Premium
TRIAL OF TRANSNASAL ESOPHAGOGASTRODUODENOSCOPY
Author(s) -
Abe Kiminori,
Miyaoka Masaaki
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
digestive endoscopy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.5
H-Index - 56
eISSN - 1443-1661
pISSN - 0915-5635
DOI - 10.1111/j.0915-5635.2006.00609.x
Subject(s) - esophagogastroduodenoscopy , medicine , nausea , vomiting , premedication , surgery , endoscope , adverse effect , endoscopy , anesthesia
Background: Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is conventionally performed transorally, although this is often a rather unpleasant experience for the patient. In the present study, we examined the merits and demerits of transnasal EGD. Materials and Methods: We used two types of small‐diameter endoscope, produced by Olympus Co. and Fujinon Toshiba ES Systems Co., Ltd. Results: Transnasal EGD was performed successfully in 98.8% (955/967) of patients examined. When questioned about premedication and the degree of discomfort, the great majority of patients stated that transnasal EGD was more comfortable than a transoral procedure. The incidences of nausea and vomiting were low at 8.6% (82/955) and 0.8% (8/955), respectively. Other identified adverse reactions were nasal pain in 42.9% (415/967) of patients, and epistaxis in 1.1% (11/967). The average time taken for transnasal EGD was 8.2 ± 0.7 min, approximately 1 min longer than for the transoral method. Conclusion: Transnasal EGD is less stressful to patients than transoral EGD, and is a feasible and safe alternative.