Does Sedation Affect Examination of Esophagogastric Junction during Upper Endoscopy?

Association between anesthesia assistance and precancerous lesions and early cancer detection during diagnostic esophagogastroduodenoscopy: a propensity score-matched retrospective study

Background

Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is a fundamental procedure for early detection of upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer. However, limited research has been conducted on the impact of sedation during EGD on the identification of precancerous lesions and early cancer (EC). This retrospective study aims to evaluate whether sedation during EGD can improve the detection rates of precancerous lesions and EC.

Methods

In this propensity score-matched retrospective study, we examined medical records from outpatients who underwent diagnostic EGD at a large tertiary center between January 2023 and December 2023. Data on endoscopic findings and histology biopsies were obtained from an endoscopy quality-control system. The primary objective was to compare the rates of detecting precancerous lesions and EC in patients who received sedation during EGD vs. those who did not receive sedation. Additionally, we aimed to identify factors influencing these detection rates using binary logistic regression analysis.

Results

Following propensity score matching, a total of 17,862 patients who underwent diagnostic EGD with or without propofol sedation were identified. The group that received sedation exhibited a higher detection rate of precancerous lesions and EC in comparison to the non-sedated group (1.04 vs. 0.75%; p = 0.039). Additionally, within the sedated group, there was an increased likelihood of identifying precancerous lesions and EC specifically at the gastric antrum (0.60 vs. 0.32%, p = 0.006). Binary logistic regression analysis demonstrated that independent risk factors influencing the detection rates included age, gender, observation time, and number of biopsies conducted during the procedure.

Conclusion

Anesthesia assistance during EGD screening proved advantageous in detecting EC as well as precancerous lesions. It is crucial for endoscopists to consider these factors when performing EGD screening procedures.

Comparison of transnasal esophagoscopy and sedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy in the assessment of laryngopharyngeal reflux

OBJECTIVE

Transnasal esophagoscopy (TNE) in the awake patient and esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in sedation are both used in the assessment of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). The objective of this study was to compare these two endoscopic methods in contributing to the diagnosis of LPR.

METHODS

This study included 54 patients presenting with signs and symptoms suspicious for LPR, which were examined both by TNE and EGD. The contribution of each method to the diagnosis of LPR was evaluated separately and then compared with each other.

RESULTS

In detecting LPR, TNE showed a significant higher sensitivity (94% vs. 60%) and accuracy (93% vs. 59%) than EGD, but their specificity was equal (50% each). The most common pathologic findings in both methods were a hiatal hernia (70% vs. 48%) and gaping cardia (69% vs. 24%), followed by peptic esophagitis (41% vs. 24%).

CONCLUSION

The value of EGD is limited in the workup of LPR, as sedation tends to mask the subtle findings in this kind of reflux disease.

Effect of anesthesia assistance on the detection rate of precancerous lesions and early esophageal squamous cell cancer in esophagogastroduodenoscopy screening: A retrospective study based on propensity score matching

Background

Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) screening is vital for the early diagnosis of esophageal squamous cell cancer (ESCC). However, improvement in the detection rate of precancerous lesions and early ESCC with anesthesia assistance (AA) has not yet been investigated. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the effect of AA on the detection rate of precancerous lesions and early ESCC in patients undergoing EGD screening and identify risk factors affecting the detection rate.

Methods

We reviewed patients' electronic medical records who underwent EGD screening between May 2019 and August 2020. Patients were divided into two groups based on whether they received AA: those in Group A underwent EGD screening with AA, and patients in Group O underwent EGD screening without AA. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to account for differences in baseline characteristics. Detection rates of precancerous lesions and early ESCC were compared between the two groups following PSM. Binary logistic regression was used to identify risk factors affecting the detection rate.

Results

The final analysis included 21,835 patients (Group A = 13,319, Group O = 8,516) from 28,985 patients who underwent EGD screening during the study period. Following PSM, 6009 patients remained in each group for analysis. There was no significant difference in the detection rate of precancerous lesions and early ESCC between Groups A and O (1.1% vs. 0.8%, p > 0.05). Binary logistic regression showed that age (50-59 years, 60-69 years and 70-79 years), higher endoscopist seniority, high-definition (HD) endoscopy, narrow-band imaging (NBI), and number of endoscopic images were all independent risk factors that affected the detection rate of precancerous lesions and early ESCC.

Conclusion

There was no statistically significant difference in the detection rate of precancerous lesions and early ESCC between patients who underwent EGD screening with and without AA. All independent risk factors that affected the detection rate of precancerous lesions and early ESCC included the following: age (50-59 years, 60-69 years and 70-79 years), higher endoscopist seniority, HD endoscopy, NBI, and number of endoscopic images. Endoscopists should consider all these factors as much as possible when performing EGD screening.

