Kadayifci Abdurrahman, Atar Mustafa, Parlar Serap, Balkan Ayhan, Koruk Irfan, Koruk Mehmet
Division of Gastroenterology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Gaziantep, Gaziantep, Turkey.
Division of Gastroenterology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
J Gastrointestin Liver Dis. 2014 Mar;23(1):27-31.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Both unsedated transoral endoscopy (TOE) and sedated TOE have some drawbacks in clinical practice. Unsedated transnasal endoscopy (TNE) has been suggested as an alternative to both methods. This study aimed to determine the advantages of TNE in patients who have previously undergone unsedated conventional TOE.
Patients who had received an unsedated TOE in the last 12 months and were scheduled for a second upper endoscopy were included. They were randomized to undergo either unsedated TOE, using a standard endoscope, or unsedated TNE, using an ultrathin endoscope. Post-procedure, patients were asked to complete a questionnaire to assess pain, discomfort and acceptability of the procedure, and to compare the current procedure with their previous unsedated TOE. Endoscope insertion rate, procedure duration, and side-effects were recorded.
Each group included 50 patients. With the exception of nasal pain, the tolerability and acceptance were significantly greater in the unsedated TNE group. Significantly more TNE patients (82%) found the current endoscopic procedure to be better than their previous TOE when compared with patients who had received a second TOE (12%). A repeat procedure was significantly more acceptable for TNE patients when compared to the TOE group (68% vs.16%). The duration of endoscopy was significantly shorter in TOE than in TNE (p<0.05). Endoscope insertion failed in 4% and mild epistaxis was observed in 4% of TNE patients.
Unsedated TNE was better tolerated in endoscopy experienced patients when compared with unsedated TOE. The majority of patients found TNE more acceptable and preferable to TOE, suggesting that TNE should become a more common practice in clinics when applicable.
在临床实践中,非镇静经口内镜检查(TOE)和镇静TOE都存在一些缺点。非镇静经鼻内镜检查(TNE)被提议作为这两种方法的替代方案。本研究旨在确定TNE在既往接受过非镇静传统TOE的患者中的优势。
纳入在过去12个月内接受过非镇静TOE且计划进行第二次上消化道内镜检查的患者。他们被随机分为两组,一组使用标准内镜进行非镇静TOE,另一组使用超薄内镜进行非镇静TNE。检查后,要求患者完成一份问卷,以评估检查过程中的疼痛、不适和可接受性,并将当前检查与之前的非镇静TOE进行比较。记录内镜插入率、检查持续时间和副作用。
每组包括50名患者。除鼻痛外,非镇静TNE组的耐受性和可接受性明显更高。与接受第二次TOE的患者(12%)相比,显著更多的TNE患者(82%)认为当前的内镜检查比他们之前的TOE更好。与TOE组相比,TNE患者对重复检查的接受度明显更高(68%对16%)。TOE的内镜检查持续时间明显短于TNE(p<0.05)。4%的TNE患者内镜插入失败,4%的患者出现轻度鼻出血。
与非镇静TOE相比,有内镜检查经验的患者对非镇静TNE的耐受性更好。大多数患者认为TNE比TOE更可接受且更可取,这表明在适用时,TNE应在临床上成为更常见的检查方法。