2006PubMedRequires access

[Comparison of double balloon enteroscopy and small bowel series for the evaluation of small bowel lesions].

Ji-Yun Jo, Jeong‐Sik Byeon, Kee Don Choi, Hye Won Park, Gin Hyug Lee, Seung‐Jae Myung, Hwoon‐Yong Jung, Suk-Kyun Yang, Weon‐Seon Hong, Jin-Ho Kim, Hyun Kwon Ha

Open publisher page 3 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The role of double balloon enteroscopy (DBE) is still evolving. The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic yield of DBE with that of small bowel series (SBS). METHODS: We enrolled patients with suspected small bowel disease consecutively, and performed both DBE and SBS in all patients. RESULTS: Eighteen patients (M:F=12:6, 14-82 years) were included. Indications for small bowel evaluation were obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (10), abdominal pain (5), diarrhea (2) and abnormal CT finding (1). Of 10 obscure gastrointestinal bleeding patients, 6 showed the same findings in both studies. However, 4 showed negative findings in SBS while DBE detected erosions or ulcerations. Of 5 abdominal pain patients, 3 showed the same results in both studies. However, 2 demonstrated different results. One was suspected of early Crohn's disease in SBS, but proved to be normal in DBE, and the other was suspected of malignancy in SBS but was suspected of benign ulcers in DBE. Of 2 chronic diarrhea patients, one was diagnosed as Crohn's disease in both studies. The other was suspected of tuberculosis in SBS but diagnosed as lymphangiectasia by DBE with biopsy. One patient with jejunal wall thickening in CT proved to be normal in both DBE and SBS. There were no serious complications associated with DBE and SBS. CONCLUSIONS: DBE is better than SBS in terms of diagnostic accuracy. DBE may become an important method for the evaluation of small bowel diseases.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The role of double balloon enteroscopy (DBE) is still evolving. The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic yield of DBE with that of small bowel series (SBS). METHODS: We enrolled patients with suspected small bowel disease consecutively, and performed both DBE and SBS in all patients. RESULTS: Eighteen patients (M:F=12:6, 14-82 years) were included. Indications for small bowel evaluation were obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (10), abdominal pain (5), diarrhea (2) and abnormal CT finding (1). Of 10 obscure gastrointestinal bleeding patients, 6 showed the same findings in both studies. However, 4 showed negative findings in SBS while DBE detected erosions or ulcerations. Of 5 abdominal pain patients, 3 showed the same results in both studies. However, 2 demonstrated different results. One was suspected of early Crohn's disease in SBS, but proved to be normal in DBE, and the other was suspected of malignancy in SBS but was suspected of benign ulcers in DBE. Of 2 chronic diarrhea patients, one was diagnosed as Crohn's disease in both studies. The other was suspected of tuberculosis in SBS but diagnosed as lymphangiectasia by DBE with biopsy. One patient with jejunal wall thickening in CT proved to be normal in both DBE and SBS. There were no serious complications associated with DBE and SBS. CONCLUSIONS: DBE is better than SBS in terms of diagnostic accuracy. DBE may become an important method for the evaluation of small bowel diseases.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 3 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The role of double balloon enteroscopy (DBE) is still evolving. The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic yield of DBE with that of small bowel series (SBS). METHODS: We enrolled patients with suspected small bowel disease consecutively, and performed both DBE and SBS in all patients. RESULTS: Eighteen patients (M:F=12:6, 14-82 years) were included. Indications for small bowel evaluation were obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (10), abdominal pain (5), diarrhea (2) and abnormal CT finding (1). Of 10 obscure gastrointestinal bleeding patients, 6 showed the same findings in both studies. However, 4 showed negative findings in SBS while DBE detected erosions or ulcerations. Of 5 abdominal pain patients, 3 showed the same results in both studies. However, 2 demonstrated different results. One was suspected of early Crohn's disease in SBS, but proved to be normal in DBE, and the other was suspected of malignancy in SBS but was suspected of benign ulcers in DBE. Of 2 chronic diarrhea patients, one was diagnosed as Crohn's disease in both studies. The other was suspected of tuberculosis in SBS but diagnosed as lymphangiectasia by DBE with biopsy. One patient with jejunal wall thickening in CT proved to be normal in both DBE and SBS. There were no serious complications associated with DBE and SBS. CONCLUSIONS: DBE is better than SBS in terms of diagnostic accuracy. DBE may become an important method for the evaluation of small bowel diseases.

Key concepts: Medicine, Enteroscopy, Double-balloon enteroscopy, Diarrhea, Abdominal pain, Gastroenterology, Inflammatory bowel disease, Capsule endoscopy

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
[Comparison of double balloon enteroscopy and small bowel series for the evaluation of small bowel lesions]. — Research Paper | ScholarLens