CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Endosc Int Open 2017; 05(05): E340-E344
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-122008
Original article
Eigentümer und Copyright ©Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2017

Comparative quality assessment of esophageal examination with transnasal and sedated endoscopy

Nicholas R. Crews
1   Division of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
,
Emmanuel C. Gorospe
2   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
,
Michele L. Johnson
2   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
,
Louis-Michel Wong Kee Song
2   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
,
David A. Katzka
2   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
,
Prasad G. Iyer
2   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

submitted 06 June 2016

accepted after revision 02 November 2016

Publication Date:
05 May 2017 (online)

Abstract

Background Unsedated transnasal esophagoscopy (TNE) may offer a less expensive, mobile alternative to sedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for evaluations of reflux related complications. Comparisons of imaging quality by these methods are lacking.

Methods Two reviewers evaluated videos of TNE and EGD procedures, performed during a community randomized study comparing endoscopic techniques. Subjects were randomized to EGD, TNE in endoscopy suite, or TNE in mobile research unit. Endoscopic quality was assessed using a validated scoring tool.

Results In total, 115 videos (58 EGD, 28 endoscopy suite TNE, and 29 mobile TNE) were reviewed. Overall quality scores for TNE and EGD were excellent without a statistically significant difference (P = 0.30). There were no differences in gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) visualization scores, though EGD scored higher in esophageal passage (P < 0.05) and TNE scored higher in esophageal intubation (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in any quality score between mobile TNE and gastrointestinal suite TNE.

Conclusion Esophageal assessment with TNE or EGD was comparable in overall quality and GEJ visualization. TNE quality was not affected by procedure location. TNE is a feasible option for endoscopic assessment of reflux complications.

 
  • References

  • 1 Iyer PG, Chak A. Can endosheath technology open primary care doors to Barrett’s esophagus screening by transnasal endoscopy?. Endoscopy 2016; 48: 105-106
  • 2 Peery AF, Hoppo T, Garman KS. et al. Feasibility, safety, acceptability, and yield of office-based, screening transnasal esophagoscopy (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 75: 945-953, e942
  • 3 Chung JW, Park S, Chung MJ. et al. A novel disposable, transnasal esophagoscope: a pilot trial of feasibility, safety, and tolerance. Endoscopy 2012; 44: 206-209
  • 4 Mokhashi MS, Wildi SM, Glenn TF. et al. A prospective, blinded study of diagnostic esophagoscopy with a superthin, stand-alone, battery-powered esophagoscope. Am J Gastroenterol 2003; 98: 2383-2389
  • 5 Garcia RT, Cello JP, Nguyen MH. et al. Unsedated ultrathin EGD is well accepted when compared with conventional sedated EGD: a multicenter randomized trial. Gastroenterology 2003; 125: 1606-1612
  • 6 Jobe BA, Hunter JG, Chang EY. et al. Office-based unsedated small-caliber endoscopy is equivalent to conventional sedated endoscopy in screening and surveillance for Barrett’s esophagus: a randomized and blinded comparison. Am J Gastroenterol 2006; 101: 2693-2703
  • 7 Sami SS, Dunagan KT, Johnson ML. et al. A randomized comparative effectiveness trial of novel endoscopic techniques and approaches for Barrett’s esophagus screening in the community. Am J Gastroenterol 2015; 110: 148-158
  • 8 Sami SS, Subramanian V, Ortiz-Fernández-Sordo J. et al. Performance characteristics of unsedated ultrathin video endoscopy in the assessment of the upper gastrointestinal tract: systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 82: 782-792
  • 9 Shariff MK, Bird-Lieberman EL, O’Donovan M. et al. Randomized crossover study comparing efficacy of transnasal endoscopy with that of standard endoscopy to detect Barrett’s esophagus. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 75: 954-961
  • 10 Saeian K, Staff DM, Vasilopoulos S. et al. Unsedated transnasal endoscopy accurately detects Barrett’s metaplasia and dysplasia. Gastrointest Endosc 2002; 56: 472-478
  • 11 Aedo MR, Zavala-Gonzalez MA, Meixueiro-Daza A. et al. Accuracy of transnasal endoscopy with a disposable esophagoscope compared to conventional endoscopy. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 6: 128-136
  • 12 Williams J, Russell I, Durai D. et al. What are the clinical outcome and cost-effectiveness of endoscopy undertaken by nurses when compared with doctors? A Multi-Institution Nurse Endoscopy Trial (MINuET). Health Technol Assess 2006; 10: 1-195 iii–iv, ix–x
  • 13 Boolchand V, Faulx A, Das A. et al. Primary care physician attitudes toward endoscopic screening for GERD symptoms and unsedated esophagoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2006; 63: 228-233
  • 14 Alashkar B, Faulx AL, Hepner A. et al. Development of a program to train physician extenders to perform transnasal esophagoscopy and screen for Barrett’s esophagus. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2014; 12: 785-792