Capsule endoscopy (CE) is widely used for intestinal examination; however, capsule aspiration into the airway is a serious complication that requires urgent intervention. We present a management case report and review 39 cases from 2003 to 2023, providing insights into the prevention and treatment of capsule aspiration.

A 69-year-old man with chronic bronchitis and emphysema presented with 7 months of intermittent melena. After swallowing a capsule endoscope (PillCam™ SB 3), he had a brief cough and chest tightness. Imaging confirmed aspiration in the right intermediate bronchus, and non-invasive removal procedures were unsuccessful.

Real-time imaging confirmed the lodged capsule. Non-invasive methods, such as coughing and chest percussion, were unsuccessful. Therefore, flexible bronchoscopy was performed under general anesthesia to retrieve the capsule using a snare, which was then placed into the duodenum using a gastroscope.

The capsule was successfully retrieved, and the patient recovered well, completing the endoscopy without further issues.

Our case study and literature review highlight the need for careful attention to high-risk groups in CE, including the elderly and individuals with neurological or swallowing difficulties. A thorough history review and real-time monitoring are essential for preventing complications. Bronchoscopy is preferred for CE retrieval due to its advantages. Manufacturers are urged to improve CE safety, with respiratory physicians helping internists in managing this potentially life-threatening complication.

Capsule endoscopy is a safe, minimally invasive procedure used to investigate gastrointestinal bleeding of unknown origin that persists or recurs after a negative initial endoscopy. The most common adverse effects of capsule endoscopy include abdominal pain, nausea and vomiting. Capsule pulmonary aspiration, although a rare complication, has been reported in the literature. Most reported cases resolve without further medical intervention. In these cases, the capsule is either expelled by coughing, or it re-enters the oropharynx and is then swallowed. In a small number of cases, the capsule remains in the lung, unable to be expectorated. This requires prompt diagnosis and emergency bronchoscopic removal under general anaesthesia. Due to the smooth, rounded surfaces of the capsule, it may be difficult to grasp, and consequently extraction may be technically challenging. The existing literature contains limited documentation on anaesthetic and surgical approaches for managing an aspirated endoscopy capsule. In this case report, we present the management of an aspirated endoscopy capsule in a district general hospital, in which thoracic surgery was not available. Local resources were used to manage this potentially life-threatening complication without patient transfer. In our case, we provided a tubeless field to optimise surgical access. This facilitated the successful surgical extraction of the endoscopy capsule from the left main bronchus.

Capsule endoscopy (CE) and deep enteroscopy (DE) can be useful for diagnosing and treating suspected small-bowel disease. Guidelines and detailed recommendations exist for the use of CE/DE, but comprehensive quality indicators are lacking. The goal of this task force was to develop quality indicators for appropriate use of CE/DE by using a modified RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method.

An expert panel of 7 gastroenterologists with diverse practice experience was assembled to identify quality indicators. A literature review was conducted to develop a list of proposed quality indicators applicable to preprocedure, intraprocedure, and postprocedure periods. The panelists reviewed the literature; identified and modified proposed quality indicators; rated them on the basis of scientific evidence, validity, and necessity; and determined proposed performance targets. Agreement and consensus with the proposed indicators were verified using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method.

The voting procedure to prioritize metrics emphasized selecting measures to improve quality and overall patient care. Panelists rated indicators on the perceived appropriateness and necessity for clinical practice. After voting and discussion, 2 quality indicators ranked as inappropriate or uncertain were excluded. Each quality indicator was categorized by measure type, performance target, and summary of evidence. The task force identified 13 quality indicators for CE and DE.

Comprehensive quality indicators have not existed for CE or DE. The task force identified quality indicators that can be incorporated into clinical practice. The panel also addressed existing knowledge gaps and posed research questions to better inform future research and quality guidelines for these procedures.

Capsule endoscopy (CE) and deep enteroscopy (DE) can be useful for diagnosing and treating suspected small-bowel disease. Guidelines and detailed recommendations exist for the use of CE/DE, but comprehensive quality indicators are lacking. The goal of this task force was to develop quality indicators for appropriate use of CE/DE by using a modified RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method.

An expert panel of 7 gastroenterologists with diverse practice experience was assembled to identify quality indicators. A literature review was conducted to develop a list of proposed quality indicators applicable to preprocedure, intraprocedure, and postprocedure periods. The panelists reviewed the literature; identified and modified proposed quality indicators; rated them on the basis of scientific evidence, validity, and necessity; and determined proposed performance targets. Agreement and consensus with the proposed indicators were verified using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method.

The voting procedure to prioritize metrics emphasized selecting measures to improve quality and overall patient care. Panelists rated indicators on the perceived appropriateness and necessity for clinical practice. After voting and discussion, 2 quality indicators ranked as inappropriate or uncertain were excluded. Each quality indicator was categorized by measure type, performance target, and summary of evidence. The task force identified 13 quality indicators for CE and DE.

Comprehensive quality indicators have not existed for CE or DE. The task force identified quality indicators that can be incorporated into clinical practice. The panel also addressed existing knowledge gaps and posed research questions to better inform future research and quality guidelines for these procedures.

Mark Hanscom Courtney Stead Harris Feldman Neil B. Marya David Cave.

