Retrospective Evaluation to Compare Small Bowel Video Reading by AKE-1 (Navicam SB) Capsule Endoscope System With and Without ProScan Module and PillCam SB3 Capsule System With SBI
Trial Snapshot
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Status
- Completed
- Sponsor
- Enrollment
- 87
- Locations
- 1
- Primary Endpoint
- Diagnostic consistency
Study Overview
Brief Summary
This is a retrospective study on prospectively collected patient video data from a multicenter, single-blinded pivotal trial (Ethics Approval No. [2021] (0635-01)), involving a consecutive series of patients recruited by 3 Chinese centers based on the suspected small bowel disease, gastrointestinal bleeding, etc. All video images will be anonymized (de-identified). Video images from both the investigational device and comparator device are reviewed by two independent reviewers. Once the conventional reading has been completed, each reviewer will then review randomized videos with the ProScan feature enabled in ESView or SBI enabled on the Pillcam Rapid software. Each reviewer should review for normal versus abnormal findings, type of visual findings and categorization (lesions, polyps, bleeding, etc.), diagnosis, reading time, and subjective assessment of visual quality.
Detailed Description
This is a retrospective study on prospectively collected patient video data from a multicenter, single-blinded pivotal trial, involving a consecutive series of patients recruited by 3 Chinese centers based on the suspected small bowel disease, gastrointestinal bleeding, etc.
Video images from both the investigational device and comparator device are reviewed by two independent reviewers. Video that will be retrospectively collected, have been anonymized. Each reviewer will review the images collected according to the "conventional reading" as recommended by ACG guidelines.
Once the conventional reading has been completed, each reviewer will then review randomized videos with the ProScan feature enabled in ESView or SBI enabled on the Pillcam software . Each reviewer will then review the videos and document all lesions/findings found by the ProScan and Pillcam software with SBI. Annotations should be done after the reading, each finding shall be labelled and categorized (active bleeding, Angioectasia, polyps/ nodules, tumors or varisces, ulcers, isolated erosions, lesions, other).
For all lesions/findings, if there was significant disagreement between two reviewers for the same image, for both capsule videos, another independent reviewer will then review the video of that examination and provide his review results.
Study Design
- Study Type
- Observational
- Observational Model
- Case Control
- Time Perspective
- Retrospective
Eligibility Criteria
- Ages
- 18 Years to — (Adult, Older Adult)
- Sex
- All
- Accepts Healthy Volunteers
- No
Inclusion Criteria
- •Patients who participated in the study titled Performance Evaluation of the NaviCam SB Capsule Endoscope System in Comparison to the PillCam SB3 Capsule System for the Diagnosis of Small Bowel Diseases (Ethics Approval No. [2021] (0635-01)) and were included in the FAS.
Exclusion Criteria
- Not provided
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Diagnostic consistency
Time Frame: 1 month
The agreement rate between ESView software with ProScan assisted reading mode in the AKE-1 system and Rapid software with SBI pre-selection mode in the PillCam SB3 system on video classification, i.e. normal or abnormal.
Secondary Outcomes
No secondary outcomes reported