Lu Zhanjun, Qi Yu, Weng Jianjun, Ma Lei, Wan Xinjian, Wan Rong, Lu Lungen, Zhao Hang
Department of Gastroenterology, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai JiaoTong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China (mainland).
Department of Gastroenterology, Shanghai East Hospital, Shanghai Tongji University, Shanghai, China (mainland).
Med Sci Monit. 2017 Apr 22;23:1933-1939. doi: 10.12659/msm.900343.
BACKGROUND Single-balloon endoscopy (SBE) has been introduced as a simplified endoscopy technique after the promotion of double-balloon endoscopy (DBE). The difference in clinical performance between DBE and SBE is still not very clear. In this study, we aimed to compare the efficacy and safety between these 2 endoscopic procedures. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 173 patients with suspected small bowel disease were enrolled into this study from January 2007 to December 2011. All cases were divided into DBE or SBE groups according to the endoscopic procedures they underwent. We then compared the diagnostic yield, the influence of DBE and SBE on the diagnostic/therapeutic course, the examination time, and post-procedure discomfort between DBE and SBE groups. RESULTS We observed no notable adverse events during or after the examinations. Additionally, SBE displays a significantly higher diagnostic rate (62.0%) than DBE (35.6%) via the anal approach (P=0.0137), while there was no difference in positive diagnostic rate between DBE and SBE via the oral route. Remarkably, it takes significantly less time to perform SBE examinations (38.86±5.64 minutes) than DBE procedures (41.80±6.50 minutes) via the oral route (P=0.048), although the average examination time for DBE is close to that for SBE via the anal route (P=0.952). However, DBE and SBE are similar in terms of their impact on the diagnostic/therapeutic course and complication rate. CONCLUSIONS Both SBE and DBE are very safe procedures to perform and SBE is a preferred choice for the evaluation of small bowel diseases in terms of diagnostic rate via the anal route compared with DBE.
背景 在双气囊内镜(DBE)推广之后,单气囊内镜(SBE)作为一种简化的内镜技术被引入。DBE和SBE在临床性能上的差异仍不是很清楚。在本研究中,我们旨在比较这两种内镜检查方法的疗效和安全性。
材料与方法 2007年1月至2011年12月,共有173例疑似小肠疾病的患者纳入本研究。所有病例根据其接受的内镜检查方法分为DBE组或SBE组。然后我们比较了两组之间的诊断率、DBE和SBE对诊断/治疗过程的影响、检查时间以及术后不适情况。
结果 在检查期间或检查后,我们未观察到明显的不良事件。此外,经肛门途径时,SBE的诊断率(62.0%)显著高于DBE(35.6%)(P = 0.0137),而经口腔途径时,DBE和SBE的阳性诊断率无差异。值得注意的是,经口腔途径进行SBE检查所需的时间(38.86±5.64分钟)明显少于DBE检查(41.80±6.50分钟)(P = 0.048),尽管DBE的平均检查时间与经肛门途径的SBE相近(P = 0.952)。然而,DBE和SBE在对诊断/治疗过程的影响和并发症发生率方面相似。
结论 SBE和DBE都是非常安全的检查方法,并且与DBE相比,就经肛门途径的诊断率而言,SBE是评估小肠疾病的首选。