Comparison of Advantages and Disadvantages between Capsule Endoscope Camera Modules and Wired Endoscope Modules

In medical diagnosis, capsule endoscopes and wired endoscope camera modules each have their own characteristics. The capsule endoscope has the core advantage of being non-invasive and convenient. After being swallowed by the patient, it moves naturally with the gastrointestinal tract to take images and transmit them wirelessly. The entire process is painless without intubation, leading to high patient acceptance. It is particularly suitable for people who are afraid of invasive examinations, those who are physically weak, or for health screening. Moreover, it does not require complex preparations, allowing patients to move freely. However, due to volume limitations, its camera resolution is relatively low, resulting in insufficient detail presentation and a higher risk of missed diagnosis. Additionally, it can only be used for examination and cannot perform treatments such as biopsy or resection, and the single examination cost is more expensive.

Although wired endoscopes require intubation through natural body cavities, which may cause discomfort such as nausea and abdominal pain (which can be relieved by anesthesia), and the preparations before and after the examination are cumbersome and require patients to cooperate in the hospital, their advantages are also significant. Their cameras are larger in size and equipped with advanced optical systems, providing high-resolution images with clear details. Doctors can actively adjust the angle for focused observation to reduce missed diagnoses. More importantly, they can complete therapeutic operations such as biopsy and hemostasis through the working channel, achieving one-stop diagnosis and treatment. Furthermore, the equipment can be reused, resulting in lower single examination costs. They are more suitable for patients with obvious symptoms who need clear diagnosis and treatment or those with detected lesions requiring detailed examination. The choice between the two devices should be made based on comprehensive consideration of the patient's condition, examination purpose, and medical resources.