Unsedated transnasal endoscopy: a safe and less costly alternative

A guide on transnasal endoscopy: setting up a pediatric unsedated endoscopy program

Background

Unsedated transnasal endoscopy is becoming an increasingly popular option for the evaluation of upper gastrointestinal tract disorders in adults and children worldwide. This innovative technology has transformative potential as it provides for a more efficient, safe, and cost-effective method for endoscopy and reduces the risks associated with anesthesia, which is particularly relevant in pediatrics as endoscopy is commonly done under general anesthesia or conscious sedation. The aim is to address knowledge gaps amongst pediatric gastroenterologists who may be considering the development of a TNE program, detailing how to implement sedation-free TNE into practice for pediatric patients and current and forthcoming technologies.

Methods

We conducted a comprehensive review of current literature and collection of data from experts and clinicians in the field on how sedation-free programs were started and being conducted. We aimed to collate the data to provide a guide to address knowledge gaps with a focus on setting up and starting a sedation-free endoscopy program.

Results

Here in, we provide a detailed guide for implementing a sedation-free endoscopy program in pediatrics including design and layout of a TNE unit, special staffing needs, equipment, current and forthcoming technologies, financial considerations and training considerations. We highlight special considerations that are relevant in pediatrics incorporating distraction or dissociation techniques such as Virtual Reality Systems, developmentally appropriate preparation for children, and topical analgesia.

Conclusion

Sedation-free endoscopy is a rapidly growing option for pediatric patients. Development of an unsedated pediatric endoscopy program will improve patient care, decrease the need for anesthesia, provide a lower cost and safe alternative to traditional sedated endoscopy, and is a viable component to a pediatric gastroenterology practice.

Systematic review with meta-analysis: ultra-thin gastroscopy compared to conventional gastroscopy for the diagnosis of oesophageal varices in people with cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Haemorrhage from ruptured oesophageal varices is a common cause of death in people with cirrhosis. Guidelines recommend screening for varices at time of cirrhosis diagnosis and throughout the course of the disease. Conventional gastroscopy is the criterion standard for variceal screening; however, is invasive, costly, and carries risks related to use of sedation. Ultra-thin gastroscopy (using endoscopes with a shaft diameter ≤6 mm) has been proposed as an alternative method of variceal screening that mitigates these risks.

AIM

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of ultra-thin gastroscopy compared to conventional gastroscopy for the diagnosis of varices in people with cirrhosis.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane library databases were searched for studies that evaluated the accuracy of ultra-thin gastroscopy compared to conventional gastroscopy in the diagnosis of oesophageal varices.

RESULTS

Ten studies, 7 in known cirrhosis, with 752 participants were included in this systematic review. The overall prevalence of oesophageal varices was 42%. On bivariate modelling, pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity were 98% (95% CI 93%-99%) and 96% (95% CI 91%-99%) respectively. The positive and negative likelihood ratios were 28 (95% CI 10.7-73.2) and 0.02 (95% CI 0.01-0.72) respectively. Kappa coefficient for inter-observer agreement for any varices ranged from 0.45 to 0.90. No serious adverse events related to ultra-thin gastroscopy were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Ultra-thin gastroscopy is accurate in the diagnosis of oesophageal varices, safe and well tolerated. It is a valid alternative to conventional gastroscopy for the screening and surveillance of varices in people with cirrhosis.

Enhancing the Detection of Barrett Esophagus

In Western countries, the incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma has increased rapidly in parallel with its premalignant condition, Barrett esophagus (BE). Unlike colonoscopy, endoscopic screening for BE is not currently recommended for all patients; however, surveillance endoscopy is advocated for patients with established BE. Novel imaging and sampling techniques have been developed and investigated for the purpose of improving the detection of Barrett esophagus, dysplasia, and neoplasia. This article discusses several screening and surveillance techniques, including Seattle protocol, chromoendoscopy, electronic chromoendoscopy, wide area transepithelial sampling with 3-dimensional analysis, nonendoscopic sampling devices, and transnasal endoscopy.

Comparative acceptability of transnasal esophagoscopy and esophageal capsule esophagoscopy: a randomized, controlled trial in veterans

BACKGROUND

EGD screening for Barrett's esophagus (BE) is costly, with insufficient evidence to support its effectiveness.

OBJECTIVE

To compare acceptance and tolerability of 2 novel, office-based, endoscopic screening techniques done on nonsedated patients.

DESIGN

Randomized block study design with allocation concealment.

SETTING

Outpatient clinic setting at a Veterans Affairs medical center.

PATIENTS

A total of 184 veterans with or without GERD symptoms.

INTERVENTIONS

Transnasal esophagoscopy (TNE) or esophageal capsule esophagoscopy (ECE).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Acceptance and tolerability of TNE and ECE and effectiveness of BE screening.

