Trial reportEndoscopy2016
Pilot randomized crossover study comparing the efficacy of transnasal disposable endosheath with standard endoscopy to detect Barrett's esophagus.
Trial report in Endoscopy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic and Clinical Performance of Single-Use Versus Reusable Gastrointestinal Endoscopes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Pooled it
- Unsedated transnasal endoscopy for the detection of Barrett's esophagus: systematic review and meta-analysis.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2023Pooled it
- Endoscopic Screening of Barrett's Esophagus.Gastrointestinal endoscopy clinics of North America · 2026Review
- Article
- New Techniques to Screen for Barrett Esophagus.Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2023Article
- Unsedated Transnasal Endoscopy: A Safe, Well-Tolerated and Accurate Alternative to Standard Diagnostic Peroral Endoscopy.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2022Review
- Barrett's Oesophagus: Today's Mistake and Tomorrow's Wisdom in Screening and Prevention.Visceral medicine · 2022Review
- Innovations in Screening Tools for Barrett's Esophagus and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.Current gastroenterology reports · 2021Review
- Comparative Cost Effectiveness of Reflux-Based and Reflux-Independent Strategies for Barrett's Esophagus Screening.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2021Article
- Tethered capsule en face optical coherence tomography for imaging Barrett's oesophagus in unsedated patients.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2020Article
- Endoscopic measurement of gastric pH associates with persistent acid reflux in patients treated with proton-pump inhibitors for gastroesophageal reflux disease.United European gastroenterology journal · 2019Article
- Miniature gastrointestinal endoscopy: Now and the future.World journal of gastroenterology · 2019Review
- Novel Screening Tests for Barrett's Esophagus.Current gastroenterology reports · 2019Review
- Early detection and therapeutics.Molecular oncology · 2019Review
- Acceptability, Accuracy, and Safety of Disposable Transnasal Capsule Endoscopy for Barrett's Esophagus Screening.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2019Article
- Endoscopic Management of Early Adenocarcinoma and Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Esophagus: Screening, Diagnosis, and Therapy.Gastroenterology · 2018Review
- Alternatives to Traditional Per-Oral Endoscopy for Screening.Gastrointestinal endoscopy clinics of North America · 2017Review
- Past, present and future of Barrett's oesophagus.European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology · 2017Review
- Prevalence and Predictors of Gastroesophageal Reflux Complications in Community Subjects.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2016Article
- Monitoring the premalignant potential of Barrett's oesophagus'.Frontline gastroenterology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND STUDY
aimsThe transnasal endosheath endoscope is a new disposable technology with potential applicability to the primary care setting. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of transnasal endosheath endoscopy (TEE) for the detection of Barrett's esophagus, by comparing the diagnostic accuracy of TEE with that of standard endoscopy. PATIENTS AND
methodsThis was a prospective, randomized, crossover study performed in a single tertiary referral center. Consecutive patients undergoing surveillance for Barrett's esophagus or referred for diagnostic assessment were recruited. All patients were randomized to undergo TEE followed by standard endoscopy or the reverse. Endoscopy experiences and patient preferences were evaluated using a questionnaire. Endoscopic and histologic diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus, and optical image quality of both endoscopic procedures, were compared.
resultsA total of 21 of 25 patients completed the study. TEE had sensitivity and specificity of 100 % for an endoscopic diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus, and of 66.7 % and 100 %, respectively, for the histologic diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus. The mean optical quality of standard endoscopy was significantly better than that of TEE (7.11 ± 0.42 vs. 4.06 ± 0.27; P < 0.0001). However, following endoscopy, patients reported a significantly better experience with TEE compared with standard endoscopy (7.05 ± 0.49 vs. 4.35 ± 0.53; P = 0.0006), with 60 % preferring TEE and 25 % preferring sedated standard endoscopy.
conclusionsIn this study, TEE had equal accuracy for an endoscopic diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus compared with standard endoscopy, at the expense of reduced image quality and a lower yield of intestinal metaplasia on biopsy. TEE was better tolerated and preferred by patients. Hence, TEE needs further evaluation in primary care as an initial diagnostic tool.
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.