ArticleCureus2026
Exploring Patient Experience and Acceptability of Sedated Transnasal Endoscopy as an Alternative to Oesophagogastroduodenoscopy Under General Anaesthetic.
Article in Cureus, 2026. 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.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective Demands on endoscopy services have increased substantially in recent years, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (OGD) under conscious sedation is poorly tolerated by a subgroup of patients, who are often referred for propofol-sedated or general anaesthetic OGD (GA OGD), a resource-intensive procedure associated with prolonged waiting times. Transnasal endoscopy (TNE) is better tolerated and has comparable diagnostic accuracy to conventional OGD. This study evaluated patient-reported experience of sedated TNE (sTNE) as an alternative to GA OGD. Method Fourteen patients who were unable to tolerate OGD under conscious sedation were identified from the GA OGD waiting list and offered sTNE. Following the procedure, participants completed questionnaires comprising Likert-scale assessments of comfort, acceptability and willingness to recommend the procedure, together with optional free-text comments. Free-text responses underwent descriptive thematic analysis. Results All 14 patients (100%) successfully completed sTNE despite previous intolerance of conventional OGD under conscious sedation. All participants reported the procedure to be comfortable and stated they would recommend it as an alternative to GA OGD. Among the 10 patients with previous OGD experience, all reported sTNE to be more tolerable than their prior procedure. Analysis of free-text responses demonstrated consistent findings, with 56.5% specifically highlighting good tolerability and 95.7% expressing an overall positive patient experience. Conclusion Sedated TNE demonstrated excellent patient tolerability in individuals who had previously been unable to tolerate conventional OGD and enabled removal from the GA OGD waiting list. These findings support sTNE as a promising alternative for appropriately selected patients, with the potential to reduce waiting times and optimise endoscopy resource utilisation. Larger prospective studies are warranted to confirm these findings.
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.