh's disease, in patients with established Crohn's disease (when assessing severity, occult gastrointestinal bleeding and/or as a guide to therapy), in patients with inflammatory bowel disease unclassified (IBDU), and in individuals with ulcerative colitis. The first item in this group is the most important although there is no strong evidence to establish the position of CE in the diagnostic workup. In patients with established Crohn's disease, recently developed activity scores are promising tools for an accurate assessment of severity. As a guide to therapy, CE should be focused on patients with unexplained symptoms when other investigations are inconclusive. In postoperative Crohn's Disease, international consensus recommended considering CE only if ileocolonoscopy is contraindicated or unsuccessful. In the case of IBDU, studies have shown a significant proportion of patients reclassified with Crohn's disease. In this setting, CE could have a role determining small bowel involvement. The role of CE in ulcerative colitis is limited. Some authors advocate CE before colectomy for refractory cases in order to exclude Crohn's disease. In summary, CE offers a new horizon in inflammatory bowel disease, and a better knowledge of mucosal abnormalities that could offer a paradigm shift: changing from symptom-based disease activity estimation to direct mucosal healing monitoring. Nevertheless, randomized controlled studies are still needed to provide stronger evidence in this setting.

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.

Wireless capsule endoscopy: perspectives beyond gastrointestinal bleeding.

Wireless capsule endoscopy (CE) is a technology developed for the endoscopic exploration of the small bowel. The first capsule model was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2001, and its first and essential indication was occult gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. Over subsequent years, this technology has been refined to provide superior resolution, increased battery life, and capabilities to view different parts of the GI tract. Indeed, cases for which CE proved useful have increased significantly over the last few years, with new indications for the small bowel and technical improvements that have expanded its use to other parts of the GI tract, including the esophagus and colon. The main challenges in the development of CE are new devices with the ability to provide therapy, air inflation for a better vision of the small bowel, biopsy sampling systems attached to the capsule and the possibility to guide and move the capsule with an external motion control. In this article we review the current and new indications of CE, and the evolving technological changes shaping this technology, which has a promising potential in the coming future of gastroenterology.

Capsule endoscopy in the small bowel Crohn's disease.

CD is a chronic inflammatory disorder associated to mucosal and transmural inflammation of the bowel wall. It is well known that CD can affect the entire gastrointestinal. Therefore, ileocolonoscopy and biopsies of the terminal ileum as well as of each colonic segment to look for microscopic evidence of CD are the first-line procedures to establish the diagnosis. However, it has been observed that up to 30% of the patients have only small bowel involvement. Evaluation of the small bowel has been made with radiological procedures, barium radiography, and abdominal computed tomography or by ileocolonoscopy or enteroscopy, but they have many recognized limitations. CE is undoubtedly a very useful diagnostic tool proposed to observe small-bowel lesions undetectable by conventional endoscopy or radiologic studies. We review different studies that have been published reporting the use of CE in suspected and evaluation of the extension or the recurrence in CD and also its use in pediatric population and its complications.

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.

Capsule endoscopy in the small bowel Crohn's disease.

CD is a chronic inflammatory disorder associated to mucosal and transmural inflammation of the bowel wall. It is well known that CD can affect the entire gastrointestinal. Therefore, ileocolonoscopy and biopsies of the terminal ileum as well as of each colonic segment to look for microscopic evidence of CD are the first-line procedures to establish the diagnosis. However, it has been observed that up to 30% of the patients have only small bowel involvement. Evaluation of the small bowel has been made with radiological procedures, barium radiography, and abdominal computed tomography or by ileocolonoscopy or enteroscopy, but they have many recognized limitations. CE is undoubtedly a very useful diagnostic tool proposed to observe small-bowel lesions undetectable by conventional endoscopy or radiologic studies. We review different studies that have been published reporting the use of CE in suspected and evaluation of the extension or the recurrence in CD and also its use in pediatric population and its complications.

Characteristics and outcome of 27 elbow periprosthetic joint infections: results from a 14-year cohort study of 358 elbow prostheses.

Elbow arthroplasty is increasingly performed in patients with rheumatic and post-traumatic arthritis. Data on elbow periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) are limited. We investigated the characteristics and outcome of elbow PJI in a 14-year cohort of total elbow arthroplasties in a single centre. Elbow prosthesis, which were implanted between 1994 and 2007 at Schulthess Clinic in Zurich, were retrospectively screened for infection. PJI was defined as periprosthetic purulence, the presence of sinus tract or microbial growth. A Kaplan-Meier survival method and Cox proportional hazard analysis were performed. Of 358 elbow prostheses, PJI was identified in 27 (7.5%). The median patient age (range) was 61 (39-82) years; 63% were females. Seventeen patients (63%) had a rheumatic disorder and ten (37%) had osteoarthritis. Debridement and implant retention was performed in 78%, followed by exchange or removal of the prosthesis (15%) or no surgery (7%).The relapse-free survival (95% CI) was 79% (63-95%) after 1 year and 65% (45-85%) after 2 years. The outcome after 2 years was significantly better when patients were treated according to the algorithm compared to patients who were not (100% vs. 33%, p <0.05). In 21 patients treated with debridement and retention, the cure rate was also higher when the algorithm was followed (100% vs. 11%, p <0.05). The findings of the present study suggest that the treatment algorithm developed for hip and knee PJI can be applied to elbow PJI. With proper patient selection and antimicrobial therapy, debridement and retention of the elbow prosthesis is associated with good treatment outcome.

Diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infections.

Advances in implant design, surgical technique, peri-operative antimicrobial prophylaxis and laminar airflow operating room environment have made total joint arthroplasty one of the most successful surgical procedures of all times. Orthopaedic implants, however, remain prone to microbial contamination resulting in persistent risk of implant-associated infection. Treatment of infections associated with orthopaedic devices usually requires appropriate surgical intervention combined with a prolonged antimicrobial therapy. The choice of the best possible treatment regimen depends on duration and pathogenesis of infection, stability of the implant, antimicrobial susceptibility of the pathogen and condition of the surrounding soft tissue. In addition towell known diagnostic procedures new promising tools for rapid and correct microbial diagnosis are being developed as correct diagnosis of the responsible micro-organism and this is paramount for successful treatment of prosthetic joint infection.

Diagnosis of periprosthetic hip infection : review

Since its introduction, total hip arthroplasty has become one of the most successful orthopedic operations ever. However, periprosthetic infection, now reported with the prevalence of around 1-2% is the most challenging complication. It is associated with disasterous physiological, psychological and financial effects. Therefore, early firm diagnosis is essential to avoid further patient morbidity and mortality as well as overwhelming financial medical service costs. This article reviews our current understanding of periprosthetic infection with particular focus on the clinical usefulness of various tests which are used to help make the diagnosis.

What treatment for periprosthetic shoulder infection? Results from a multicentre retrospective series.

PURPOSE: Controversy still exists as to the best surgical treatment for periprosthetic shoulder infections. The aim of this multi-institutional study was to review a continuous retrospective series of patients treated in four European centres and to assess the respective eradication rate of various treatment approaches. METHODS: Forty-four patients were available for this retrospective follow-up evaluation. Functional and clinical evaluation of treatment for infection was performed using the Constant-Murley score, visual analogue scale and patient satisfaction Neer score. Erythrocyte sedimentation rate, serum leucocyte count and C-reactive protein were measured and shoulder X-ray examination performed prior to surgery and at the latest follow-up. RESULTS: At a mean follow-up of 41 months (range 24-98), 42 of 44 patients (95.5%) showed no signs of infection recurrence/persistence. Comparable eradication rates were observed after resection arthroplasty (100%; 6/6), two-stage revision (17/17) or permanent antibiotic-loaded spacer implant (93.3%; 14/15). No patient was treated by one-stage revision. On average, both functional and pain scores improved significantly; the worst joint function was observed after resection arthroplasty. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective analysis conducted on the largest published series of patients to date shows comparable infection eradication rates after two-stage revision, resection arthroplasty or permanent spacer implant for the treatment of septic shoulder prosthesis.

