Background and Aim: We aimed to prospectively determine patient burden and patient preference for magnetic resonance enteroclysis, capsule endoscopy and balloon-assisted enteroscopy in patients with suspected or known Crohn's disease (CD) or occult gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB). Methods: Consecutive consenting patients with CD or OGIB underwent magnetic resonance enteroclysis, capsule endoscopy and balloon-assisted enteroscopy. Capsule endoscopy was only performed if magnetic resonance enteroclysis showed no high-grade small bowel stenosis. Patient preference and burden was evaluated by means of standardized questionnaires at five moments in time. Results: From January 2007 until March 2009, 76 patients were included (M/F 31/45; mean age 46.9years; range 20.0-78.4years): 38 patients with OGIB and 38 with suspected or known CD. Seventeen patients did not undergo capsule endoscopy because of high-grade stenosis. Ninety-five percent (344/363) of the questionnaires were suitable for evaluation. Capsule endoscopy was significantly favored over magnetic resonance enteroclysis and balloon-assisted enteroscopy with respect to bowel preparation, swallowing of the capsule (compared to insertion of the tube/scope), burden of the entire examination, duration and accordance with the pre-study information. Capsule endoscopy and magnetic resonance enteroclysis were significantly preferred over balloon-assisted enteroscopy for clarity of explanation of the examination, and magnetic resonance enteroclysis was significantly preferred over balloon-assisted enteroscopy for bowel preparation, painfulness and burden of the entire examination. Balloon-assisted enteroscopy was significantly favored over magnetic resonance enteroclysis for insertion of the scope and procedure duration. Pre- and post-study the order of preference was capsule endoscopy, magnetic resonance enteroclysis and balloon-assisted enteroscopy. Conclusion: Capsule endoscopy was preferred to magnetic resonance enteroclysis and balloon-assisted enteroscopy; it also had the lowest burden. Magnetic resonance enteroclysis was preferred over balloon-assisted enteroscopy for clarity of explanation of the examination, bowel preparation, painfulness and burden of the entire examination, and balloon-assisted enteroscopy over magnetic resonance enteroclysis for scope insertion and study duration.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1746.2012.07223.x, hdl.handle.net/1765/40847
Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology
Erasmus MC: University Medical Center Rotterdam

Wiarda, B.M, Stolk, M, Heine, D.G.N, Mensink, P.B.F, Thieme, M.E, Kuipers, E.J, & Stoker, J. (2013). Patient burden and patient preference: Comparing magnetic resonance enteroclysis, capsule endoscopy and balloon-assisted enteroscopy. Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 28(3), 464–471. doi:10.1111/j.1440-1746.2012.07223.x