Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2021 Aug 30;13(8):e17560.
doi: 10.7759/cureus.17560. eCollection 2021 Aug.

Diagnostic Accuracy for Per-Patient Polyp Detection of Second-Generation Capsule Endoscopy Compared to Colonoscopy: A Meta-Analysis of Multicenter Studies

Hassam Ali  1 , Rahul Pamarthy  1 , Shiza Sarfraz  2 , Eslam Ali  3
Affiliations
Review

Diagnostic Accuracy for Per-Patient Polyp Detection of Second-Generation Capsule Endoscopy Compared to Colonoscopy: A Meta-Analysis of Multicenter Studies

Hassam Ali et al. Cureus. .

Abstract

Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) or capsule colonoscopy can be used as colorectal cancer (CRC) screening option. We intended to analyze the concerning literature that compared second-generation CCE to standard colonoscopy for multicenter studies only. A literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. Study characteristics related to our research including sensitivity and specificity for per-patient polyps detection (size: ≥ 10 mm and ≥ 6 mm). Meta-analysis was performed using an open meta-analyst. Our research included five studies, involving a total of 1518 patients, with a total of 1305 analyzed patients. The adequate bowel preparation rate ranged from 70% to 90%. The rates of complete CCE transit fluctuated from 80% to 100%. Our meta-analysis illustrated that mean (95% confidence interval) per-patient sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio were: 0.86 (0.82-0.91) (p < 0.001), 0.88 (0.72-0.96) (p < 0.001), and 50.7 (18.5-138.9) (p < 0.001), respectively, for polyps ≥ 6 mm; and 0.86 (0.8-0.91) (p < 0.001), 0.96 (0.92-0.98) (p < 0.001), and 173.5 (98.4-305.8) (p < 0.001), respectively, for polyps ≥ 10 mm. We concluded that CCE had high sensitivity and specificity for per-patient polyps vs. standard colonoscopy. Nevertheless, the comparatively higher rate of unfinished CCEs limits the utilization of CCE for CRC screening.

Keywords: cce; colon cancer prevention; colon cancer survillence; colon capsule endoscopy; colonoscopy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. PRISMA flow chart
PRISMA: preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis
Figure 2
Figure 2. Forest plots for polyps ≥ 6 mm. a: Sensitivity and specificity, b: Diagnostic odds ratio
TP: True Positives; FP: False Positives; FN: False Negatives; TN: True Negatives; CI: Confidence Intervals.
Figure 3
Figure 3. Forest plots of polyps ≥ 10 mm. a: Sensitivity and specificity, b: Diagnostic odds ratio
TP: True Positives; FP: False Positives; FN: False Negatives; TN: True Negatives; CI: Confidence Intervals.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, Bray F. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71:209–249. - PubMed
    1. Screening for colorectal cancer: US preventive services task force recommendation statement. Davidson KW, Barry MJ, Mangione CM, et al. JAMA. 2021;325:1965–1977. - PubMed
    1. Wireless capsule endoscopy. Iddan G, Meron G, Glukhovsky A, Swain P. Nature. 2000;405:417. - PubMed
    1. Diagnostic accuracy of capsule endoscopy compared with colonoscopy for polyp detection: systematic review and meta-analyses. Kjølhede T, Ølholm AM, Kaalby L, Kidholm K, Qvist N, Baatrup G. Endoscopy. 2021;53:713–721. - PubMed
    1. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. BMJ. 2009;339:0. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources