Repetitive Position Change Improves Gastric Cleanliness for Magnetically Controlled Capsule Gastroscopy

  • Yuan-Chen Wang
  • Jun Pan
  • Xi Jiang
  • Xiao-Ju Su
  • Wei Zhou
  • Wen-Bin Zou
  • Yang-Yang Qian
  • Yi-Zhi Chen
  • Xiao Liu
  • Jin Yu
  • Xiao-Nan Yan
  • An-Jing Zhao
  • Zhao-Shen Li
  • Zhuan LiaoEmail author
Original Article


Background and Aims

Good gastric preparation is essential for magnetically controlled capsule gastroscopy (MCCG) examination. This study aims to determine if repetitive position change after dimethicone premedication could further improve gastric cleanliness for MCCG.


Consecutive patients referred for MCCG in our center from May 7 to May 31, 2018 were prospectively enrolled and randomized to undergo repetitive position change for 15 min (position change group) or not (conventional group) after ingesting dimethicone. Primary outcome was gastric cleanliness score and secondary outcomes were detection rate of positive findings, number of lesions per patient, gastric examination time, and safety of MCCG.


Totals of 43 and 40 were included in the position change and conventional groups, respectively. Gastric cleanliness score in the position change group was significantly higher than in the conventional group (21.2 ± 1.0 vs. 18.6 ± 2.0, P  < 0.001), as was the proportion of acceptable gastric cleanliness (gastric cleanliness score ≥ 18) (100% vs. 72.5%, P  < 0.001). There was no statistical difference in detection rate of positive findings between the two groups (27.9% vs. 27.5%, P  = 0.97). In the position change group, the gastric examination time was significantly reduced (13.2 ± 4.0 vs. 15.3 ± 5.1, P = 0.043). No adverse events were observed.


Repetitive position change after dimethicone premedication significantly improves gastric cleanliness for MCCG examination.

Clinical Trial Registration, ID: NCT03514966.


Position change Gastric cleanliness Dimethicone Magnetically controlled capsule gastroscopy 


Author's contribution

Study concept and design (ZL); registration of the study (YCW, JP); conduct of the study (YCW, JP); acquisition of data (YCW, XJS, XJ, WBZ, YYQ, WZ, XL, JY, XNY, AJZ); analysis and interpretation of data (YCW, JP); drafting of the manuscript (JP); statistical analysis (YCW); critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content (ZL, ZSL); obtained funding (ZL, JP). All authors had access to the study data and reviewed and approved the final manuscript.


This study is supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (to Z. Liao, No. 81422010); Foundation for the Author of National Excellent Doctoral Dissertation of China (to Z. Liao, No. 201271); the Shuguang Program of Shanghai Education Development Foundation and Shanghai Municipal Education Commission (to Z. Liao, No. 15SG33); the Chang Jiang Scholars Program of Ministry of Education (to Z. Liao, No. Q2015190); and Shanghai Sailing Program (to J. Pan, No. 18YF1422800), China.

Conflicts of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Supplementary material

10620_2018_5415_MOESM1_ESM.tif (5.9 mb)
Supplementary Figure S1. Gastric preparation regimen. (TIFF 6025 kb)
10620_2018_5415_MOESM2_ESM.tif (5.6 mb)
Supplementary Figure S2. Representative images showing the 4-point grading scale used to objectively describe the cleanliness of the stomach during magnetically controlled capsule gastroscopy. (A) Excellent, no adherent mucus and foam (score 4). (B) Good, mild mucus and foam but does not obscure vision (score 3). (C) Fair, considerable amount of mucus or foam present precluding a completely reliable examination (score 2). (D) Poor, large amount of mucus or foam residue needing water to clear it (score 1). (TIFF 5712 kb)
10620_2018_5415_MOESM3_ESM.tif (16.5 mb)
Supplementary Figure S3. The images of primary landmarks in stomach. (A) Cardia. (B) Fundus. (C) Body. (D) Angulus. (E) Antrum. (F) Pylorus. (TIFF 16928 kb)
10620_2018_5415_MOESM4_ESM.tif (6.1 mb)
Supplementary Figure S4. Typical findings by magnetically controlled capsule gastroscopy. (A) Polyps. (B) Gastric fundus varices. (C) Gastric ulcer. (D) Gastric cancer. (TIFF 6224 kb)