Association between sedation and small neoplasm detection during diagnostic esophagogastroduodenoscopy: a propensity score-matched retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is fundamental for detecting upper gastrointestinal (GI) neoplasms. However, the impact of sedation on small neoplasm detection during EGD has not been evaluated. The aim of this study was to investigate whether EGD with sedation could improve small upper GI neoplasm detection.

METHODS

This propensity score-matched retrospective study analyzed the medical records of outpatients undergoing diagnostic EGD at a large tertiary center between January 2013 and December 2018. The primary outcome was the detection rate of small upper GI neoplasms (≤10 mm). The secondary outcomes were biopsy rate and small neoplasms in different anatomic subsites.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, 20,052 patients undergoing diagnostic EGD with or without propofol sedation were identified. A higher detection rate of small upper GI neoplasms was observed in the sedation group (2.80% vs. 2.02%; p < .001). In particular, the detection rate of small cancers in the sedation group was 3-fold higher than that in the no-sedation group (0.16% vs. 0.05%; p = .023). Small neoplasms were more likely identified at the gastric antrum (1.60% vs. 1.09%; p = .002) and angulus (0.66% vs. 0.45%; p = .044) in the sedation group. In addition, endoscopists were more likely to take biopsies when performing sedated EGD (41.4% vs. 36.4%, p < .001), and a higher biopsy rate was associated with an increased detection rate of small neoplasms.

CONCLUSIONS

Sedation was significantly associated with a higher detection rate of small upper GI neoplasms and might be recommended for improving the quality of EGD.

Impact of endoscopic sedation on gastric polyp detection: A one-center retrospective observational study

Sedation esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) has become more prevalent in many countries. However, owing to the limitation of health insurance payment for sedation EGD in Taiwan, non-sedation EGD still accounts for the majority of cases. This study was aimed to explore the differences between the sedation and non-sedation groups in terms of endoscopic findings, such as detection rate of gastric polyp of any size, number of detected gastric polyps, and location of the gastric polyps detected.We enrolled 10,940 patients who underwent EGD between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2016 at the Tri-Service General Hospital; among the patients, 1900 received intravenous sedation (IVS) and 9040 did not. The data reviewed included demographics, parameters of the polyp (number, size, and location), and pathology.Compared with the non-sedation group, the sedation group had a higher overall polyp detection rate (P < .001); a greater number of detected polyps (Odds ratio 1.50, P = .007); and a higher detection rate of smaller polyps, such as fundic gland polyp, and hyperplastic polyp (P < .001). Among the pathological findings, gastric neuroendocrine tumor (NET) was detected using EGD in 2 cases and manifested as small polyps (<0.05 cm), and it showed significantly better detection rates in the sedation EGD group than in the non-sedation EGD group (P = .002).Sedation EGD could enhance a patients willingness and cooperation during EGD. Furthermore, sedation EGD increased the detection rates of small gastric polyps and was more likely to enable identification of unusual findings, such as gastric NET.

Endoscopic Screening in Asian Countries Is Associated With Reduced Gastric Cancer Mortality: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review

BACKGROUND & AIMS

It is not clear how endoscopic screening for gastric cancer affects incidence or mortality. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the relationship between endoscopic screening for gastric cancer and mortality and incidence.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of PubMed and EMBASE for published cohort and case-control studies of adults without gastric cancer who underwent endoscopic screening at least once that included a comparator and reported outcomes of mortality or incidence through March 8, 2018. Two investigators independently reviewed the included studies and extracted relevant data. The effect estimate of interest was the relative risk (RR). We used a random effects model to combine RRs and 95% confidence intervals (Cis).

RESULTS

Our final analysis included 6 cohort studies and 4 nested case-control studies comprising 342,013 individuals, all from Asia. The combined result (RR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.49-0.73) indicated that endoscopic screening was associated with a 40% RR reduction in gastric cancer mortality. We did not observe an association between endoscopic screening and incidence (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.93-1.40). Subgroup analysis showed significant reductions in gastric cancer mortality after endoscopic screening compared with no screening (RR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.48-0.70) or radiographic screening (RR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.12-0.91). However, endoscopic screening did not significantly reduce mortality compared with expected deaths (RR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.38-1.16).

CONCLUSIONS

In a systematic review and meta-analysis, we found that endoscopic screening may reduce the risk of death from gastric cancer and not affect incidence in Asian countries. Population-based prospective cohort studies are warranted to confirm our findings.