Choi Jong Hwan, Choi Jae Hyuk, Lee Yoo Jin, Lee Hyung Ki, Choi Wang Yong, Kim Eun Soo, Park Kyung Sik, Cho Kwang Bum, Jang Byoung Kuk, Chung Woo Jin, Hwang Jae Seok
Jong Hwan Choi, Jae Hyuk Choi, Yoo Jin Lee, Hyung Ki Lee, Wang Yong Choi, Eun Soo Kim, Kyung Sik Park, Kwang Bum Cho, Byoung Kuk Jang, Woo Jin Chung, Jae Seok Hwang, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Keimyung University School of Medicine, Daegu 700-712, South Korea.
World J Gastroenterol. 2014 Jul 7;20(25):8221-8. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i25.8221.
To compare outcomes using the novel portable endoscopy with that of nasogastric (NG) aspiration in patients with gastrointestinal bleeding.
Patients who underwent NG aspiration for the evaluation of upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleeding were eligible for the study. After NG aspiration, we performed the portable endoscopy to identify bleeding evidence in the UGI tract. Then, all patients underwent conventional esophagogastroduodenoscopy as the gold-standard test. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the portable endoscopy for confirming UGI bleeding were compared with those of NG aspiration.
In total, 129 patients who had GI bleeding signs or symptoms were included in the study (age 64.46 ± 13.79, 91 males). The UGI tract (esophagus, stomach, and duodenum) was the most common site of bleeding (81, 62.8%) and the cause of bleeding was not identified in 12 patients (9.3%). Specificity for identifying UGI bleeding was higher with the portable endoscopy than NG aspiration (85.4% vs 68.8%, P = 0.008) while accuracy was comparable. The accuracy of the portable endoscopy was significantly higher than that of NG in the subgroup analysis of patients with esophageal bleeding (88.2% vs 75%, P = 0.004). Food material could be detected more readily by the portable endoscopy than NG tube aspiration (20.9% vs 9.3%, P = 0.014). No serious adverse effect was observed during the portable endoscopy.
The portable endoscopy was not superior to NG aspiration for confirming UGI bleeding site. However, this novel portable endoscopy device might provide a benefit over NG aspiration in patients with esophageal bleeding.
比较新型便携式内镜检查与鼻胃管抽吸术在胃肠道出血患者中的应用效果。
因评估上消化道(UGI)出血而接受鼻胃管抽吸术的患者符合本研究条件。在进行鼻胃管抽吸术后,我们使用便携式内镜检查来确定上消化道出血的证据。然后,所有患者均接受传统的食管胃十二指肠镜检查作为金标准检测。将便携式内镜检查用于确认上消化道出血的敏感性、特异性和准确性与鼻胃管抽吸术进行比较。
本研究共纳入129例有胃肠道出血体征或症状的患者(年龄64.46±13.79岁,男性91例)。上消化道(食管、胃和十二指肠)是最常见的出血部位(81例,占62.8%),12例患者(9.3%)未明确出血原因。便携式内镜检查识别上消化道出血的特异性高于鼻胃管抽吸术(85.4%对68.8%,P = 0.008),而准确性相当。在食管出血患者的亚组分析中,便携式内镜检查的准确性显著高于鼻胃管抽吸术(88.2%对75%,P = 0.004)。便携式内镜检查比鼻胃管抽吸术更易检测到食物残渣(20.9%对9.3%,P = 0.014)。在便携式内镜检查过程中未观察到严重不良反应。
在确认上消化道出血部位方面,便携式内镜检查并不优于鼻胃管抽吸术。然而,这种新型便携式内镜检查设备在食管出血患者中可能比鼻胃管抽吸术更具优势。