This is quite good, just a few corrections/suggestions. The paper reviews the application of capsule endoscopy in THE diagnosis of small bowel disease. And, with certain significance, (do you mean, to some extent??) the paper expounds the application value of capsule endoscopy in various small bowel diseases in a sorted way. (This sentence is not at all clear to me - what is 'application value'? what is 'a sorted way'? However, relevant summaries HAVE been seen in multiple journals so the paper lacks novelty (I think ORIGINALITY is a better word here). Moreover, some of the concepts in the paper are trite (I am not sure a concept can be trite. Do you mean that the discussion/analysis is superficial ?) and the paper fails to analyze the application of these concepts and the instrument-assisted small intestine scope. I would thus advise rejecting this manuscript.

This seems great apart from one word, where you have written ‘relevant summaries has been seen’ this should be ‘relevant summaries have been seen’ as summaries is plural ‘have’ is the correct form.

I love your Spanish perfect. if you want to learn more Latin Spanish really just write me