Follow-up endoscopy rates as an indicator of effectiveness in colon capsule endoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

objectiveColon capsule endoscopy (CCE) has emerged as a promising alternative for investigating lower gastrointestinal symptoms. However, its adoption has been limited due to concerns about cost-effectiveness, significantly influenced by follow-up endoscopy rates (FERs). Understanding CCE's FERs is crucial for its integration into routine clinical practice. We synthesised the evidence to evaluate the overall rate of further investigation in CCE.

designA systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, and PubMed were searched through 15 August 2024. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies included reporting FERs after CCE, including subsequent endoscopic procedures and radiological imaging. There were no language restrictions or limitations in CCE referral indications, patient recruitment criteria, or pathologies investigated. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: All studies were independently screened and extracted two times by four reviewers. A random-effects model was used for meta-analysis and meta-regression to identify key contributing factors.

results2850 participants from 19 studies were included in the analysis. Compared with the key performance indicators for FERs in colonoscopy (0.10-0.15) and CT colonography (0.25), the pooled FER for CCE was found to be 0.42 (95% CI 0.34 to 0.50). The meta-regression analysis identified complete transit rates and adequate bowel cleansing quality as factors inversely associated with FERs. Furthermore, the CCE2 capsule demonstrated a higher reinvestigation risk than CCE1, likely due to its improved diagnostic accuracy. Although CCE indications were associated with lower FERs, subgroup analysis did not reach statistical significance with high heterogeneity.

conclusionThis study highlights significant FERs for CCE and identifies key contributing factors, emphasising the importance of appropriate patient selection to reduce reinvestigation needs. Future research should focus on improving completion rates, bowel preparation protocols, and refining CCE indications. This will minimise environmental impact and enhance cost-effectiveness and patient satisfaction. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024567959.