Capsule endoscopy (CE) has an excellent safety profile. Although retention is the most cited complication, capsule aspiration is less frequent and is often reported only as isolated cases. This study represents a systematic effort to compile and scrutinize the available data on capsule aspiration to provide comprehensive and conclusive information on this CE complication.

A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure. The search terms used were 'capsule endoscopy' AND 'aspiration' (both terms searched as keyword and MeSH). We included case reports and/or series on capsule aspiration, as well as observational cohort studies that reported capsule aspiration among their complications/outcomes.

Thirty-four case reports with 37 cases of capsule aspiration were identified. A further four observational studies reported aspiration as part of a cohort of patients undergoing CE. 94.6% of aspirations occurred in elderly men. 87.1% had significant comorbidities. 59.5% had symptoms on aspiration, with cough reported most frequently. The most common location of aspiration was the right main bronchus. Half of the patients required intervention for capsule retrieval; bronchoscopy was the most common management, with good effect. There was a single fatality following capsule aspiration, not directly related to the procedure, and one case of aspiration pneumonia. Outcomes were good for all other patients. The estimated overall aspiration rate is 0.1%.

Although very rare and generally safely managed, capsule aspiration should be anticipated in certain patient groups and capsule administration should be approached with necessary precautions.

Capsule endoscopy (CE) has become a first-line tool for small bowel (SB) examination. However, adverse events (AEs), such as CE retention or aspiration, may occur. The aims of this study were to evaluate incidence, clinical outcomes and therapeutic approaches of CE-related AEs in the largest series published to date.

Data from 5428 procedures performed at 12 institutions between August 2001 and January 2012 were retrospectively analyzed. Baseline patient characteristics; procedure; type, localization and symptoms before/after AEs; previous patency tests performed; therapeutic management and patient's outcome were recorded.

The overall incidence of CE-related AEs was 1.9%: 2.0% for SB, 0.9% for esophageal and 0.5% for colon CE. The incidence of capsule retention was significantly higher than capsule aspiration (1.87% vs. 0.003%; p < 0.05), in patients suffering from inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) than in obscure GI bleeding (OGIB) (3.3% vs. 1.5%; p < 0.05) and in patients with the combination of nausea/vomiting, abdominal pain and distension. The SB was the most frequent localization of retention (88.2%). The use of patency tests -except for Patency© capsule- before CE was not a good predictor for AEs. Most of the patients with AEs developed no or mild symptoms (97%) and were managed by non-surgical methods (64.4%).

CE-related AEs are uncommon and difficult to predict by imagiological examinations. SB retention, that is usually asymptomatic, is the most frequent AE. In absence of symptoms, non-surgical management of CE-related AEs is recommended.

Capsule endoscopy remains at the forefront of small bowel investigation, offering the only non-invasive means of directly imaging the mucosa of the small bowel. Recommended for the investigation of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding, Crohn's disease, coeliac disease, small bowel tumours and hereditary polyposis syndromes, the uptake of small bowel capsule endoscopy has been widespread in the UK. However, despite a wealth of published literature supporting the utility of capsule endoscopy in clinical practice, there are limited data regarding the actual practical aspects of service delivery, training and quality assurance. In this article, we attempt to address this by considering specific factors that contribute to provision of a high-quality capsule service. The role of formal training, accreditation and quality assurance measures is also discussed.

The introduction of capsule endoscopy (CE) in clinical practice increased the interest for the study of the small-bowel. Consequently, in about 10 years, an impressive quantity of literature on indications, diagnostic yield (DY), safety profile and technical evolution of CE has been published as well as several reviews. At present time, there are 5 small-bowel capsule enteroscopy (SBCE) models in the worldwide market. Head-to-head trials have showed in the great majority of studies comparable results in terms of DY, image quality and completion rate. CE meta-analyses formed the basis of national/international guidelines; these guidelines place CE in a prime position for the diagnostic work-up of patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding, known and/or suspected Crohn's disease and possible small-bowel neoplasia. A 2-L polyethylene glycol-based purge, administered the day before the procedure, is the most widely practiced preparation regimen. Whether this regimen can be further improved (i.e., by further decreasing its volume, changing the timing of administration, coupling it with prokinetics and/or other factors) or if it can really affect the DY, is still under discussion. Faecal calprotectin has been used in SBCE studies in two settings: in patients taking non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, to evaluate the type and extent of mucosal damage and, more importantly from a clinical point of view, in patients with known or suspected Crohn's disease for assessment of inflammation activity. Although there is still a lot of debate around the exact reasons of SBCE poor performance in various small-bowel segments, it is worth to remember that the capsule progress is non-steerable, hence more rapid in the proximal than in lower segments of the small-bowel. Capsule aspiration, a relatively unexpected complication, has been reported with increasing frequency. This is probably related with the increase in the mean age of patients undergoing CE. CE video review is a time-consuming procedure. Therefore, several attempts have been made to develop technical software features, in order to make CE video analysis easier and shorter (without jeopardizing its accuracy). Suspected Blood Indicator, QuickView and Fujinon Intelligent Chromo Endoscopy are some of the software tools that have been checked in various clinical studies to date.