» Articles » PMID: 28210269

Low Prevalence of Clinically Significant Endoscopic Findings in Outpatients with Dyspepsia

Overview
Publisher Wiley
Specialty Gastroenterology
Date 2017 Feb 18
PMID 28210269
Citations 16
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The value of endoscopy in dyspeptic patients is questionable. To examine the prevalence of significant endoscopic findings (SEFs) and the utility of alarm features and age in predicting SEFs in outpatients with dyspepsia. A retrospective analysis of outpatient adults who had endoscopy for dyspepsia. Demographic variables, alarm features, and endoscopic findings were recorded. We defined SEFs as peptic ulcer disease, erosive esophagitis, malignancy, stricture, or findings requiring specific therapy. Of 650 patients included in the analysis, 51% had a normal endoscopy. The most common endoscopic abnormality was nonerosive gastritis (29.7%) followed by nonerosive duodenitis (7.2%) and LA-class A esophagitis (5.4%). Only 10.2% had a SEF. Five patients (0.8%) had malignancy. SEFs were more likely present in patients with alarm features (12.6% versus 5.4%, = 0.004). Age ≥ 55 and presence of any alarm feature were associated with SEFs (aOR 1.8 and 2.3, resp.). Dyspeptic patients have low prevalence of SEF. The presence of any alarm feature and age ≥ 55 are associated with higher risk of SEF. Endoscopy in young patients with no alarm features has a low yield; these patients can be considered for nonendoscopic approach for diagnosis and management.

Citing Articles

Analysis between symptoms of the upper gastrointestinal tract and endoscopic findings of patients undergoing upper digestive endoscopy in a reference center in the interior of Maranhão, Brazil.

Santos L, Martins M, Souza C, Silva R, Silva M Acta Cir Bras. 2024; 39():e395824.

PMID: 39356931 PMC: 11441153. DOI: 10.1590/acb395824.


Yield of alarm features in predicting significant endoscopic findings among hospitalized patients with dyspepsia.

Ibrahim L, Basheer M, Khoury T, Sbeit W World J Gastroenterol. 2024; 30(26):3210-3220.

PMID: 39086631 PMC: 11287408. DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v30.i26.3210.


Gastroscopy for dyspepsia: Understanding primary care and gastroenterologist mental models of practice: A cognitive task analysis approach.

Barber T, Crick K, Toon L, Tate J, Kelm K, Novak K J Can Assoc Gastroenterol. 2023; 6(6):234-243.

PMID: 38106487 PMC: 10723936. DOI: 10.1093/jcag/gwad035.


Diagnostic yield of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients attending a UK centre with symptoms compatible with Rome IV functional dyspepsia.

Lorraine-Francis H, Newberry E, Aziz I Frontline Gastroenterol. 2023; 14(4):306-311.

PMID: 37409327 PMC: 11138181. DOI: 10.1136/flgastro-2022-102268.


Diagnostic value of endoscopy in adult patients with dyspepsia.

Al-Abachi K Prz Gastroenterol. 2022; 17(4):274-279.

PMID: 36514452 PMC: 9743333. DOI: 10.5114/pg.2021.112250.


References
1.
Tack J, Talley N, Camilleri M, Holtmann G, Hu P, Malagelada J . Functional gastroduodenal disorders. Gastroenterology. 2006; 130(5):1466-79. DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2005.11.059. View

2.
Fransen G, Janssen M, Muris J, Laheij R, J B M J Jansen . Meta-analysis: the diagnostic value of alarm symptoms for upper gastrointestinal malignancy. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2004; 20(10):1045-52. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2004.02251.x. View

3.
Zhao Y, Zou D, Wang R, Ma X, Yan X, Man X . Dyspepsia and irritable bowel syndrome in China: a population-based endoscopy study of prevalence and impact. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2010; 32(4):562-72. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2010.04376.x. View

4.
Zagari R, Richard Law G, Fuccio L, Pozzato P, Forman D, Bazzoli F . Dyspeptic symptoms and endoscopic findings in the community: the Loiano-Monghidoro study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009; 105(3):565-71. DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2009.706. View

5.
Drossman D, Hasler W . Rome IV-Functional GI Disorders: Disorders of Gut-Brain Interaction. Gastroenterology. 2016; 150(6):1257-61. DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2016.03.035. View