The Effect of Sham Feeding on Small Bowel Transit Time in Patients Undergoing Capsule Endoscopy

NCT ID: NCT02353208

Last Updated: 2017-12-27

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

122 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2015-01-31

Study Completion Date

2017-05-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Capsule endoscopy is a non-invasive way to examine the small bowel, but its yield is limited by the battery life. In 20% of cases, the recording stops before the entire length of small bowel is examined. Capsule transit speed is dependent on bowel motility. When we eat, the brain sends signal to the bowel to speed up motility. In this study the investigators wish to determine if chewing bacon (sham feeding) can trick the brain to speed up bowel motility and improve the rate of complete small bowel examination.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

This is a prospective, randomized, single-blinded controlled trial.

Subjects ages 19 years and older referred for capsule endoscopy (CE) at the GI Clinic, St. Paul's Hospital will be invited to participate in the study. We will be recruiting 122 subjects and will randomize them into 2 groups: control group and treatment group. Control subjects will undergo the standard capsule endoscopy procedure. Subjects in Treatment group will undergo sham feeding in addition to the standard capsule endoscopy procedure. Both control and treatment subjects in this study will be required to swallow a capsule (the size of a large pill) named Given Imaging SB3® Capsule.

The investigator and the video reader will be blinded (single-blinded study). Times will be recorded at: first gastric image, first duodenal image and first cecal image.

The diagnostic yield for controls and subjects will be calculated. The clarity of the images will be graded according to the ICCE 2005 consensus regarding bowel preparation and prokinetics in capsule endoscopy.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Slow Transit

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

DIAGNOSTIC

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Investigators

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Sham Feeding of Bacon Bits

In addition to the standard procedure, subjects will be asked to perform sham feeding on two occasions: 1) Immediately after having swallowed the capsule and 2) One hour after having swallowed the capsule.

Sham feeding will be performed as follows: The patients will be asked to chew 10 times on a piece of bacon over a period of 30 seconds, prior to spitting saliva and bacon into a container. This will be repeated 10 times at one minute intervals.

The patient will then complete the capsule study as per the standard procedure.

Bacon bits will be a commercially available produce which has been deemed safe for sale in Canada.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Sham Feeding of Bacon Bits

Intervention Type OTHER

Bacon bits will be a commercially available produce which has been deemed safe for sale in Canada.

Placebo

The control group will not chew bacon bits while undergoing capsule endoscopy.

Group Type PLACEBO_COMPARATOR

Placebo

Intervention Type OTHER

Participants will not be asked to chew bacon bits

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Sham Feeding of Bacon Bits

Bacon bits will be a commercially available produce which has been deemed safe for sale in Canada.

Intervention Type OTHER

Placebo

Participants will not be asked to chew bacon bits

Intervention Type OTHER

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

Bacon bits Control

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Out-patients, 19 years or older referred to St. Paul's Hospital for capsule endoscopy

Exclusion Criteria

* In-patients will be excluded
* Patients who have been taking taken medications that affect your bowel movement in the five days prior to the procedure
* Patients who are vegetarian or have dietary restrictions that do not allow bacon/pork products.
* Patients, who have proven or suspected obstruction of the bowel.
* Patients, who have had prior small bowel and/or stomach surgery.
* Patients who have a known and/or have a history suggestive of a swallowing disorder
* Patients with complicated diabetes diabetes with associated complications (bleeding in eyes, kidney disease, or numbness/tingling in hands/feet)
* Patient who have thyroid problem that is not being treated (for example, hypothyroid but not taking supplement)
* Patients who are pregnant, prisoners or an institutionalized individuals
* Patients whose capsule camera is placed using a traditional scope (instead of swallowing the capsule camera)
Minimum Eligible Age

19 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

University of British Columbia

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Robert Enns

Clinical Associate Professor

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Robert Enns, M.D.