  1. 1.
    Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, et al. Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65:87–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Van Cutsem E, Sagaert X, Topal B, et al. Gastric cancer. Lancet. 2016;388:2654–2664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zhang X, Li M, Chen S, et al. Endoscopic screening in Asian countries is associated with reduced gastric cancer mortality: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Gastroenterology. 2018;155:347–354.e9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Liao Z, Duan XD, Xin L, et al. Feasibility and safety of magnetic-controlled capsule endoscopy system in examination of human stomach: a pilot study in healthy volunteers. J Interv Gastroenterol. 2012;2:155–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zou WB, Hou XH, Xin L, et al. Magnetic-controlled capsule endoscopy vs. gastroscopy for gastric diseases: a two-center self-controlled comparative trial. Endoscopy. 2015;47:525–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Liao Z, Hou X, Lin-Hu EQ, et al. Accuracy of magnetically controlled capsule endoscopy, compared with conventional gastroscopy, in detection of gastric diseases. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;14:1266–1273.e1261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhu SG, Qian YY, Tang XY, et al. Gastric preparation for magnetically controlled capsule endoscopy: a prospective, randomized single-blinded controlled trial. Dig Liver Dis. 2018;50:42–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zhao AJ, Qian YY, Sun H, et al. Screening for gastric cancer with magnetically controlled capsule gastroscopy in asymptomatic individuals. Gastrointest Endosc. 2018;88:466–474.e1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Qian YY, Zhu SG, Hou X, et al. Preliminary study of magnetically controlled capsule gastroscopy for diagnosing superficial gastric neoplasia. Dig Liver Dis. 2018;50:1041–1046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chen MJ, Wang HY, Chang CW, et al. The add-on N-acetylcysteine is more effective than dimethicone alone to eliminate mucus during narrow-band imaging endoscopy: a double-blind, randomized controlled trial. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2013;48:241–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ge ZZ, Chen HY, Gao YJ, et al. The role of simeticone in small-bowel preparation for capsule endoscopy. Endoscopy. 2006;38:836–840.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    McElnay JC, D’Arcy PF. Leonard JK The effect of activated dimethicone, other antacid constituents, and kaolin on the absorption of propranolol. Experientia. 1982;38:605–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fujii T, Iishi H, Tatsuta M, et al. Effectiveness of premedication with pronase for improving visibility during gastroendoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 1998;47:382–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lee GJ, Park SJ, Kim SJ, et al. Effectiveness of premedication with pronase for visualization of the mucosa during endoscopy: a randomized, controlled trial. Clin Endosc. 2012;45:161–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chang WK, Yeh MK, Hsu HC, et al. Efficacy of simethicone and N-acetylcysteine as premedication in improving visibility during upper endoscopy. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014;29:769–774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Elvas L, Areia M, Brito D, et al. Premedication with simethicone and N-acetylcysteine in improving visibility during upper endoscopy: a double-blind randomized trial. Endoscopy. 2017;49:139–145.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Monrroy H, Vargas JI, Glasinovic E, et al. Use of N-acetylcysteine plus simethicone to improve mucosal visibility during upper GI endoscopy: a double-blind, randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2018;87:986–993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rahman I, Pioche M, Shim CS, et al. Magnetic-assisted capsule endoscopy in the upper GI tract by using a novel navigation system (with video). Gastrointest Endosc. 2016;83:889–895.e881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Valeur J, Berstad A, Hausken T. The effect of body position on postprandial perceptions, gastric emptying, and intragastric meal distribution: an ultrasonographic study in reclining healthy subjects. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2015;50:170–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Holwerda AM, Lenaerts K, Bierau J, et al. Body position modulates gastric emptying and affects the post-prandial rise in plasma amino acid concentrations following protein ingestion in humans. Nutrients. 2016;8:221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Jones KL, O’Donovan D, Horowitz M, et al. Effects of posture on gastric emptying, transpyloric flow, and hunger after a glucose drink in healthy humans. Dig Dis Sci. 2006;51:1331–1338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Esaki M, Matsumoto T, Kudo T, et al. Bowel preparations for capsule endoscopy: a comparison between simethicone and magnesium citrate. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009;69:94–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Albert J, Gobel CM, Lesske J, et al. Simethicone for small bowel preparation for capsule endoscopy: a systematic, single-blinded, controlled study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;59:487–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Asl SM, Sivandzadeh GR. Efficacy of premedication with activated Dimethicone or N-acetylcysteine in improving visibility during upper endoscopy. World J Gastroenterol. 2011;17:4213–4217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Loots C, Smits M, Omari T, et al. Effect of lateral positioning on gastroesophageal reflux (GER) and underlying mechanisms in GER disease (GERD) patients and healthy controls. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2013; 25:222–229, e161–e222Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Horowitz M, Jones K, Edelbroek MA, et al. The effect of posture on gastric emptying and intragastric distribution of oil and aqueous meal components and appetite. Gastroenterology. 1993;105:382–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chang CC, Chen SH, Lin CP, et al. Premedication with pronase or N-acetylcysteine improves visibility during gastroendoscopy: an endoscopist-blinded, prospective, randomized study. World J Gastroenterol. 2007;13:444–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rostas JW 3rd, Mai TT. Richards WO Gastric motility physiology and surgical intervention. Surg Clin North Am. 2011;91:983–999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yuan-Chen Wang
    • 1
  • Jun Pan
    • 1
  • Xi Jiang
    • 1
  • Xiao-Ju Su
    • 1
  • Wei Zhou
    • 1
  • Wen-Bin Zou
    • 1
  • Yang-Yang Qian
    • 1
  • Yi-Zhi Chen
    • 1
  • Xiao Liu
    • 1
  • Jin Yu
    • 1
  • Xiao-Nan Yan
    • 1
  • An-Jing Zhao
    • 1
  • Zhao-Shen Li
    • 1
  • Zhuan Liao
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.National Clinical Research Center for Digestive Diseases, Department of Gastroenterology, Changhai HospitalSecond Military Medical UniversityShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations