Colon capsule endoscopy as an alternative to colonoscopy for the diagnosis of colonic disease may serve as a less invasive and more tolerable investigation for patients. Our aim was to examine patient-reported outcomes for colon capsule endoscopy compared to conventional optical colonoscopy including preference of investigation modality, tolerability and adverse events. A systematic literature search was conducted in Web of Science, PubMed and Embase. Search results were thoroughly screened for in- and exclusion criteria. Included studies underwent assessment of transparency and completeness, after which, data for meta-analysis were extracted. Pooled estimates of patient preference were calculated and heterogeneity was examined including univariate meta-regressions. Patient-reported tolerability and adverse events were reviewed. Out of fourteen included studies, twelve had investigated patient-reported outcomes in patients who had undergone both investigations, whereas in two the patients were randomized between investigations. Pooled patient preferences were estimated to be 52% (CI 95%: 41–63%) for colon capsule endoscopy and 45% (CI 95%: 33–57%) for conventional colonoscopy: not indicating a significant difference. Procedural adverse events were rarely reported by patients for either investigation. The tolerability was high for both colon capsule endoscopy and conventional colonoscopy. Patient preferences for conventional colonoscopy and colon capsule endoscopy were not significantly different. Procedural adverse events were rare and the tolerability for colon capsule endoscopy was consistently reported higher or equal to that of conventional colonoscopy.

Background and study aims Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) is an alternative to conventional colonoscopy (CC) in specific clinical settings. High completion rates (CRs) and adequate cleanliness rates (ACRs) are fundamental quality parameters if CCE is to be widely implemented as a CC equivalent diagnostic modality. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy of different bowel preparations regimens on CR and ACR in CCE. Patients and methods We performed a systematic literature search in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. Data were independently extracted per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The primary outcome measures (CR, ACR) were retrieved from the individual studies and pooled event rates were calculated. Results Thirty-four observational (OBS) studies (n = 3,789) and 12 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) (n = 1,214) comprising a total 5,003 patients were included. The overall CR was 0.798 (95 % CI, 0.764–0.828); the highest CRs were observed with sodium phosphate (NaP) + gastrografin booster (n = 2, CR = 0.931, 95 % CI, 0.820–0.976). The overall ACR was 0.768 (95 % CI, 0.735–0.797); the highest ACRs were observed with polyethylene glycol (PEG) + magnesium citrate (n = 4, ER = 0.953, 95 % CI, 0.896–0.979). Conclusions In the largest meta-analysis on CCE bowel preparation regimens, we found that both CRs and ACRs are suboptimal compared to the minimum recommended standards for CC. PEG laxative and NaP booster were the most commonly used but were not associated with higher CRs or ACRs. Well-designed studies on CCE should be performed to find the optimal preparation regimen.

Video-capsule endoscopy (VCE) reading is a time- and energy-consuming task. Agreement on findings between readers (either different or the same) is a crucial point for increasing performance and providing valid reports. The aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis is to provide an evaluation of inter/intra-observer agreement in VCE reading. A systematic literature search in PubMed, Embase and Web of Science was performed throughout September 2022. The degree of observer agreement, expressed with different test statistics, was extracted. As different statistics are not directly comparable, our analyses were stratified by type of test statistics, dividing them in groups of “None/Poor/Minimal”, “Moderate/Weak/Fair”, “Good/Excellent/Strong” and “Perfect/Almost perfect” to report the proportions of each. In total, 60 studies were included in the analysis, with a total of 579 comparisons. The quality of included studies, assessed with the MINORS score, was sufficient in 52/60 studies. The most common test statistics were the Kappa statistics for categorical outcomes (424 comparisons) and the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) for continuous outcomes (73 comparisons). In the overall comparison of inter-observer agreement, only 23% were evaluated as “good” or “perfect”; for intra-observer agreement, this was the case in 36%. Sources of heterogeneity (high, I² 81.8–98.1%) were investigated with meta-regressions, showing a possible role of country, capsule type and year of publication in Kappa inter-observer agreement. VCE reading suffers from substantial heterogeneity and sub-optimal agreement in both inter- and intra-observer evaluation. Artificial-intelligence-based tools and the adoption of a unified terminology may progressively enhance levels of agreement in VCE reading.