RESULTS

Esophageal screening was accepted by 184 of 1210 (15.2%) veterans. The majority were men (96%) and African American (58%), with a mean (± standard deviation) age of 58.9 (± 8.1) years. Five TNE participants (5%) and 2 ECE participants (2%) refused the assigned procedure after randomization (P = .25). Eleven patients (12.6%) randomized to TNE crossed the minimal clinically important threshold for overall procedure tolerability, as opposed to no patients randomized to ECE (P = .001). Effectiveness of BE screening was not significantly different in both procedures (TNE vs ECE = 3.2% vs 5.4%; P = .47). Overall, BE was present in 8 of 75 white participants (10.6%) and in 0 of 107 African American participants (P < .001).

LIMITATIONS

The general veteran population may not reflect the screening population for BE.

CONCLUSION

Despite a small proportion of veterans expressing interest in esophageal screening, both TNE and ECE were feasible in the outpatient clinic setting and were accepted by >95% of participants who did express an interest. Screening was effective only in white participants. Moderate differences in tolerability between TNE and ECE notwithstanding, cost considerations along with availability of equipment and trained personnel should guide the modality to be used for BE screening.

Direct biliary drainage using transnasal endoscopy for patients with severe-to-moderate acute cholangitis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic biliary drainage (BD) is an effective palliative treatment for acute cholangitis. Transnasal endoscopy (TNE) using an ultraslim endoscope can be less stressful and has limited hemodynamic effects compared with endoscopic retrograde cholangiography using a conventional duodenoscope. Here, we evaluate the clinical usefulness of direct BD by TNE in critically ill patients with acute cholangitis who had undergone endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) previously.

METHODS

Twenty-three patients with severe-to-moderate acute cholangitis who had undergone ES previously were enrolled prospectively. BD was achieved by TNE, using an ultraslim upper endoscope with a 5-Fr nasobiliary drainage catheter and/or a plastic stent. The technical and clinical success, as well as the safety, of the procedure were investigated.

RESULTS

A total of 23 patients were enrolled, including 17 with bile duct stones. The severity of the cholangitis was severe in nine (39.1%) and moderate in 14 patients (60.9%). The technical success rate was 95.7% (22/23). Nasobiliary drainage was performed in 15 patients, a plastic stent was placed in three, and both treatments were used in four patients. In three patients, direct BD by TNE was achieved in the intensive care unit without fluoroscopy. Direct cholangioscopy for distal common bile duct was performed in nine patients (40.9%), and three patients underwent immediate stone extraction under endoscopic visualization. Clinical improvement was achieved in 20/23 (87.0%) of patients. No significant procedure-related complications occurred.

CONCLUSION

Direct BD by TNE may be useful in critically ill patients with severe-to-moderate acute cholangitis who had undergone ES previously.

[Usefulness of ultrathin transnasal endoscopy for the placement of nasoenteric feeding tubes]

BACKGROUND

Placement of nasoenteral feeding tubes can require endoscopic support.

AIM

To analyze the usefulness of transnasal ultrathin endoscopy in the placement of nasoenteral feeding tubes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed an ambispective study of all patients who underwent nasoenteral feeding (4.9 mm) in 2007.

RESULTS

Twenty-six procedures were performed. The mean age of the patients was 69.3+/-13 years. Nasal anesthesia was used in 23 patients (88.4%), and midazolam in 8 (30.8%). No anesthesia was used in 4 patients (15.3%).

INDICATIONS

stenotic esophageal lesions (42.3%), distal placement to the pathological alteration (46.1%), and failure of placement through the normal route (11.5%). We placed 13 (50%) nasoduodenal, 7 (29.6%) nasogastric and 6 (23.1%) nasojejunal tubes. The success rate was 100%. The most frequently used calibre was 12 F. There were no complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of transnasal ultrathin endoscopy in the placement of nasoenteral feeding tubes in our patients was safe, effective and relatively easy.

Autonomic nervous function in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: a prospective randomized comparison between transnasal and oral procedures

BACKGROUND

Transnasal esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) using an ultrathin endoscope is less stressful to the cardiovascular system with less elevation of systolic blood pressure (BP) than oral procedures. To elucidate the mechanism of such beneficial cardiovascular responses, we performed a prospective patient-centered randomized study in which BP and pulse rate (P), as well as autonomic nervous functions, were estimated during transnasal EGD compared with those in oral procedures using the same ultrathin endoscope.

METHODS

The study involved 781 patients, among whom 55 and 56 cases were assigned to transnasal and oral EGD groups, respectively. The autonomic nervous responses were determined employing power spectral analysis (PSA) of heart-rate variations on electrocardiogram. PSA data were based on two peaks in low frequency (LF) and high-frequency (HF) ranges. HF power and the ratio of LF power/HF power represented parasympathetic and sympathetic nervous activities, respectively.

RESULTS

Our study confirmed the lesser elevation of BP and P in patients undergoing transnasal EGD than in those undergoing oral procedures. PSA revealed a lower increase in LH power/HF power in transnasal EGD than in oral EGD. However, both endoscopic procedures equally suppressed HF power. Significant correlations were found between the parameters of cardiovascular response (P and BP) and autonomic functions (LF power/HF power ratio and HF power).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study demonstrating less sympathetic stimulation in patients undergoing transnasal EGD, leading to lesser elevation of BP and P.