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

University of British Columbia

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

GI Clinic, St. Paul's Hospital

Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Canada

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

ASGE Technology Committee; Wang A, Banerjee S, Barth BA, Bhat YM, Chauhan S, Gottlieb KT, Konda V, Maple JT, Murad F, Pfau PR, Pleskow DK, Siddiqui UD, Tokar JL, Rodriguez SA. Wireless capsule endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2013 Dec;78(6):805-815. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2013.06.026. Epub 2013 Oct 8.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 24119509 (View on PubMed)

Pasha SF, Leighton JA, Das A, Harrison ME, Decker GA, Fleischer DE, Sharma VK. Double-balloon enteroscopy and capsule endoscopy have comparable diagnostic yield in small-bowel disease: a meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008 Jun;6(6):671-6. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2008.01.005. Epub 2008 Mar 20.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 18356113 (View on PubMed)

Iaquinto G, Fornasarig M, Quaia M, Giardullo N, D'Onofrio V, Iaquinto S, Di Bella S, Cannizzaro R. Capsule endoscopy is useful and safe for small-bowel surveillance in familial adenomatous polyposis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2008 Jan;67(1):61-7. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2007.07.048.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 18155426 (View on PubMed)

Marmo R, Rotondano G, Piscopo R, Bianco MA, Cipolletta L. Meta-analysis: capsule enteroscopy vs. conventional modalities in diagnosis of small bowel diseases. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2005 Oct 1;22(7):595-604. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2005.02625.x.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 16181299 (View on PubMed)

Schulmann K, Hollerbach S, Kraus K, Willert J, Vogel T, Moslein G, Pox C, Reiser M, Reinacher-Schick A, Schmiegel W. Feasibility and diagnostic utility of video capsule endoscopy for the detection of small bowel polyps in patients with hereditary polyposis syndromes. Am J Gastroenterol. 2005 Jan;100(1):27-37. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2005.40102.x.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 15654777 (View on PubMed)

Triester SL, Leighton JA, Leontiadis GI, Fleischer DE, Hara AK, Heigh RI, Shiff AD, Sharma VK. A meta-analysis of the yield of capsule endoscopy compared to other diagnostic modalities in patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding. Am J Gastroenterol. 2005 Nov;100(11):2407-18. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2005.00274.x.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 16279893 (View on PubMed)

Caddy GR, Moran L, Chong AK, Miller AM, Taylor AC, Desmond PV. The effect of erythromycin on video capsule endoscopy intestinal-transit time. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006 Feb;63(2):262-6. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2005.07.043.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 16427932 (View on PubMed)

Postgate A, Tekkis P, Patterson N, Fitzpatrick A, Bassett P, Fraser C. Are bowel purgatives and prokinetics useful for small-bowel capsule endoscopy? A prospective randomized controlled study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009 May;69(6):1120-8. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.06.044. Epub 2009 Jan 18.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 19152909 (View on PubMed)

Rondonotti E, Herrerias JM, Pennazio M, Caunedo A, Mascarenhas-Saraiva M, de Franchis R. Complications, limitations, and failures of capsule endoscopy: a review of 733 cases. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005 Nov;62(5):712-6; quiz 752, 754. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2005.05.002.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 16246685 (View on PubMed)

Westerhof J, Weersma RK, Koornstra JJ. Risk factors for incomplete small-bowel capsule endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009 Jan;69(1):74-80. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.04.034. Epub 2008 Aug 8.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 18691709 (View on PubMed)

Aparicio JR, Martinez J, Casellas JA. Right lateral position does not affect gastric transit times of video capsule endoscopy: a prospective study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009 Jan;69(1):34-7. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.03.1111. Epub 2008 Jul 11.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 18620344 (View on PubMed)

Liao Z, Li F, Li ZS. Right lateral position improves complete examination rate of capsule endoscope: a prospective randomized, controlled trial. Endoscopy. 2008 Jun;40(6):483-7. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-995689.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 18556803 (View on PubMed)

