» Articles » PMID: 20659140

Unsedated Transnasal Ultrathin Esophagogastroduodenoscopy May Provide Better Diagnostic Performance in Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

Overview
Journal Dis Esophagus
Specialty Gastroenterology
Date 2010 Jul 28
PMID 20659140
Citations 8
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Transnasal ultrathin esophagogastroduodenoscopy (N-EGD) with less gagging reflexes under non-sedation is likely suitable for the diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), however, N-EGD might have drawbacks, including its low image resolution. Limited information is available regarding the diagnosability of N-EGD for GERD. We compared the utility and gagging reflexes of three different endoscopies, including N-EGD, ultrathin transoral EGD (UTO-EGD) and conventional oral EGD (CO-EGD), in the diagnosis of GERD. We performed screening endoscopy in 1580 patients (N-EGD n=727, UTO-EGD n=599, CO-EGD n=254) and compared the frequency distributions of the severity of reflux esophagitis, hiatus hernia, and Barrett's epithelium to estimate the diagnostic performance of each endoscopy. We also analyzed patients' tolerability of endoscopy by the subjective evaluation of gagging reflexes. In the diagnosis of reflux esophagitis and Barrett's epithelium, there was no significant difference in the frequency distributions of the severity of the diseases among three EGDs. However, the incidence of Barrett's epithelium was higher than that in the previous nationwide survey of GERD in Japan. The evaluated size of hiatus hernia was smaller in N-EGD than in two other peroral endoscopies. The size of hiatus hernia correlated significantly with severity of gagging reflexes that was also lowest when diagnosed with N-EGD. N-EGD had an equivalent performance in the diagnosis of reflux esophagitis and Barrett's epithelium compared with CO-EGD. Enlargement of hiatus hernia induced by gagging reflexes was minimal in N-EGD, resulting in its better performance in the diagnosis of Barrett's epithelium.

Citing Articles

Public acceptance and uptake of oesophageal adenocarcinoma screening strategies: A mixed-methods systematic review.

Sijben J, Peters Y, van der Velden K, Rainey L, Siersema P, Broeders M EClinicalMedicine. 2022; 46:101367.

PMID: 35399814 PMC: 8987366. DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2022.101367.


.

Groulx S, Limburg H, Doull M, Klarenbach S, Singh H, Wilson B CMAJ. 2020; 192(47):E1597-E1607.

PMID: 33229357 PMC: 7721269. DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.190814-f.


Guideline on screening for esophageal adenocarcinoma in patients with chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Groulx S, Limburg H, Doull M, Klarenbach S, Singh H, Wilson B CMAJ. 2020; 192(27):E768-E777.

PMID: 32631908 PMC: 7828892. DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.190814.


Screening for esophageal adenocarcinoma and precancerous conditions (dysplasia and Barrett's esophagus) in patients with chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease with or without other risk factors: two systematic reviews and one overview of reviews....

Hamel C, Ahmadzai N, Beck A, Thuku M, Skidmore B, Pussegoda K Syst Rev. 2020; 9(1):20.

PMID: 31996261 PMC: 6990541. DOI: 10.1186/s13643-020-1275-2.


Necessity of transnasal gastroscopy in routine diagnostics: a patient-centred requirement analysis.

Schuldt A, Kirsten H, Tuennemann J, Heindl M, van Bommel F, Feisthammel J BMJ Open Gastroenterol. 2019; 6(1):e000264.

PMID: 31139423 PMC: 6506089. DOI: 10.1136/bmjgast-2018-000264.