Chun-Xiao Chen

OMOM capsule endoscopy in diagnosis of small bowel disease.

ObjectiveTo assess the diagnostic efficiency of OMOM capsule endoscopy (CE) in a group of patients with different indications.MethodsData from 89 consecutive patients (49 males, 40 females) with suspected small bowel disease who underwent OMOM CE (Jinshan Science and Technology Company, Chongqing, China) examination were obtained by retrospective review. The patients’ indications of the disease consisted of the following: obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB), abdominal pain or diarrhea, partial intestinal obstruction, suspected inflammatory bowel disease, tumor of unknown origin, hypoproteinemia, constipation, weight loss, and elevated tumor markers.ResultsCE failed in one patient. Visualization of the entire small bowel was achieved in 75.0%. Capsules were naturally excreted by all patients. The detection rate of abnormalities was 70.5% for patients with suspected small bowel disease, and the diagnostic yield for patients with OGIB was higher than that for patients with abdominal pain or diarrhea (85.7% vs 53.3%, P<0.005). Angiodysplasia was the most common small bowel finding. Active bleeding sites were noted in the small intestine in 11 cases.ConclusionOMOM CE is a useful diagnostic tool for the diagnosis of variably suspected small bowel disease, whose diagnostic efficiency is similar to that of the Pillcam SB (small bowel) CE (Given Imaging, Yoqneam, Israel).

Diagnosis of obscure gastrointestinal hemorrhage with capsule endoscopy in combination with multiple-detector computed tomography

Aim:  To demonstrate the clinical efficacy of combination capsule endoscopy (CE) and multiple‐detector computed tomography (MDCT) diagnostic imaging in the identification of gastrointestinal hemorrhages.

Effect of small bowel preparation with simethicone on capsule endoscopy

BackgroundCapsule endoscopy is a novel non-invasive method for visualization of the entire small bowel. The diagnostic yield of capsule endoscopy depends on the quality of visualization of the small bowel mucosa and its complete passage through the small bowel. To date, there is no standardized protocol for bowel preparation before capsule endoscopy. The addition of simethicone in the bowel preparation for the purpose of reducing air bubbles in the intestinal lumen had only been studied by a few investigators.MethodsSixty-four participants were randomly divided into two groups to receive a bowel preparation of polyethylene glycol (PEG) solution (Group 1) and both PEG solution and simethicone (Group 2). The PEG solution and simethicone were taken the night before and 20 min prior to capsule endoscopy, respectively. Frames taken in the small intestine were examined and scored for luminal bubbles by two professional capsule endoscopists. Gastric emptying time and small bowel transit time were also recorded.ResultsSimethicone significantly reduced luminal bubbles both in the proximal and distal small intestines. The mean time proportions with slight bubbles in the proximal and distal intestines in Group 2 were 97.1% and 99.0%, respectively, compared with 67.2% (P<0.001) and 68.8% (P<0.001) in Group 1. Simethicone had no effect on mean gastric emptying time, 32.08 min in Group 2 compared with 30.88 min in Group 1 (P=0.868), but it did increase mean small intestinal transit time from 227.28 to 281.84 min (P=0.003).ConclusionBowel preparation with both PEG and simethicone significantly reduced bubbles in the intestinal lumen and improved the visualization of the small bowel by capsule endoscopy without any side effects observed.

Antimicrobial resistance and molecular characterization of Staphylococcus haemolyticus in a Chinese hospital

The aim of this study was to perform the molecular characterization of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus haemolyticus (MRSH) from clinical specimens of patients in a Chinese hospital. One hundred and thirty-three strains of S. haemolyticus collected from April 2002 to April 2003 were analyzed. Antimicrobial susceptibility to 15 antimicrobial agents was determined by the broth microdilution method. The resistant rates to penicillin G and oxacillin were higher than 90%. There were no isolates resistant to linezolid or vancomycin, and only 6.0% of the strains were resistant to teicoplanin. The positivity rate for mecA genes was 90.2% by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Ninety MRSH (isolated from inpatients and mecA-gene-positive) were genotyped by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) after SmaI digestion. Twenty-five different PFGE patterns (A∼Y) were found and a major clone (type A; n = 36) with five subtypes was identified. Clone A was detected during a 1-year period. Identical PFGE types were found in different wards and patients. The results of this study suggest the clonal spread of MRSH within our hospital. This emphasizes the need for control and prevention measures.