Article Text

PTU-010 A Combination of Pillcam®SB2 and Smartpill® in the Investigation of Patients Referred for Assessment of Known or Suspected Small-Bowel Crohn’s Disease & Their Association with Faecal Calprotectin Levels; Case Series
  1. DE Yung,
  2. J Plevris,
  3. A Koulaouzidis
  1. Centre of Liver & Digestive Disorders, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK


Introduction SmartPill® (Given Imaging Corp., Yoqneam, Israel) is an ingestible, wireless, non-imaging capsule device that records physiological data including contractions, pH and temperature throughout the gastrointestinal (GI) tract.1 There are currently scarce data looking at SmartPill® assessment of patients with known or suspected small-bowel Crohn’s Disease(CD).2 We designed this pilot study to investigate feasibility and safety of SmartPill® assessment of gut motility in this group (local ethics committee approval ref.12/SS/0013).

Methods Over one year (2012), patients with known or suspected CD, referred for small-bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE), were invited to participate. Patients underwent hydrogen breath test to exclude small-bowel bacterial overgrowth, patency capsule (Agile®) to confirm luminal patency and provided stool samples for faecal calprotectin (FC). Patients ingested PillCam®SB2, then SmartPill®4 h afterwards. Thirty-three healthy controls were obtained from unpublished data. For statistical analysis, P < 0.05 was considered significant.

Results Over the aforementioned period, 12 patients were recruited (7 F/5 M, mean age 44.2 ±16.6 years). 10 underwent complete SmartPill® examination (1 stomach retention, 1 dropout). Pillcam®SB2 was complete in 10 (1 stomach retention, 1 dropout). Mean FC was 340 ±307.7 μg/g. The study group had longer transit times and lower gut motility index (MI) compared to controls, where MI = Ln (sum of pressure amplitudes × number of contractions + 1). The difference in motility appears statistically significant (P < 0.05). Transit times for SmartPill® were longer than PillCam®SB2 (not statistically significant), possibly due to differences in capsule specifications. Limitations: signal loss from SmartPill® (5/10 studies), possibly due to radiofrequency interference.

Conclusion This study is the first pilot to attempt combining SBCE and SmartPill® in clinical assessment of small-bowel CD. Current data on motility in CD is scarce. Multimodal information could provide a clearer clinical picture.3–5 Furthermore, despite concerns about capsule retention in CD patients, our study suggests SmartPill® appears safe for use if a patency capsule is employed beforehand.

References 1 Tran K, Brun R, Kuo B. Evaluation of regional and whole gut motility using the wireless motility capsule: relevance in clinical practice. Therap Adv Gastroenterol 2012;5:249–260.

2 Rao SSC, Camilleri M, Haler WL, et al. Evaluation of gastrointestinal transit in clinical practice: position paper of the American and European Neurogastroenterology and Motility Societies. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2011;23:8–23.

3 Koulaouzidis A, Iakovidis DK, Karargyris A, et al. Wireless endoscopy in 2020: Will it still be a capsule? World J Gastroenterol 2015;21:5119–30.

4 Dignass A, Van Assche G, Lindsay JO, Lémann M, Söderholm J, et al. The second European evidence-based consensus on the diagnosis and management of Crohn’s disease: current management. J Crohns Colitis 2010;4:28–62.

5 Fireman Z, Mahajna E, Broide E, Shapiro M, Fich L, et al. Diagnosing small bowel Crohn’s disease with wireless capsule endoscopy. Gut 2003;52:390–92.

Disclosure of Interest D. Yung: None Declared, J. Plevris: None Declared, A. Koulaouzidis Grant/research support from: ESGE- Given®Imaging Research grant 2011

Statistics from

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.