UNASSIGNED: Social inequalities in colorectal cancer screening participation are evident. Barriers to screening participation include discomfort from diagnostic modalities. We aimed to describe the discomfort experienced from colonoscopy and colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) and investigate the discrepancy between expected and experienced discomfort stratified by socioeconomic status.
UNASSIGNED: A randomised controlled trial was conducted offering half of the colorectal cancer screening invitees the choice between CCE and colonoscopy after a positive faecal immunochemical test. This paper includes those who elected to undergo CCE. A positive CCE elicited referral for a therapeutic colonoscopy. Participants reported their discomfort from CCE and from any following colonoscopies in electronically distributed questionnaires. Discomfort was measured using visual analogue scales and compared between socioeconomic subgroups determined by educational level and income.
UNASSIGNED: The experienced discomfort from CCE and colonoscopy differed significantly between educational levels but not income levels. The bowel preparation contributed the most to the experienced discomfort in both CCE and colonoscopy. The discrepancy between expected and experienced discomfort from colonoscopy increased with increasing educational and income levels. A similar trend was seen in CCE between educational levels but not income levels.
UNASSIGNED: None of the results indicated a higher discomfort in lower socioeconomic subgroups. Regardless of the investigation modality, the bowel preparation was the main contributor to experienced discomfort. The discrepancy between expected and experienced discomfort did not seem to be larger in lower socioeconomic subgroups, indicating that this is not a major barrier causing inequalities in screening uptake. This is the first study investigating individual discomfort discrepancy in both CCE and colonoscopy, while being able to stratify by socioeconomic status.

UNASSIGNED: Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) has gained momentum as an alternative modality for the investigation of the lower gastrointestinal tract. Of the few challenges that remain, the comparison and - eventually - matching of polyps at different timestamps leads to the potential for double reporting and can contribute to false-positive findings and inaccuracies. With the impending artificial intelligence integration, the risk of double reporting the same polyp due to the lack of information on spatial orientation underscores the necessity for establishing criteria for polyp matching.
UNASSIGNED: This RAND/University of California, Los Angeles (modified Delphi) process aims to identify the key factors or components used to match polyps within a CCE video. This involves exploring the attributes of each factor to create comprehensive polyp-matching criteria based on international expert consensus.
UNASSIGNED: A systematic qualitative study using surveys.
UNASSIGNED: A panel of 11 international CCE experts convened to assess a survey comprised of 60 statements. Participants anonymously rated statement appropriateness on a 1-9 scale (1-3: inappropriate, 4-6: uncertain and 7-9: appropriate). Following a virtual group discussion of the Round 1 results, a Round 2 survey was developed and completed before the final analysis.
UNASSIGNED: The factors that were agreed to be essential for polyp matching include (1) timestamp, (2) polyp localization, (3) polyp vascular pattern, (4) polyp size, (5) time interval of the polyp appearance between the green and yellow camera, (6) surrounding tissue, (7) polyp morphology and (8) polyp surface and contour. When five or more factors are satisfied, it was agreed that the comparing polyps are likely the same polyp.
UNASSIGNED: This study has established the first complete criteria for polyp matching in CCE. While it might not provide a definitive solution for matching difficult, small and common polyps, these criteria serve as a framework to guide and facilitate the process of polyp-matching.
Creating criteria and standards for matching polyps (abnormal growth in the bowels) on colon capsule video analysis: an international expert agreement using the RAND (modified Delphi process) process Background: Doctors often use colon capsule endoscopy (CCE), a high-tech capsule with two cameras, to record and check for diseases in the small and large bowels as the capsule travels through the intestines. One of the most common conditions in the large bowel is polyps, which are abnormal growths in the lining of the bowel. Comparing and matching polyps in the same video from the capsule can be tricky as they look very similar, leading to the possibility of incorrectly reporting the same polyp twice or more. This can lead to wrong results and inaccuracies. The literature did not have any criteria or standards for matching polyps in CCE before. Aim: Using the RAND/UCLA (modified Delphi) process, this study aims to identify the key factors or components used to match polyps within a CCE video. The goal is to explore each factor and create complete criteria for polyp matching based on the agreement from international experts. Method: A group of 11 international CCE experts came together to evaluate a survey with 60 statements. They anonymously rated each statement on a scale from 1 to 9 (1-3: inappropriate, 4-6: uncertain, and 7-9: appropriate). After discussing the Round 1 results virtually, a Round 2 survey with the same but revised questions was created and completed before the final analysis of their agreement. Results: The main factors for matching polyps are 1) the timing when the polyp was seen, 2) where it is in the bowel, 3) its blood vessel pattern, 4) size, 5) the timing of its appearance between cameras, 6) surrounding tissue features, 7) its shape, and 8) surface features. If five or more of these factors match, the compared polyps are likely the same. Conclusion: This study establishes the first complete criteria for matching polyps in CCE. While it may not provide a definitive solution for matching challenging and small polyps, these criteria serve as a guide to help and make the process of polyp matching easier.

OBJECTIVE: Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) often requiring endoscopic evaluations, which can be uncomfortable and costly, especially for children. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of a noninvasive approach combining fecal calprotectin (FCP), colonic ultrasonography (US), and colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) compared with standard ileocolonoscopy in pediatric UC.
METHODS: UC children were enrolled and underwent FCP and US on Day 0, followed by CCE on Day 1 and ileocolonoscopy on Day 2. All procedures were performed by operators who were blinded to the patient\'s clinical history and all test results. The accuracy for disease activity and extension of each technique and their combination was assessed and compared. Tolerability and safety were also evaluated.
RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were enrolled (15 males, mean age 13.2 ± 3.2 years). CCE showed a sensitivity of 95% and specificity of 100% in detecting colonic inflammation, with positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of 100% and 92%, respectively. US demonstrated a sensitivity of 85% and specificity of 92%, with PPV and NPV of 94% and 79%. The combination of FCP, US, and CCE achieved 95% sensitivity and 100% specificity, with PPV of 100% and NPV of 92%. The noninvasive approach was better tolerated than colonoscopy (p < 0.05), and no serious adverse events were reported.
CONCLUSIONS: The noninvasive approach combining fecal calprotectin (FCP), ultrasonography, and colon capsule endoscopy demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy and better tolerability compared with standard ileocolonoscopy in pediatric ulcerative colitis follow-up. Further multicenter studies are needed to confirm these findings and evaluate the reproducibility of this noninvasive approach.

Gastroenterology is increasingly moving towards minimally invasive diagnostic modalities. The diagnostic exploration of the colon via capsule endoscopy, both in specific protocols for colon capsule endoscopy and during panendoscopic evaluations, is increasingly regarded as an appropriate first-line diagnostic approach. Adequate colonic preparation is essential for conclusive examinations as, contrary to a conventional colonoscopy, the capsule moves passively in the colon and does not have the capacity to clean debris. Several scales have been developed for the classification of bowel preparation for colon capsule endoscopy. Nevertheless, their applications are limited by suboptimal interobserver agreement. Our group developed a deep learning algorithm for the automatic classification of colonic bowel preparation, according to an easily applicable classification. Our neural network achieved high performance levels, with a sensitivity of 91%, a specificity of 97% and an overall accuracy of 95%. The algorithm achieved a good discriminating capacity, with areas under the curve ranging between 0.92 and 0.97. The development of these algorithms is essential for the widespread adoption of capsule endoscopy for the exploration of the colon, as well as for the adoption of minimally invasive panendoscopy.

OBJECTIVE: To establish patient factors associated with a successful colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) test.
METHODS: This prospective cohort study used data collected from patients who underwent CCE as part of the ScotCap evaluation prior to April 2020. A CCE was defined as successful if the capsule visualized the whole colon and rectum (complete test) with sufficient bowel cleansing to permit assessment of the colonic mucosa (adequate bowel preparation). Factors from patients in symptomatic and surveillance groups were analysed for associations with a successful test, complete test, adequate bowel preparation and requirement for further procedure using univariate, multivariate logistic, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression.
RESULTS: Data from 263 symptomatic and 137 surveillance patients were analysed. There was an association between a symptomatic patient\'s age and a successful test (OR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.95-0.99), adequate bowel preparation (OR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.94-1.00) and further procedure requirement (OR = 1.04, 95% CI: 1.02-1.06). An association was found, for symptomatic patients, between a faecal immunochemical test result in the range 10-399 μg/g and a further procedure (OR = 2.32, 95% CI: 1.23-4.48). In patients undergoing surveillance for previous colorectal cancer (OR = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.18-0.97), had previous bowel resection surgery (OR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.19-0.98) or took a beta blocker medication (OR = 0.32, 95% CI: 0.11-0.88), an association was found with further procedure requirement.
CONCLUSIONS: Among symptomatic patients, younger age was associated with obtaining a successful CCE test. Clinicians could consider patient selection based on these results to improve the rate of successful testing in clinical practice.

The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of white light colon capsule endoscopy\'s current clinical application, concentrating on its most recent developments. Second-generation colon capsule endoscopy (CCE2) is approved by the FDA for use as an adjunctive test in patients with incomplete colonoscopy and within Europe in patients at average risk, those with incomplete colonoscopies or those unwilling to undergo conventional colonoscopies. Since the publication of European Society of GI Endoscopy guidelines on the use of CCE, there has been a significant increase in comparative studies on the diagnostic yield of CCE. This paper discusses CCE2 in further detail. It explains newly developed colon capsule system and the current status on the use of CCE, it also provides a comprehensive summary of systematic reviews on the implementation of CCE in colorectal cancer screening from a methodological perspective. Patients with ulcerative colitis can benefit from CCE2 in terms of assessing mucosal inflammation. As part of this review, performance of CCE2 for assessing disease severity in ulcerative colitis is compared with colonoscopy. Finally, an assessment if CCE can become a cost-effective clinical service overall.

Individual income and educational level are associated with participation rates in colorectal cancer screening. We aimed to investigate the expected discomfort from the endoscopic diagnostic modalities of colonoscopy and colon capsule endoscopy in different socioeconomic groups as a potential barrier for participation. In a randomized clinical trial within the Danish colorectal cancer screening program, we distributed questionnaires to 2031 individuals between August 2020 and December 2022 to investigate the expected procedural and overall discomfort from investigations using visual analogue scales. Socioeconomic status was determined by household income and educational level. Multivariate continuous ordinal regressions were performed to estimate the odds of higher expected discomfort. The expected procedural and overall discomfort from both modalities were significantly higher with increasing educational levels and income, except for procedural discomfort from colon capsule endoscopy between income quartiles. The odds ratios for higher expected discomfort increased significantly with increasing educational level, whereas the differences between income groups were less substantial. Bowel preparation contributed most to expected discomfort in colon capsule endoscopy, whereas in colonoscopy, the procedure itself was the largest contributor. Individuals with prior experiences of colonoscopy reported significantly lower expected overall but not procedural discomfort from colonoscopy. The threshold for acceptable discomfort between subgroups is unknown, but the expected discomfort in colon capsule endoscopy and colonoscopy was higher in higher socioeconomic subgroups, suggesting that expected discomfort is not a significant contributor to the inequalities in screening uptake.

