Unsedated Ultrathin EGD Is Well Accepted When Compared with Conventional Sedated EGD: A Multicenter Randomized Trial

ArticleinGastroenterology 125(6):1606-12 · December 2003with23 Reads
DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2003.08.034 · Source: PubMed
In the United States, upper gastrointestinal endoscopy is usually performed using intravenous sedation. Sedation increases the rate of both complications and costs of endoscopy. Unsedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) using conventional 8-11-mm endoscopes is an alternative to sedated endoscopy but is generally perceived as unacceptable to many American patients. Unsedated EGD using ultrathin 5-6-mm endoscopes is better tolerated. A randomized trial comparing unsedated ultrathin EGD (UT-EGD) with sedated conventional EGD (C-EGD) in a diverse American population is needed. In this multicenter, randomized, controlled trial, 80 patients scheduled to undergo elective outpatient EGD were randomized to unsedated UT-EGD or sedated C-EGD. The study was carried out at San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, and the Liver and Digestive Health Medical Clinic, San Jose. Baseline characteristics of patients randomized to unsedated UT-EGD and sedated C-EGD were similar. Moreover, there were no significant differences in overall patient satisfaction and willingness to repeat endoscopy in the same manner among the 2 study groups. There was, however, a significant difference in median total procedure time between the 2 study groups of 1.5 hours (P < 0.0001). The mean (+/- SD) total procedure cost was 512.4 US dollars (+/- 100.8 US dollars) for sedated C-EGD and 328.6 US dollars (+/- 70.3 US dollars) for unsedated UT-EGD (P < 0.0001). Patients undergoing unsedated UT-EGD are as satisfied as patients undergoing sedated C-EGD and are just as willing to repeat an unsedated UT-EGD. Unsedated UT-EGD was also faster, less costly, and may allow greater accessibility to this procedure.
    • "In addition, the cost—effectiveness of an unsedated procedure was clearly described in the esophagogastroduodenoscopy . The cost of a conventional sedated procedure was reduced by 35—60% in the unsedated procedure [12,25]. As a consequence, we believe that transnasal TEE without conscious sedation using an ultrathin probe is safe, feasible and cost—effective, which would enhance the use of TEE in clinical practice, similar to the esophagogastroduodenoscopy . "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The widespread use of transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is limited by disadvantages, including patient intolerance and increased medical costs. We aimed to investigate the feasibility and safety of transnasal TEE in the detection of possible embolic sources in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and/or stroke, using an ultrathin TEE probe. Sixty-two patients with AF and/or stroke underwent transnasal TEE without conscious sedation. The presence or the absence of the following parameters was evaluated: left atrial (LA) thrombus; LA spontaneous echocardiographic contrast; intraatrial shunts; and aortic plaque. The insertion of a TEE probe was successful in 52 (84%) patients. TEE found LA thrombus in 10 (19%) patients and other embolic sources in 4 (8%) patients. Two (4%) patients had mild epistaxis. This study demonstrated that the use of transnasal TEE was feasible and safe in the detection of LA thrombus in patients with AF and/or stroke.
    Full-text · Article · Dec 2009
    • "sible. Since the description of the technique, [4] unsedated transnasal OGD has proved to be a cost-effective alternative, which significantly improves patient tolerance compared to unsedated conventional peroral OGD [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]. Transnasal OGD permits a diagnostic yield similar to that of conventional peroral OGD in a variety of circumstances, including the grading of oesophageal varices or the detection of Barrett's oesophagus [10] [11]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Unsedated transnasal oesogastroduodenoscopy significantly improves patient tolerance compared to unsedated conventional peroral oesogastroduodenoscopy. To assess the adoption of transnasal oesogastroduodenoscopy among endoscopists from various European countries and its determinants. A survey was distributed to 624 endoscopists attending a live course on digestive endoscopy; a poll was also performed immediately before and after live video retransmission of a transnasal oesogastroduodenoscopy. Answer rate was 48%; transnasal oesogastroduodenoscopy was practised by 31% of respondents. In multivariate analysis, practice of transnasal oesogastroduodenoscopy was associated with location in France and Netherlands (P<0.0001), availability of many gastroscopes (P<0.0001) and less frequent use of sedation (P=0.006). Endoscopists who did not practise transnasal oesogastroduodenoscopy cited doubts about its advantages over conventional oesogastroduodenoscopy and lack of training (34% each) as barriers to adoption. Seventy-four percent of endoscopists practicing transnasal oesogastroduodenoscopy did actually use it in <20% of eligible cases. Live video retransmission of a transnasal oesogastroduodenoscopy increased the proportion of endoscopists interested in this technique (P=0.006). Adoption of transnasal oesogastroduodenoscopy largely varies between European countries; endoscopists practicing this technique use it in a minority of eligible cases. Live case demonstration may decrease barriers to the adoption of this technique.
    Full-text · Article · Apr 2008
    • "According to other trials [21,29] , in our study the percentage of abnormal vital signs was similar in the three groups of patients. However, it has recently been reported that TN-EGD is associated with fewer adverse effects on cardiopulmonary function than TO-EGD [30] . Our study confirmed that the performances of the narrow endoscope were acceptable. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: 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. 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. 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. 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.
    Article · Feb 2007
Show more

    Recommended publications

    Discover more