ArticleSurgical endoscopy2015
A pilot study assessing tolerance safety and feasibility of diagnostic transnasal esophagogastroduodenoscopy using an improved larger caliber endoscope and an adapted topical anesthesia.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTransnasal 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.
methodsThree 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.
resultsThe 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).
conclusionOur 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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.