Koulaouzidis A, Giannakou A, Yung DE, Dabos KJ, Plevris JN. Do prokinetics influence the completion rate in small-bowel capsule endoscopy? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Curr Med Res Opin. 2013 Sep;29(9):1171-85. doi: 10.1185/03007995.2013.818532. Epub 2013 Jul 11.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 23790243 (View on PubMed)

Power ML, Schulkin J. Anticipatory physiological regulation in feeding biology: cephalic phase responses. Appetite. 2008 Mar-May;50(2-3):194-206. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2007.10.006. Epub 2007 Oct 24.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 18045735 (View on PubMed)

Defilippi C, Valenzuela JE. Sham feeding disrupts the interdigestive motility complex in man. Scand J Gastroenterol. 1981;16(8):977-9. doi: 10.3109/00365528109181014.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 7336138 (View on PubMed)

Stern RM, Crawford HE, Stewart WR, Vasey MW, Koch KL. Sham feeding. Cephalic-vagal influences on gastric myoelectric activity. Dig Dis Sci. 1989 Apr;34(4):521-7. doi: 10.1007/BF01536327.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 2702882 (View on PubMed)

Katschinski M, Dahmen G, Reinshagen M, Beglinger C, Koop H, Nustede R, Adler G. Cephalic stimulation of gastrointestinal secretory and motor responses in humans. Gastroenterology. 1992 Aug;103(2):383-91. doi: 10.1016/0016-5085(92)90825-j.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 1634057 (View on PubMed)

Brin VB, Tsabolova ZT. [The effect of calcitonin on the mechanisms of urine formation and sodium excretion in normotensive and spontaneously hypertensive rats]. Biull Eksp Biol Med. 1991 Feb;111(2):118-20. Russian.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 1854946 (View on PubMed)

Ou G, Svarta S, Chan C, Galorport C, Qian H, Enns R. The effect of chewing gum on small-bowel transit time in capsule endoscopy: a prospective, randomized trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014 Apr;79(4):630-6. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2013.08.038. Epub 2013 Oct 7.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 24112594 (View on PubMed)

Feldman M, Richardson CT. Role of thought, sight, smell, and taste of food in the cephalic phase of gastric acid secretion in humans. Gastroenterology. 1986 Feb;90(2):428-33. doi: 10.1016/0016-5085(86)90943-1.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 3940915 (View on PubMed)

Abdallah L, Chabert M, Louis-Sylvestre J. Cephalic phase responses to sweet taste. Am J Clin Nutr. 1997 Mar;65(3):737-43. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/65.3.737.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 9062523 (View on PubMed)

Wicks D, Wright J, Rayment P, Spiller R. Impact of bitter taste on gastric motility. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2005 Sep;17(9):961-5. doi: 10.1097/00042737-200509000-00012.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 16093874 (View on PubMed)

Schiller LR, Feldman M, Richardson CT. Effect of sham feeding on gastric emptying. Gastroenterology. 1980 Jun;78(6):1472-5.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 7372066 (View on PubMed)

Soffer EE, Adrian TE. Effect of meal composition and sham feeding on duodenojejunal motility in humans. Dig Dis Sci. 1992 Jul;37(7):1009-14. doi: 10.1007/BF01300279.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 1618049 (View on PubMed)

Powley TL, Berthoud HR. Diet and cephalic phase insulin responses. Am J Clin Nutr. 1985 Nov;42(5 Suppl):991-1002. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/42.5.991.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 3933326 (View on PubMed)

Teff KL, Devine J, Engelman K. Sweet taste: effect on cephalic phase insulin release in men. Physiol Behav. 1995 Jun;57(6):1089-95. doi: 10.1016/0031-9384(94)00373-d.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 7652029 (View on PubMed)

de Franchis R, Avgerinos A, Barkin J, Cave D, Filoche B; ICCE. ICCE consensus for bowel preparation and prokinetics. Endoscopy. 2005 Oct;37(10):1040-5. doi: 10.1055/s-2005-870327. No abstract available.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 16189787 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

H14-03443

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id