OBJECTIVE: Lower gastrointestinal (GI) diagnostics have been facing relentless capacity constraints for many years, even before the COVID-19 era. Restrictions from the COVID pandemic have resulted in a significant backlog in lower GI diagnostics. Given recent developments in deep neural networks (DNNs) and the application of artificial intelligence (AI) in endoscopy, automating capsule video analysis is now within reach. Comparable to the efficiency and accuracy of AI applications in small bowel capsule endoscopy, AI in colon capsule analysis will also improve the efficiency of video reading and address the relentless demand on lower GI services. The aim of the CESCAIL study is to determine the feasibility, accuracy and productivity of AI-enabled analysis tools (AiSPEED) for polyp detection compared with the \'gold standard\': a conventional care pathway with clinician analysis.
METHODS: This multi-centre, diagnostic accuracy study aims to recruit 674 participants retrospectively and prospectively from centres conducting colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) as part of their standard care pathway. After the study participants have undergone CCE, the colon capsule videos will be uploaded onto two different pathways: AI-enabled video analysis and the gold standard conventional clinician analysis pathway. The reports generated from both pathways will be compared for accuracy (sensitivity and specificity). The reading time can only be compared in the prospective cohort. In addition to validating the AI tool, this study will also provide observational data concerning its use to assess the pathway execution in real-world performance.
RESULTS: The study is currently recruiting participants at multiple centres within the United Kingdom and is at the stage of collecting data.
CONCLUSIONS: This standard diagnostic accuracy study carries no additional risk to patients as it does not affect the standard care pathway, and hence patient care remains unaffected.

BACKGROUND: Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) is useful as an alternative examination for patients in whom colonoscopy is difficult. The Japanese Association for Capsule Endoscopy has published a recommended regimen for CCE using castor oil, which is becoming a standard examination method for CCE in Japan. However, castor oil has an unpleasant flavor. Therefore, patient acceptance is not good.
OBJECTIVE: The aims were to develop a castor oil-filled capsule and evaluate its feasibility and patient acceptance in a retrospective, comparative study.
METHODS: A dissolution study of pig-derived gelatin capsules filled with castor oil was performed using artificial gastric juice. The CCE excretion rates within battery lifetime, CCE examination times, endoscopic colonic cleansing levels, and patient acceptability between CCE boosters with a castor oil-filled capsule and without castor oil were retrospectively compared using medical information, clinical data, and endoscopic findings at Takada Chuo Hospital from September 2016 to August 2019.
RESULTS: The castor oil-filled capsules were completely disintegrated at approximately 1-3 min in artificial gastric juice. Bowel preparation with oil-filled capsules and without castor oil was performed in 27 and 24 patients, respectively. CCE excretion rates within battery life were 100% and 91.7% (p = 0.217), small bowel transit times were 115 min and 143 min (p = 0.046), colon transit times were 168 min and 148 min (p = 0.733), and adequate colonic cleansing rates were 85.2% and 86.3% (p = 1.000) in patients using bowel preparation with and without oil-filled capsules, respectively. Regarding acceptance, the taste was not problematic in 85.2%, and tolerability for the next CCE was 96.3%.
CONCLUSIONS: CCE using a castor oil-filled capsule method achieved high examination performance and sufficient patient tolerability.

When an optical colonoscopy is carried out, Scope Guide can assist the endoscopist in determining the localization. In colon capsule endoscopy (CCE), this support is not available. To our knowledge, the interobserver agreement on landmark identification has never been studied. This study aims to investigate the interobserver agreement on landmark identification in CCE.
An interobserver study was carried out comparing the landmark identification (the ileocecal valve, hepatic flexure, splenic flexure, and anus) in CCE investigations between an external private contractor and three in-house CCE readers with different levels of experience. All CCE investigations analyzed in this study were carried out as a part of the Danish screening program for colorectal cancer. Patients were between 50 and 74 years old with a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT). A random sample of 20 CCE investigations was taken from the total sample of more than 800 videos.
Overall interobserver agreement on all landmarks was 51%. Interobserver agreement on the first cecal image (ileocecal valve), hepatic flexure, splenic flexure, and last rectal image (anus) was 72%, 29%, 22%, and 83%, respectively. The overall interobserver agreement, including only examinations with adequate bowel preparation (n = 16), was 54%, and for individual landmarks, 73%, 32%, 24%, and 85%.
Overall interobserver agreement on all four landmarks from CCE was poor. Measures are needed to improve landmark identification in CCE investigations. Artificial intelligence could be a possible solution to this problem.