Esophageal capsule endoscopy for screening and surveillance of esophageal varices in patients with portal hypertension

Authors

  • Roberto de Franchis,

    Corresponding author
    1. Department of Medical Sciences, University of Milan, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Fondazione Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Mangiagalli and Regina Elena, Milan, Italy
    • Department of Medical Sciences, University of Milan, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Fondazione Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Mangiagalli and Regina Elena, Milan, Italy
    Search for more papers by this author
    • Potential conflict of interest: Drs. de Franchis, Eliakim, and Eisen are consultants for and received grants from Given Imaging. Dr. Laine received grants from Given Imaging. Dr. Brown is on the speakers' bureau of Given Imaging. Dr. Fischer is a consultant for and is on the speakers' bureau of Given Imaging. Dr. Vargas received grants from Roche, Novartis, Vertex, Idenix, Pharmasset, Debiopharm, and Given Imaging.

    • fax: (39) 025 032 0747

  • Glenn M. Eisen,

    1. Oregon Health Sciences University, Portland, OR
    Search for more papers by this author
    • Potential conflict of interest: Drs. de Franchis, Eliakim, and Eisen are consultants for and received grants from Given Imaging. Dr. Laine received grants from Given Imaging. Dr. Brown is on the speakers' bureau of Given Imaging. Dr. Fischer is a consultant for and is on the speakers' bureau of Given Imaging. Dr. Vargas received grants from Roche, Novartis, Vertex, Idenix, Pharmasset, Debiopharm, and Given Imaging.

  • Loren Laine,

    1. University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
    Search for more papers by this author
    • Potential conflict of interest: Drs. de Franchis, Eliakim, and Eisen are consultants for and received grants from Given Imaging. Dr. Laine received grants from Given Imaging. Dr. Brown is on the speakers' bureau of Given Imaging. Dr. Fischer is a consultant for and is on the speakers' bureau of Given Imaging. Dr. Vargas received grants from Roche, Novartis, Vertex, Idenix, Pharmasset, Debiopharm, and Given Imaging.

  • Inaki Fernandez-Urien,

    1. Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Juan Manuel Herrerias,

    1. Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena, Seville, Spain
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Russell D. Brown,

    1. University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL
    Search for more papers by this author
    • Potential conflict of interest: Drs. de Franchis, Eliakim, and Eisen are consultants for and received grants from Given Imaging. Dr. Laine received grants from Given Imaging. Dr. Brown is on the speakers' bureau of Given Imaging. Dr. Fischer is a consultant for and is on the speakers' bureau of Given Imaging. Dr. Vargas received grants from Roche, Novartis, Vertex, Idenix, Pharmasset, Debiopharm, and Given Imaging.

  • Laurel Fisher,

    1. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
    Search for more papers by this author
    • Potential conflict of interest: Drs. de Franchis, Eliakim, and Eisen are consultants for and received grants from Given Imaging. Dr. Laine received grants from Given Imaging. Dr. Brown is on the speakers' bureau of Given Imaging. Dr. Fischer is a consultant for and is on the speakers' bureau of Given Imaging. Dr. Vargas received grants from Roche, Novartis, Vertex, Idenix, Pharmasset, Debiopharm, and Given Imaging.

  • Hugo E. Vargas,

    1. Mayo Clinic Foundation, Scottsdale, AZ
    Search for more papers by this author
    • Potential conflict of interest: Drs. de Franchis, Eliakim, and Eisen are consultants for and received grants from Given Imaging. Dr. Laine received grants from Given Imaging. Dr. Brown is on the speakers' bureau of Given Imaging. Dr. Fischer is a consultant for and is on the speakers' bureau of Given Imaging. Dr. Vargas received grants from Roche, Novartis, Vertex, Idenix, Pharmasset, Debiopharm, and Given Imaging.

  • John Vargo,

    1. Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Julie Thompson,

    1. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Rami Eliakim

    1. Rambam Medical Center, Haifa, Israel
    Search for more papers by this author
    • Potential conflict of interest: Drs. de Franchis, Eliakim, and Eisen are consultants for and received grants from Given Imaging. Dr. Laine received grants from Given Imaging. Dr. Brown is on the speakers' bureau of Given Imaging. Dr. Fischer is a consultant for and is on the speakers' bureau of Given Imaging. Dr. Vargas received grants from Roche, Novartis, Vertex, Idenix, Pharmasset, Debiopharm, and Given Imaging.


  • See Editorial on Page 1434

Abstract

Bleeding from esophageal varices (EV) is a serious consequence of portal hypertension. Current guidelines recommend screening patients with cirrhosis with esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) to detect varices. However, the unpleasantness and need for sedation of EGD may limit adherence to screening programs. Pilot studies have shown good performance of esophageal capsule endoscopy in detecting varices. This multicenter trial was designed to assess the diagnostic performance of capsule endoscopy in comparison with EGD. Patients undergoing EGD for screening or surveillance of EV underwent a capsule study previously. The study was designed as an equivalence study, assuming that a difference of ≤10% between capsule endoscopy and EGD in diagnosing EV would demonstrate equivalence. Two hundred eighty-eight patients were enrolled. Endoscopy was for screening in 195 patients and for surveillance of known EV in 93. Overall agreement for detecting EV between EGD and capsule endoscopy was 85.8%; the kappa score was 0.73. Capsule endoscopy had a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 84%, 88%, 92%, and 77%, respectively. The difference in diagnosing EV was 15.6% in favor of EGD. There was complete agreement on variceal grade in 227 of 288 cases (79%). In differentiating between medium/large varices requiring treatment and small/absent varices requiring surveillance, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for capsule endoscopy were 78%, 96%, 87%, and 92%, respectively. Overall agreement on treatment decisions based on EV size was substantial at 91% (kappa = 0.77). Conclusion: We recommend that EGD be used to screen patients with cirrhosis for large EV. However, the minimal invasiveness, good tolerance, and good agreement of capsule endoscopy with EGD might increase adherence to screening programs. Whether this is the case needs to be determined. (HEPATOLOGY 2008;47:1595–1603.)

Ancillary