首页> 外文期刊>Revista de Gastroenterolog??a de M??xico >Diagnostic agreement between video capsule endoscopy and single and double balloon enteroscopy for small bowel bleeding at a tertiary care hospital in Bogota, Colombia
【24h】

Diagnostic agreement between video capsule endoscopy and single and double balloon enteroscopy for small bowel bleeding at a tertiary care hospital in Bogota, Colombia

机译:哥伦比亚博格拉三高级护理医院小肠内窥镜检查和单双气球肠镜筛查诊断协议

获取原文
           

摘要

IntroductionVideo capsule endoscopy and balloon-assisted enteroscopy are complementary diagnostic methods in the study of small bowel bleeding, and different factors can affect their diagnostic yield.AimsTo define the level of agreement between video capsule endoscopy and enteroscopy in small bowel bleeding, according to the type of lesion, in a cohort of patients at a tertiary care referral center.Materials and methodsA retrospective study was conducted that included 428 capsule endoscopies performed within the time frame of 2011 and 2019 at our healthcare institution. Seventy-four video capsule endoscopies, followed by enteroscopy, in 71 patients suspected of presenting with small bowel bleeding, were analyzed.ResultsMean patient age was 63.9?±?13.5 years and 42 patients were women. The two diagnostic procedures were performed. Overall diagnostic yield of positive findings between video capsule endoscopy and enteroscopy was 86.5% vs. 58.1%, respectively (p?=?0.0527). Agreement between video capsule endoscopy and enteroscopy for positive pathologic findings was weak (Ik?=?0.17, 95% CI: -0.0097-0.3543), but according to lesion type, it was good for inflammatory lesions (Ik?=?0.71, 95% CI: 0.5182-0.9119) and moderate for angiectasias (Ik?=?0.45, 95% CI: 0.2469-0.6538) and tumors (Ik?=?0.40, 95% CI: 0.1217-0.6794). The results between the two methods differed in 38 patients (51.3%). There was complete intestinal capsule retention in one patient (1.4%) and active bleeding in 13 (17.6%).ConclusionsThe present study showed that the two techniques had a similar overall detection rate for small bowel lesions, but the type of lesion was the main factor that could modify diagnostic agreement.
机译:简介胶囊内窥镜检查和气球辅助肠镜检查是在小肠出血的研究中进行互补的诊断方法,不同的因素会影响其诊断收益率。Maimsto根据类型的小肠出血中的视频胶囊内窥镜检查和肠镜检查之间的一致性程度。在第三级护理转诊中心的患者队列中的病变。进行了回顾性研究,其中包括在2011年和2019年在我们的医疗机构的时间范围内进行的428个胶囊内窥镜。分析了七十四个视频胶囊内窥镜,其次是肠镜检查,在71名涉嫌患有小肠出血的71名患者中,进行了分析。培育患者年龄为63.9岁?±13.5岁,42名患者是女性。进行了两种诊断程序。视频胶囊内窥镜检查和肠镜检查之间的阳性结果的整体诊断产量分别为86.5%,分别为58.1%(P?= 0.0527)。视频胶囊内窥镜检查和肠镜检查之间的同意弱(IK?=?0.17,95%CI:-0.0097-0.3543),但根据病变型,它对炎症病变有益(IK?=?0.71,95 %CI:0.5182-0.9119)和中等的血管分离血征(IK?= 0.45,95%CI:0.2469-0.6538)和肿瘤(IK?= 0.40,95%CI:0.1217-0.6794)。两种方法之间的结果在38名患者中不同(51.3%)。在一个患者(1.4%)中存在完全肠胶囊保留,并在13中有活性出血(17.6%)。结论本发明的研究表明,这两种技术具有类似的小肠病变的总体检测率,但病变的类型是主要的可以修改诊断协议的因素。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号