Capsule endoscopy versus push enteroscopy for evaluation of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding with 1-year outcomes

Jonathan A. Leighton, Virender K. Sharma, Joseph G. Hentz, Danette Musil, Marie J. Malikowski, Tony L. Mcwane, David E. Fleischer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

33 Scopus citations


Because of the low diagnostic yield of standard radiologic tests for identifying sources of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding in the small intestine, we compared wireless video capsule endoscopy with push enteroscopy and small-bowel follow-through. Patients referred to Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Arizona, between August and December 2001 for evaluation of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding were potential candidates. Eligible patients had previously inconclusive endoscopy, colonoscopy, small-bowel follow-through, and other radiologic studies. Participants underwent capsule endoscopy and enteroscopy (within 24 hr). The primary end point was localization of any bleeding source, with 1-year telephone follow-up. Capsule endoscopy yielded positive findings in 10 of 20 patients (11 men; mean age, 69 years), 6 of whom had negative enteroscopy and small-bowel follow-through. No patient with negative findings on capsule endoscopy had positive findings on enteroscopy and small-bowel follow-through. At follow-up, 19 patients reported fewer transfusions, gastrointestinal procedures, and hospitalizations. Capsule endoscopy identified more lesions and improved outcomes.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)891-899
Number of pages9
JournalDigestive diseases and sciences
Issue number5
StatePublished - May 2006


  • Capsule endoscopy
  • Gastrointestinal endoscopy
  • Gastrointestinal hemorrhage
  • Push enteroscopy
  • Small intestine

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Physiology
  • Gastroenterology


Dive into the research topics of 'Capsule endoscopy versus push enteroscopy for evaluation of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding with 1-year outcomes'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this