Unsedated ultrathin upper endoscopy is better than conventional endoscopy in routine outpatient gastroenterology practice: a randomized trial.

Lucio Trevisani, Viviana Cifalà, Sergio Sartori, Giuseppe Gilli, Giancarlo Matarese, Vincenzo Abbasciano
Author Information
  1. Lucio Trevisani: Centro di Endoscopia Digestiva, Azienda Ospedaliera-Universitaria Arcispedale S. Anna, C.so Giovecca 203, Ferrara 44100, Italy. tvl@unife.it

Abstract

AIM: to compare the feasibility and patients' tolerance of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) using a thin endoscope with those of conventional oral EGD and to determine the optimal route of introduction of small-caliber endoscopes.
METHODS: One hundred and sixty outpatients referred for diagnostic EGD were randomly allocated to 3 groups: conventional (C)-EGD (9.8 mm in diameter), transnasal (TN)-EGD and transoral (TO)-EGD (5.9 mm in diameter). Pre-EGD anxiety was measured using a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS). After EGD, patients and endoscopists completed a questionnaire on the pain, nausea, choking, overall discomfort, and quality of the examination either using VAS or answering some questions. The duration of EGD was timed. Blood oxygen saturation (SaO2) and heart rate (HR) were monitored during EGD.
RESULTS: Twenty-one patients refused to participate in the study. The 3 groups were well-matched for age, gender, experience with EGD, and anxiety. EGD was completed in 91.1% (41/45), 97.5% (40/41), and 96.2% (51/53) of cases in TN-EGD, TO-EGD, and C-EGD groups, respectively. TN-EGD lasted longer (3.11 +/- 1.60 min) than TO-EGD (2.25 +/- 1.45 min) and C-EGD (2.49 +/- 1.64 min) (P<0.05). The overall tolerance was higher (P<0.05) and the overall discomfort was lower (P<0.05) in TN-EGD group than in C-EGD group. EGD was tolerated "better than expected" in 73.2% of patients in TN-EGD group and 55% and 39.2% of patients in TO-EGD and C-EGD groups, respectively (P<0.05). Endoscopy was tolerated "worst than expected" in 4.9% of patients in TN-EGD group and 17.5% and 23.5% of patients in TO-EGD and C-EGD groups, respectively (P<0.05). TN-EGD caused mild epistaxis in one case. The ability to insufflate air, wash the lens, and suction of the thin endoscope were lower than those of conventional instrument (P<0.001). All biopsies performed were adequate for histological assessment.
CONCLUSION: Diagnostic TN-EGD is better tolerated than C-EGD. Narrow-diameter endoscope has a level of diagnostic accuracy comparable to that of conventional gastroscope, even though some technical characteristics of these instruments should be improved. Transnasal EGD with narrow-diameter endoscope should be proposed to all patients undergoing diagnostic EGD.

References

Gastrointest Endosc. 2004 Jan;59(1):54-7 [PMID: 14722548]
Gastrointest Endosc. 1999 Mar;49(3 Pt 1):297-301 [PMID: 10049411]
Gastroenterology. 2003 Dec;125(6):1606-12 [PMID: 14724812]
World J Gastroenterol. 2004 Nov 15;10(22):3313-7 [PMID: 15484307]
Gastrointest Endosc. 1989 Mar-Apr;35(2):79-81 [PMID: 2714608]
J Consult Clin Psychol. 1992 Feb;60(1):133-9 [PMID: 1556276]
Gastrointest Endosc. 1994 May-Jun;40(3):346-8 [PMID: 8056238]
Gastrointest Endosc. 1996 Oct;44(4):422-4 [PMID: 8905361]
Endoscopy. 1996 Nov;28(9):763-7 [PMID: 9007431]
Am J Gastroenterol. 1997 Dec;92(12):2171-8 [PMID: 9399747]
Endoscopy. 1998 Jun;30(5):448-52 [PMID: 9693891]
Endoscopy. 2005 Jan;37(1):48-51 [PMID: 15657858]
Endoscopy. 2005 Jun;37(6):559-65 [PMID: 15933930]
Gastrointest Endosc. 2005 Nov;62(5):661-6 [PMID: 16246675]
Gastrointest Endosc. 2005 Nov;62(5):667-8 [PMID: 16246676]
Endoscopy. 2005 Dec;37(12):1226-31 [PMID: 16329022]
Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 1999 Feb;11(2):201-4 [PMID: 10102233]
Postgrad Med J. 1999 Apr;75(882):223-5 [PMID: 10715762]
Am J Gastroenterol. 2001 Feb;96(2):280-4 [PMID: 11232665]
Endoscopy. 2001 Apr;33(4):311-6 [PMID: 11315891]
Am J Gastroenterol. 2001 Jun;96(6):1786-90 [PMID: 11419830]
Am J Med. 2001 Dec 3;111 Suppl 8A:153S-156S [PMID: 11749942]
Endoscopy. 2002 Jan;34(1):2-12 [PMID: 11778125]
Gastrointest Endosc. 2003 Feb;57(2):198-204 [PMID: 12556784]
Gastrointest Endosc. 2003 Jul;58(1):102-10 [PMID: 12838235]
Endoscopy. 2003 Aug;35(8):641-6 [PMID: 12929057]
Endoscopy. 2003 Aug;35(8):647-51 [PMID: 12929058]
Gastrointest Endosc. 1998 Oct;48(4):432-40 [PMID: 9786124]
Gastrointest Endosc. 1999 Mar;49(3 Pt 1):279-84 [PMID: 10049408]
Gastrointest Endosc. 1999 Mar;49(3 Pt 1):285-91 [PMID: 10049409]
Gastrointest Endosc. 1999 Mar;49(3 Pt 1):292-6 [PMID: 10049410]
Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2004 Jan 16;129(3):82-6 [PMID: 14724781]

MeSH Term

Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Ambulatory Surgical Procedures
Biopsy
Endoscopes, Gastrointestinal
Endoscopy, Digestive System
Equipment Design
Female
Gastrointestinal Diseases
Gastrointestinal Tract
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Pain Measurement
Sensitivity and Specificity