Trial reportIn vivo (Athens, Greece)
Acceptability, Safety, and Feasibility of Transnasal and Peroral Ultrathin Endoscopy Using GAGLESS Mouthpieces: A Prospective Randomized Trial.
Trial report in In vivo (Athens, Greece). 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, 0 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
15 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimEsophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is an effective screening method for early detection of gastric cancer. The GAGLESS mouthpiece has a structure that widens the pharyngeal cavity and suppresses the pharyngeal reflex. This study aimed to investigate the acceptability, safety, and feasibility of transnasal and peroral ultrathin endoscopy using GAGLESS mouthpieces (Clinical Trial Number: UMIN000036922). PATIENTS AND
methodsThis study was a multicenter, prospective, randomized, open-label trial performed using a questionnaire. The study included 101 consecutive patients who visited the participating medical institutions between June 2019 and March 2022 (median age=47 years, range=24-87 years; all male). Patients aged ≥20 years at the time of consent acquisition who were the first to undergo EGD were included in the study. The primary endpoint was the degree of distress during EGD, as determined using a visual analog scale (VAS).
resultsThe VAS score during endoscopic passage through the pharynx was significantly better in the transnasal endoscopy group than in the oral endoscopy group (2.420 vs. 4.092, p=0.001). There was no significant difference in the VAS scores between the two groups during anesthesia or throughout the examination. Compared with nasal endoscopy, oral endoscopy with a GAGLESS mouthpiece did not reduce the VAS score but did significantly improve gastric visibility.
conclusionFor patients in whom there was difficulty in inserting a nasal endoscope, using a GAGLESS mouthpiece rather than a conventional mouthpiece may be more useful in reducing pain.
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.