A pilot study assessing tolerance safety and feasibility of diagnostic transnasal esophagogastroduodenoscopy using an improved larger caliber endoscope and an adapted topical anesthesia
- 199 Downloads
Transnasal esophagogastroduodenoscopy (TN-EGDS) is well tolerated by patients and the examination is perceived comfortable without the need of a sedative drug. Conversely, mainly in Western literature, some authors report limitations in illumination, image quality, and working channel as affecting TN-EGDS diffusion. To overcome these disadvantages, a new transnasal endoscope (TNE) was tested but, due to its larger diameter, we have no evidence of its clinical safety and tolerability. A new adapted nasal anesthesia could be useful to improve TNE tolerance. In an independent, not sponsored, pilot prospective study we enrolled, in a busy clinical hospital setting, 30 adult patients receiving nasal atomized Lidocaine and Xylometazoline (XAL) to undergo a diagnostic TN-EGDS with TNE to evaluate its tolerance, safety, and feasibility.
Three physicians enrolled inpatients and outpatients with indication to diagnostic EGDS during a 6-month period. Main outcome measures were cardio-pulmonary monitoring data and patients’ answers to an adapted questionnaire investigating pain, anxiety level, willingness to repeat the examination, operators’ scores about endoscopy quality, examination conduction and anesthesia-related complications.
The examination was completed by the transnasal route in 100 % of the enrolled patients, endoscopy satisfaction and feasibility were scored to nearly the highest levels by the three different physicians. A total of 29/30 patients (96.6 %) declared the willingness to repeat the same examination if needed. The mean patients’ score for overall pain was 3.7 ± 1 SD (range 1–10 by Visual Analog Scale). Mean endoscopy duration was 11.1 ± 2.6 min (range 5.0–19.0). In a total of 17/30 TN-EGDS that lasted more than 11 min, higher heart frequency variations and worse tolerance scores were found (p < 0.05).
Our pilot study demonstrates that TN-EGDS with TNE and NA is safe, well tolerated, and feasible. The best clinical tolerance is reached when TN-EGDS lasts <11 min.
KeywordsEndoscopy Feasibility Nose Patient compliance Safety
We are grateful to Prof. Leonardo Palombi for the statistical review and to Paola Rosati for her editing advice during the final submission.
Balassone Valerio, Dauri Mario, Cappuccio Roberto, Di Camillo Mauro, Benavoli Domenico, Buonomo Oreste, Petrella Giuseppe, and Stroppa Italo have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.
Supplementary material 1 (WMV 38429 kb)
- 1.Ai ZL, Lan CH, Fan LL, Lan L, Cao Y, Li P, Song O, Chen DF (2012) Unsedated transnasal upper gastrointestinal endoscopy has favorable diagnostic effectiveness, cardiopulmonary safety, and patient satisfaction compared with conventional or sedated endoscopy. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech 26:3565–3572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2.Watanabe H, Watanabe N, Ogura R, Nishino N, Saifuku Y, Hitomi G, Okamoto Y, Tominaga K, Yoshitake N, Yamagata M, Orui M, Hiraishi H (2009) A randomized prospective trial comparing unsedated endoscopy via transnasal and transoral routes using 5.5-mm video endoscopy. Dig Dis Sci 54:2155–2160CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 5.Stroppa I, Grasso E, Paoluzi OA, Razzini C, Tosti C, Andrei F, Biancone L, Palmieri G, Romeo F, Pallone F (2008) Unsedated transnasal versus transoral sedated upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: a one-series prospective study on safety and patient acceptability. Dig Liver Dis 40:767–775CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 8.Nelson DB, Block KP, Bosco JJ, Burdick JS, Curtis WD, Faigel DO, Greenwald DA, Kelsey PB, Rajan E, Slivka A, Smith P, Wassef W, VanDam J, Wang KK (2000) Technology status evaluation report: ultrathin endoscopes esophagogastroduodenoscopy: March 2000. Gastrointest Endosc 51:786–789CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 9.Cheung J, Goodman K, Bailey R, Fedorak R, Morse J, Millan M, Guzowski T, van Zanten SV (2010) A randomized trial of topical anesthesia comparing lidocaine versus lidocaine plus xylometazoline for unsedated transnasal upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Can J Gastroenterol 24:317–321PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.Kawai T, Yamamoto K, Fukuzawa M, Sakai Y, Moriyasu F (2010) Ultra-thin transnasal esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Nippon rinsho Jpn J Clin Med 68:1264–1267Google Scholar
- 12.Hayashi Y, Yamamoto Y, Suganuma T, Okada K, Nego M, Imada S-I, Imai M, Yoshimoto K, Ueki N, Hirasawa T, Uragami N, Tsuchida T, Fujisaki J, Hoshino E, Takahashi H, Igarashi M (2009) Comparison of the diagnostic utility of the ultrathin endoscope and the conventional endoscope in early gastric cancer screening. Dig Endosc 21:116–121CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 14.Kadayifci A, Atar M, Parlar S, Balkan A, Koruk I, Koruk M (2014) Transnasal endoscopy is preferred by transoral endoscopy experienced patients. J Gastrointest Liver Dis 23:27–31Google Scholar
- 17.Yücel Üstündag, Saritafi Ü, Ponchon T (2011) Unsedated small caliber espophagogastroduodenoscopy: can we trust this technique. Turk J Gastroenterol 22:237–242Google Scholar
- 21.Pharmacy VHA, Management B, Healthcare S, Panel MA, Safety P, Topical I, Mhb B, Mhb C, Affairs V (2006) A Guidance on the Use of Topical Anesthetics for Naso/Oropharyngeal and Laryngotracheal ProceduresGoogle Scholar
- 23.Kataoka H, Hayano J, Mizushima T, Tanaka M, Kubota E, Shimura T, Mizoshita T, Tanida S, Kamiya T, Nojiri S, Mukai S, Mizuno K, Joh T (2011) Cardiovascular tolerance and autonomic nervous responses in unsedated upper gastrointestinal small-caliber endoscopy: a comparison between transnasal and peroral procedures with newly developed mouthpiece. Dig Endosc 23:78–85CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 29.Massimo Maffei J-MD (2008) Transnasal esogastroduodenoscopy (EGD): comparison with conventional EGD and new applications. SWiSS Med Wkly 138:658–664Google Scholar