Esophageal capsule endoscopy versus esophagogastroduodenoscopy for evaluating portal hypertension: a prospective comparative study of performance and tolerance.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is the most effective method for examining the upper gastrointestinal tract, and particularly for evaluating portal hypertension in cirrhotic patients, especially for screening purposes. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility, safety, accuracy, and tolerance of PillCam ESO capsule endoscopy for this indication.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this prospective study, unsedated EGD and capsule endoscopy examinations were conducted on the same day in cirrhotic patients at the time of diagnosis. The patients quantified the tolerability (relative to pain, nausea, choking sensations, etc.) of the two procedures using a 100-mm visual analogue scale. The time required for the recording and for diagnosis with the capsule examination were documented, as were the patients' preferences in comparison with EGD. Two independent endoscopists blinded to the EGD diagnoses assessed the diagnostic accuracy of the images obtained.

RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were included in the study (mean age 62, mean Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score 10.5, mean Child-Pugh score 7.3). The procedure was safe. One patient was unable to swallow the capsule. The mean recording time was 213 s (range 6 - 1200 s); the procedure accurately assessed the presence or absence of esophageal varices in 16 of 19 patients (84.2 %); and it correctly indicated a need for primary prophylaxis (esophageal varices of grade 2 or more and/or red signs) in 100 % of cases. The tolerability of the capsule endoscopy examination was significantly better, and all of the patients preferred capsule endoscopy to EGD (which was transnasal in 11 patients).

CONCLUSIONS: Capsule endoscopy was feasible, safe, accurate, highly acceptable, and preferred by cirrhotic patients undergoing screening for portal hypertension. This new technique requires further and more extensive evaluation, as well as assessment of its cost-effectiveness.