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
_version_ 1785089276456730624
author Li, Jiaxin
Li, Li
Li, Yueyuan
Chen, Long
Liang, Rongyue
Liu, Meilin
Jiao, Hongmei
author_facet Li, Jiaxin
Li, Li
Li, Yueyuan
Chen, Long
Liang, Rongyue
Liu, Meilin
Jiao, Hongmei
author_sort Li, Jiaxin
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10422704
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104227042023-08-13 Magnetic-controlled capsule endoscopy performance in aging patients Li, Jiaxin Li, Li Li, Yueyuan Chen, Long Liang, Rongyue Liu, Meilin Jiao, Hongmei BMC Gastroenterol Research 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. BioMed Central 2023-08-11 /pmc/articles/PMC10422704/ /pubmed/37568133 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12876-023-02914-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Li, Jiaxin
Li, Li
Li, Yueyuan
Chen, Long
Liang, Rongyue
Liu, Meilin
Jiao, Hongmei
Magnetic-controlled capsule endoscopy performance in aging patients
title Magnetic-controlled capsule endoscopy performance in aging patients
title_full Magnetic-controlled capsule endoscopy performance in aging patients
title_fullStr Magnetic-controlled capsule endoscopy performance in aging patients
title_full_unstemmed Magnetic-controlled capsule endoscopy performance in aging patients
title_short Magnetic-controlled capsule endoscopy performance in aging patients
title_sort magnetic-controlled capsule endoscopy performance in aging patients
topic Research
url 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
work_keys_str_mv AT lijiaxin magneticcontrolledcapsuleendoscopyperformanceinagingpatients
AT lili magneticcontrolledcapsuleendoscopyperformanceinagingpatients
AT liyueyuan magneticcontrolledcapsuleendoscopyperformanceinagingpatients
AT chenlong magneticcontrolledcapsuleendoscopyperformanceinagingpatients
AT liangrongyue magneticcontrolledcapsuleendoscopyperformanceinagingpatients
AT liumeilin magneticcontrolledcapsuleendoscopyperformanceinagingpatients
AT jiaohongmei magneticcontrolledcapsuleendoscopyperformanceinagingpatients