Transnasal endoscopic retrograde chalangiopancreatography using an ultrathin endoscope: A prospective comparison with a routine oral procedure

AIM: To investigate if transnasal endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (n-ERCP) using an ultrathin forward-viewing scope may overcome the disadvantages of conventional oral ERCP (o-ERCP) related to the large-caliber side-viewing duodenoscope.

METHODS: The study involved 50 patients in whom 25 cases each were assigned to the o-ERCP and n-ERCP groups. We compared the requirements of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) prior to ERCP, rates and times required for successful cannulation into the pancreatobiliary ducts, incidence of post-procedure hyperamylasemia, cardiovascular parameters during the procedure, the dose of a sedative drug, and successful rates of endoscopic naso-biliary drainage (ENBD).

RESULTS: Screening gastrointestinal observations were easily performed by the forward-viewing scope and thus no prior EGD was required in the n-ERCP group. There was no significant difference in the rates or times for cannulation, or incidence of hyperamylasemia between the groups. However, the cannulation was relatively difficult in n-ERCP when the scope appeared U-shape under fluoroscopy. Increments of blood pressure and the amount of a sedative drug were significantly lower in the n-ERCP group. ENBD was successfully performed succeeding to the n-ERCP in which mouth-to-nose transfer of the drainage tube was not required.

CONCLUSION: n-ERCP is likely a well-tolerable method with less cardiovascular stress and no need of prior EGD or mouth-to-nose transfer of the ENBD tube. However, a deliberate application is needed since its performance is difficult in some cases and is not feasible for some endoscopic treatments such as stenting.

Transnasal small-caliber esophagogastroduodenoscopy for preoperative evaluation of the high-risk morbidly obese patient

BACKGROUND

Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is an important facet of the preoperative evaluation for bariatric surgery. Morbidly obese patients are at high risk for airway complications during this procedure, and an attractive alternative is transnasal EGD. This report describes a series of patients evaluated successfully using this technique.

METHODS

All patients undergoing preoperative transnasal small-caliber EGD for morbid obesity surgery between September 2004 and June 2005 at a Veterans Affairs Hospital were included in the analysis. The variables assessed were the adequacy of the examination, patient tolerance, the need for sedation, and the ability to perform interventions.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 25 patients (17 men and 8 women) with an average age of 55 years (range, 44-63 years) and an average body mass index (BMI) of 47 kg/m2 (range, 38-69 kg/m2). All the patients met the 1991 National Institutes of Health (NIH) Consensus Conference Criteria for bariatric surgery and were undergoing preoperative evaluation. The most common comorbidities were hypertension (82%), diabetes mellitus (80%), and obstructive sleep apnea (68%). All 25 patients had successful cannulation of the duodenum's second portion with excellent tolerance. There were no sedation requirements for 23 (92%) of the 25 patients. Significant pathology was found in 14 (56%) of the 25 patients, including hiatal hernia (28%), gastritis (16%), esophageal intestinal metaplasia (16%), esophagitis (12%), gastric polyps (8%), gastric ulcer (4%) and esophageal varices (4%). Biopsies were indicated for 12 patients and successful for all 12 (100%).

CONCLUSION

Transnasal small-caliber EGD is a feasible and safe alternative to conventional EGD for the preoperative evaluation of patients undergoing bariatric surgery. It requires minimal to no sedation in a population at high risk for complications in this setting. In addition, this technique is effective in identifying pathology that requires preoperative treatment and offers a complete examination with biopsy capabilities. This technique should be considered for all morbidly obese patients at high risk for airway compromise during EGD.

Unsedated ultrathin EGD is well accepted when compared with conventional sedated EGD: a multicenter randomized trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

In the United States, upper gastrointestinal endoscopy is usually performed using intravenous sedation. Sedation increases the rate of both complications and costs of endoscopy. Unsedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) using conventional 8-11-mm endoscopes is an alternative to sedated endoscopy but is generally perceived as unacceptable to many American patients. Unsedated EGD using ultrathin 5-6-mm endoscopes is better tolerated. A randomized trial comparing unsedated ultrathin EGD (UT-EGD) with sedated conventional EGD (C-EGD) in a diverse American population is needed.

METHODS

In this multicenter, randomized, controlled trial, 80 patients scheduled to undergo elective outpatient EGD were randomized to unsedated UT-EGD or sedated C-EGD. The study was carried out at San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, and the Liver and Digestive Health Medical Clinic, San Jose.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics of patients randomized to unsedated UT-EGD and sedated C-EGD were similar. Moreover, there were no significant differences in overall patient satisfaction and willingness to repeat endoscopy in the same manner among the 2 study groups. There was, however, a significant difference in median total procedure time between the 2 study groups of 1.5 hours (P < 0.0001). The mean (+/- SD) total procedure cost was 512.4 US dollars (+/- 100.8 US dollars) for sedated C-EGD and 328.6 US dollars (+/- 70.3 US dollars) for unsedated UT-EGD (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing unsedated UT-EGD are as satisfied as patients undergoing sedated C-EGD and are just as willing to repeat an unsedated UT-EGD. Unsedated UT-EGD was also faster, less costly, and may allow greater accessibility to this procedure.