-
Reports in Medical Imaging
-
About Dovepress
Open access peer-reviewed scientific and medical journals.
-
Open Access
Dove Medical Press is now a member of the Open Access Initiative
-
An Author's Guide
A guide to help authors get their paper published.
-
Advocacy
Support Open Access and Dove Press
-
Reprints
Promotional Article Monitoring - further details
-
Favored Author Program
Real benefits for authors, including fast-track processing of papers.
Comparison of a new PillCam™ SB2 video capsule versus the standard PillCam™ SB for detection of small bowel disease
Original Research
(4866) Views (2772) Full article downloads
Authors: Yoav C Metzger, Samuel N Adler, Ariella Bar-Gil Shitrit, Binyamin Koslowsky, Ingvar Bjarnason
Published Date February 2009
Volume 2009:2 Pages 7 - 11
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/RMI.S4227
Yoav C Metzger1, Samuel N Adler2, Ariella Bar-Gil Shitrit3, Binyamin Koslowsky4, Ingvar Bjarnason5
1School of Medicine, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel; 2Department of Gastroenterology, Bikur Holim Hospital, Jerusalem, Israel; 3Department of Gastroenterology, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel; 4Department of Medicine, Hadassah Medical Organization, Jerusalem, Israel; 5Department of Gastroenterology, King’s College Hospital, London, UK
Background: Capsule endoscopy is the procedure of choice for many suspected small bowel diseases. PillCam™ small bowel (SB), has a high diagnostic yield. No improvements have been made on its optics since its introduction in 2002.
Aim: To compare the diagnostic yield and quality of visualization of PillCam™ SB with that of a new small bowel endoscope (PillCam™ SB2) which has a larger angle of view and upgraded visual attributes.
Methods: Twenty patients were randomized to undergo capsule enteroscopy with PillCam™ SB and PillCam™ SB2 a week apart.
Results: Both procedures had a comparable diagnostic yield. However images from PillCam™ SB2 were found to be significantly better in regards of homogenous light exposure (P < 0.001), sharpness and resolution (P < 0.001), depth of view (P < 0.005), and overall impression (P < 0.0001).
Conclusion: PillCam™ SB2 appears to be superior to the original PillCam™ SB in regard to quality of images obtained.
Keywords: small bowel, capsule endoscopy, image quality, resolution
Readers of this article also read:
Berberine: metabolic and cardiovascular effects in preclinical and clinical trials
Potential renovascular hypertension, space missions, and the role of magnesium
Critical appraisal of the role of glucosamine and chondroitin in the management of osteoarthritis of the knee
Ego mechanisms of defense are associated with patients’ preference of treatment modality independent of psychological distress in end-stage renal disease
Can a gentamicin-specific chart reduce neonatal medication errors?
Morgellons disease: Analysis of a population with clinically confirmed microscopic subcutaneous fibers of unknown etiology
Nephroprotective action of glycosaminoglycans: why the pharmacological properties of sulodexide might be reconsidered
Dashboards in neonatology
Amino acid-responsive Crohn's disease: a case study
- Testimonials
"... I was impressed at the rapidity of publication from submission to final acceptance." Dr Edwin Thrower, PhD, Yale University
- Imaging of peripheral vascular disease
- Capillary telangiectasia mimicking an active inflammatory MS-lesion in repetitive cMRIs
- Comparison of a new PillCam™ SB2 video capsule versus the standard PillCam™ SB for detection of small bowel disease
- F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)-positive parotid incidentaloma: Prevalence and clinical significance