Fractures périprothétiques [Periprosthetic fractures]

A periprosthetic fracture is a fracture around or in proximity of a prosthetic implant. As more and more prostheses are implanted, the incidence of periprosthetic fractures also increases. Several risk factors have been outlined, some due to the patient, and some due to the implant itself. Key points in diagnosis are the case history and the imaging, as they allow the distinction between a well-fixed and a loose prosthesis. Correct classification is crucial for the treatment choice, which can be non-operative or consist in an osteosynthesis or in a revision arthroplasty, depending on the patient's general medical condition and the local status.

Improved diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection by multiplex PCR of sonication fluid from removed implants.

The microbiological diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is crucial for successful antimicrobial treatment. Cultures have limited sensitivity, especially in patients receiving antibiotics. We evaluated the value of multiplex PCR for detection of microbial DNA in sonication fluid from removed orthopedic prostheses. Cases of PJI in which the prosthesis (or part of it) was removed were prospectively included. The removed implant was sonicated, and the resulting sonication fluid was cultured and subjected to multiplex PCR. Of 37 PJI cases (17 hip prostheses, 14 knee prostheses, 4 shoulder prostheses, 1 elbow prosthesis, and 1 ankle prosthesis), pathogens were identified in periprosthetic tissue in 24 (65%) cases, in sonication fluid in 23 (62%) cases, and by multiplex PCR in 29 (78%) cases. The pathogen was detected in 5 cases in sonication fluid only (Propionibacterium acnes in all cases; none of these patients had previously received antibiotics) and in 11 cases by multiplex PCR only (all of these patients had previously received antibiotics). After exclusion of 8 cases caused by P. acnes or Corynebacterium species, which cannot be detected due to the absence of specific primers in the PCR kit, sonication cultures were positive in 17 cases and multiplex PCR sonication cultures were positive in 29 cases (59% versus 100%, respectively; P < 0.01). Among 19 cases (51%) receiving antibiotics, multiplex PCR was positive in all 19 (100%), whereas sonication cultures grew the organism in 8 (42%) (P < 0.01). Multiplex PCR of sonication fluid is a promising test for diagnosis of PJI, particularly in patients who previously received antibiotics. With modified primer sets, multiplex PCR has the potential for further improvement of the diagnosis of PJI.

Wireless capsule pH monitoring: does it fulfil all expectations?

pH monitoring has been used as a diagnostic tool in gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) for many years. Recent studies have shown that wireless capsule pH monitoring is better tolerated and interferes less with daily activities as compared to traditional catheter-based pH monitoring. Moreover, prolonged recording time (48 h instead of 24 h) is possible with wireless pH monitoring. The main secondary effect of wireless capsule pH monitoring is induction of thoracic discomfort in 10-65% of the patients, which can vary from mild foreign body sensation to severe chest pain. Sensitivity and specificity of wireless capsule monitoring is comparable to that of traditional pH monitoring. It has not been proven yet that better tolerability and a longer recording time increases the diagnostic yield of wireless capsule monitoring in GERD.

Immunomarquage des collagènes I, III et IV, de la laminine et de la fibronectine dans la capsule cristallinienne humaine [Immunolabelling of collagen types I, III and IV, laminin and fibronectin in the human lens capsule].

PURPOSE: To localize collagen types I, III, and IV, laminin and fibronectin in the anterior human lens capsule. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty-one anterior capsules were sampled by capsulorhexis during extracapsular cataract extraction (mean age 71.5). All capsules were labelled by an immunostaining specific for each antibodies. Immunostaining of four capsules was revealed with immunoperoxydase and seventeen using indirect immunofluorescence. RESULTS: Labelling of collagen types I and III was observed throughout the entire thickness of the capsule for each technique, the strongest labelling was found in the base of the epithelial cells with immunofluorescence. Collagen type IV was observed at the base of the epithelial cells whichever technique was used. Laminin could be detected in the inner layer of the capsule, using immunoperoxydase or immunofluorescence. No specific labelling was found for fibronectin using the two techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Different kinds of collagens have been found in capsules, more particularly the type III. The latter does not appear on other ocular basement membrane. Because of this uneven distribution in the capsule's thickness, each collagen might have a specific function.