Background and Study Aims: Patients with spondyloarthropathies are often found to have signs of small-bowel inflammation when examined by ileocolonoscopy. Because capsule endoscopy has been found to be superior to other endoscopic and radiological modalities in the detection of small-bowel inflammation, we aimed to compare the diagnostic yield of capsule endoscopy with that of ileocolonoscopy in the detection of small-bowel lesions in patients with spondyloarthropathies. Patients and Methods: Twenty patients with documented seronegative peripheral arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, or sacroiliitis, who had not taken nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in the preceding 2 months, participated in the study. The patients underwent capsule endoscopy, followed by ileocolonoscopy within 7 days, with blinded assessment of both examinations. Biopsies were taken when indicated and adverse events were monitored. Patients completed a questionnaire on their satisfaction with the two procedures. Results: A total of 20 patients (11 men, 9 women; mean age 41 13 years) with seronegative inflammatory spondyloarthropathies but without abdominal complaints completed the study. No adverse effects were reported and all the capsules were excreted. Of these 20 patients, 11 (55%) had a normal small bowel on both examinations. Significant small-bowel findings (erythema, mucosal breaks, aphthous or linear ulcers, erosions) were detected by capsule endoscopy in six patients (30%) and by ileocolonoscopy in only one patient. In addition, capsule endoscopy detected significant upper gastrointestinal pathology in 40% of patients. The patients preferred capsule endoscopy to ileocolonoscopy. Conclusions: Capsule endoscopy detected more small-bowel lesions than ileocolonoscopy, and provided additional potentially relevant information on upper gastrointestinal pathology in patients with spondyloarthropathies.