FCCC LOGO Faculty Publications
Morgan D , Upchurch B , Draganov P , Binmoeller KF , Haluszka O , Jonnalagadda S , Okolo P , Grimm I , Judah J , Tokar J , Chiorean M
Spiral enteroscopy: prospective U.S. multicenter study in patients with small-bowel disorders
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2010 Nov;72(5) :992-998
PMID: ISI:000284101500014   
Back to previous list
Abstract
Background: The performance characteristics of spiral enteroscopy have not been well-described. Objective: To determine the technical performance, diagnostic and therapeutic yields, and safety of oral spiral enteroscopy in patients with suspected or established small-bowel pathology. Design: Prospective, multicenter, cohort study, with centralized database. Setting: Ten U. S. tertiary-care medical centers. Patients: This study involved 148 participants, of whom 101 were referred for obscure bleeding. All participants referred for antegrade deep enteroscopy were considered eligible. Intervention: Spiral enteroscopy. Main Outcome Measurements: Examination duration, depth of insertion, spiral enteroscopy findings, mucosal assessment upon withdrawal, and patient symptom assessment (day 1 and day 7 after the procedure). Results: Spiral enteroscopy was successful in 93% of patients, with a median depth of insertion beyond the angle of Treitz of 250 cm (range 10-600 cm). The mean (+/- standard deviation) total procedure time was 45.0 +/- 16.2 minutes for all procedures, and 35.4 minutes for diagnostic procedures. The diagnostic yield was 65%, of which 48% revealed more than one abnormality. The most common findings were angiectasias (61.5%), inflammation (7.5%), and neoplasia (6.8%). Argon plasma coagulation ablation accounted for 64% of therapeutic interventions. Limitations: This was not a randomized, controlled trial of deep enteroscopy modalities. Conclusion: Spiral enteroscopy appears to be safe and effective for evaluation of the small bowel. The procedure duration, depth of insertion, and diagnostic and therapeutic yields compare favorably with previously published data on other deep enteroscopy techniques such as single-balloon and double-balloon enteroscopy. Comparative studies are warranted. (Gastrointest Endosc 2010;72:992-8.)
Notes
Morgan, Douglas Upchurch, Bennie Draganov, Peter Binmoeller, Kenneth F. Haluszka, Oleh Jonnalagadda, Sreeni Okolo, Patrick Grimm, Ian Judah, Joel Tokar, Jeff Chiorean, Michael 17 Mosby-elsevier; 360 park avenue south, new york, ny 10010-1710 usa 678su