Long-term urinary and sexual outcomes after repair of anorectal malformations (ARMs) are currently affected by concomitant malformations of the urinary tract and genitalia, sacral anomalies, and the surgical approach. However, the overall prevalence of urinary and sexual dysfunction remains unclear. To evaluate the prevalence of urinary and sexual dysfunction in patients aged >10 yr after repair of ARM in infancy. A systematic literature review was performed using the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Selected studies were reviewed according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) and Standards for the Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) criteria. We included studies reporting the prevalence of the following outcomes: urinary incontinence (UI), lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), neurogenic bladder dysfunction (NBD), sexual dysfunction (SD), erectile dysfunction (ED), ejaculatory dysfunction, and birth rate. We initially identified 588 studies, of which 17 were included for evidence synthesis. A probabilistic meta-analysis on each subgroup revealed the following combined prevalence estimates: UI 16% (95% confidence interval [CI] 7–27%), LUTS/NBD 36% (95% CI 13–62%), SD among women 50% (95% CI 34–66%), ED 12% (95% CI 7–18%), ejaculatory dysfunction 16% (95% CI 9–25%), and birth rate 20% (95% CI 7–38%). Subgroup analysis showed a higher prevalence of ED and ejaculatory dysfunction among patients with high ARM severity when compared to low ARM severity. Among patients undergoing ARM repair, we found a high prevalence of long-term impairment of UI, ED, and SD. We stress the need for larger multicentre trials with more comparable populations to optimise treatment and follow-up regimens. We reviewed long-term outcomes for patients with anorectal malformations who underwent surgery and found that both urinary incontinence and sexual dysfunctions are common for both males and females.

Introduction The use of capsule endoscopy has become an approved method in small bowel diagnostics, but the same level of integration is not seen in large bowel diagnostics. We will use colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) as a filter test in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening between the faecal immunochemical test (FIT) and colonoscopy. We aim to investigate the clinical performance, population acceptability, and economic implications of the procedure in a large-scale clinical trial. Methods and analysis We will randomly allocate 124 214 Danish citizens eligible for participation in the national CRC screening programme within the Region of Southern Denmark to either an intervention group or a control group. Prior to submitting a FIT, citizens randomised to the intervention group will be informed about their opportunity to undergo CCE, instead of colonoscopy, if the FIT is positive. Suspected cancers; >3 adenomas 10 mm in size or >4 adenomas regardless of size, detected during CCE will generate an invitation to colonoscopy as per regular screening guidelines, whereas citizens with suspected low risk polyps will re-enter the biennial screening programme. Citizens with no CCE findings will be excluded from screening for 8 years. In the control group, citizens will follow standard screening procedures. Ethics and dissemination All participants must consent prior to capsule ingestion. All collected data will be handled and stored in accordance with current data protection legislation. Approvals from the regional ethics committee (ref. S-20190100) and the Danish data protection agency have been obtained (ref. 19/29858). Trial registration details The study has been registered with ClinicalTrials.gov under: NCT04049357.

The vertebral defect, anal atresia, cardiac defect, tracheoesophageal fistula/esophageal atresia, renal defect, and limb defect association and Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome are rare conditions. We aimed to present two cases with the vertebral defect, anal atresia, cardiac defect, tracheoesophageal fistula/esophageal atresia, renal defect, and limb defect association and Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser co-occurrence from our local surgical center and through a systematic literature search detect published cases. Furthermore, we aimed to collect existing knowledge in the embryopathogenesis and genetics in order to discuss a possible link between the vertebral defect, anal atresia, cardiac defect, tracheoesophageal fistula/esophageal atresia, renal defect, and limb defect association and Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome. Our first case was a white girl delivered by caesarean section at 37 weeks of gestation; our second case was a white girl born at a gestational age of 40 weeks. A co-occurrence of vertebral defect, anal atresia, cardiac defect, tracheoesophageal fistula/esophageal atresia, renal defect, and limb defect association and Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome was diagnosed in both cases. We performed a systematic literature search in PubMed ((VACTERL) OR (VATER)) AND ((MRKH) OR (Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser) OR (mullerian agenesis) OR (mullerian aplasia) OR (MURCS)) without limitations. A similar search was performed in Embase and the Cochrane library. We added two cases from our local center. All cases (n = 9) presented with anal atresia and renal defect. Vertebral defects were present in eight patients. Rectovestibular fistula was confirmed in seven patients. Along with the uterovaginal agenesis, fallopian tube aplasia appeared in five of nine cases and in two cases ovarian involvement also existed. The co-occurrence of the vertebral defect, anal atresia, cardiac defect, tracheoesophageal fistula/esophageal atresia, renal defect, and limb defect association and Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome is extremely rare. This group of patients has unusual phenotypic characteristics. The long-term outcome after treatment of defects is not well reported. A single unifying cause is not known and the etiology probably includes both genetic and non-genetic causes. We stress the importance of future studies to optimized treatment, follow-up, and etiology.