Cargando…

Magnetic-controlled capsule endoscopy performance in aging patients

BACKGROUND: The increasing elderly population and wide use of magnetic capsule endoscopy (MCE) have led to more attention to elderly patients. AIM: The aim of this study was to assess the performance (including transit time, cleanliness score, positive findings and safety) of MCE in aging patients (...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Jiaxin, Li, Li, Li, Yueyuan, Chen, Long, Liang, Rongyue, Liu, Meilin, Jiao, Hongmei
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10422704/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37568133
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12876-023-02914-0
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: The increasing elderly population and wide use of magnetic capsule endoscopy (MCE) have led to more attention to elderly patients. AIM: The aim of this study was to assess the performance (including transit time, cleanliness score, positive findings and safety) of MCE in aging patients (≥ 60 years), especially patients over 80 years old. METHODS: Consecutive patients of ≥ 60 years undergoing MCE at our center from August 2017 to August 2022 were classified into the oldest (≥ 80 years) and the older (60–79 years) groups. Esophageal transit time (ETT), gastric examination time (GET), small bowel transit time (SITT), and the quality of gastric preparation were compared. Information on examination indications, subjective discomforts, adverse events, and MCE outcomes were compared. RESULTS: Of 293 enrolled patients, 128 patients were in the oldest group and 165 patients were in the older group. ETT and GET were longer in the oldest group, whereas SITT was slightly longer in the oldest patients. Visualization scores were significantly lower in the body and antrum in the oldest patients. The total visualization score was lower in the older group compared with the oldest group; however, the difference was not significant. Cleanliness scores at the fundus and antrum and total cleanliness scores were lower in the oldest patients compared with the older patients. Positive findings and ulcers and erosions in the small intestine were more common in the oldest group. One patient had nausea during the gastric examination. Capsule retention in the cecum occurred in one case. CONCLUSION: MCE was feasible and safe for aging patients. ETT and GET were markedly longer and gastric cleanliness and visualization were worse, while overall small intestine-positive findings were higher in the oldest patients compared with the older patients. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12876-023-02914-0.