Owen Epstein

PillCam colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) is an innovative noninvasive, and painless ingestible capsule technique that allows exploration of the colon without the need for sedation and gas insufflation. Although it is already available in European and other countries, the clinical indications for CCE as well as the reporting and work-up of detected findings have not yet been standardized. The aim of this evidence-based and consensus-based guideline, commissioned by the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) is to furnish healthcare providers with a comprehensive framework for potential implementation of this technique in a clinical setting.

BACKGROUND: There are many published trials of colon cleansing regimens for colonoscopy but no clear consensus regarding relative performance. AIM: To identify high quality controlled trials comparing two or more bowel preparation regimens and to compare efficacy and tolerability. METHODS: A comprehensive systematic review was carried out to identify candidate studies. Quality appraisal was carried out on all identified studies. Results were meta-analysed where possible and qualitatively compared if not. RESULTS: Eighty-two studies qualified for analysis. Polyethylene glycol and sodium phosphate were the most frequently investigated preparations. There was no significant efficacy difference between the two, but sodium phosphate was better tolerated. Sodium picosulphate/magnesium citrate, a commonly prescribed preparation, was investigated in four studies, with no clear benefit over other regimens demonstrated. Safety was not recognized as a problem in the randomized controlled trials. Published case series demonstrate that sodium phosphate is associated with the highest risk of clinically significant electrolyte disturbances. CONCLUSION: Shortcomings in study design limit the value of many of the studies. Based on these results, no single bowel preparation emerges as consistently superior. New preparations are required that combine better efficacy and tolerability, in addition to rigorous new validated study designs, allowing unequivocal comparisons to be made.

Significant bacteriuria was found in 19% of 87 women with primary biliary cirrhosis, whereas in 89 women with other types of chronic liver disease bacteriuria was present in only 7%. In 74 women with rheumatoid arthritis 8% were bacteriuric. Midstream urine specimens obtained from 144 consecutive women with primary biliary cirrhosis attending hospital over a two year period showed that 50 (35%) developed bacteriuria during 12 months of follow up. Bacteriuria was unrelated to age, raised serum bilirubin, drug therapy or urinary pH but was more common in patients with late stage (fibrotic) disease as judged by histological criteria. Fifty seven per cent of bacteriuric primary biliary cirrhosis patients suffered more than one urinary infection. Fifty nine per cent of the 156 bacteriuric episodes were asymptomatic. The types of organism isolated, the antibiotic sensitivity patterns and cure rate were similar to those reported in bacteriuric women without other underlying disease. The reinfection rate (34%), however, was double that reported for bacteriuric episodes in 'problem' women with recurrent bacteriuria, indicating a special susceptibility to urinary infection. The most common isolates were E coli (70%), which did not show abnormal adhesiveness to uroepithelial or buccal cells of normal women, or to those of primary biliary cirrhosis patients. Patients with primary biliary cirrhosis have not been reported to be more susceptible to infection in general. Bacteriuria, however, was common throughout all clinical stages of primary biliary cirrhosis. Thus there may be a unique association between bacteriuria and primary biliary cirrhosis.