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

American Journal of Gastroenterology

Volumn 101, Issue 12, 2006, Pages 2693-2703

  Jobe, Blair A ^a,b   Hunter, John G ^a   Chang, Eugene Y ^a,b   Kim, Charles Y ^a,b   Eisen, Glenn M ^c   Robinson, Jedediah D ^a   Diggs, Brian S ^a   O'Rourke, Robert W ^a   Rader, Anne E ^a   Schipper, Paul ^a   Sauer, David A ^a,b   Peters, Jeffrey H ^d   Lieberman, David A ^c   Morris, Cynthia D ^c  

^a OREGON HEALTH AND SCIENCE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b PORTLAND VA MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c OREGON HEALTH AND SCIENCE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

MIDAZOLAM; PETHIDINE;

ADULT; AGED; AMBULATORY CARE; ARTICLE; BARRETT ESOPHAGUS; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CROSSOVER PROCEDURE; DEMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DYSPLASIA; ENDOSCOPE; ESOPHAGOSCOPY; ESOPHAGUS BIOPSY; FEMALE; GASTROESOPHAGEAL REFLUX; HEALTH SURVEY; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; LIFESTYLE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PREVALENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SCREENING; SEDATION;

AGED; AMBULATORY SURGICAL PROCEDURES; BARRETT ESOPHAGUS; CONSCIOUS SEDATION; CROSS-OVER STUDIES; ENDOSCOPY; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; FEMALE; GASTROESOPHAGEAL REFLUX; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT SATISFACTION; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SINGLE-BLIND METHOD;

EID: 33845381077     PISSN: 00029270     EISSN: 15720241     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00890.x     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Lagergren J, Bergstrom R, Lindgren A, et al. Symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux as a risk factor for esophageal adenocarcinoma. N Engl J Med 1999;340:825-31.
2. Brown LM, Devesa SS. Epidemiologic trends in esophageal and gastric cancer in the United States. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 2002;11:235-56.
3. Devesa SS, Blot WJ, Fraumeni JF Jr. Changing patterns in the incidence of esophageal and gastric carcinoma in the United States. Cancer 1998;83:2049-53.
4. Sampliner RE. Practice guidelines on the diagnosis, surveillance, and therapy of Barrett's esophagus. The Practice Parameters Committee of the American College of Gastroenterology. Am J Gastroenterol 1998;93:1028-32.
5. Sampliner RE. Updated guidelines for the diagnosis, surveillance, and therapy of Barrett's esophagus. Am J Gastroenterol 2002;97:1888-95.
6. Shaheen NJ, Provenzale D, Sandler RS. Upper endoscopy as a screening and surveillance tool in esophageal adenocarcinoma: A review of the evidence. Am J Gastroenterol 2002;97:1319-27.
7. Provenzale D, Schmitt C, Wong JB. Barrett's esophagus: A new look at surveillance based on emerging estimates of cancer risk. Am J Gastroenterol 1999;94:2043-53.
8. Eisen GMLD, Fennerty MB, Sonnenberg A. Screening and surveillance in Barrett's esophagus: A call to action. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2004;2:861-4.
9. Froehlich F, Gonvers JJ, Fried M. Conscious sedation, clinically relevant complications and monitoring of endoscopy: Results of a nationwide survey in Switzerland. Endoscopy 1994;26:231-4.
10. Arrowsmith JB, Gerstman BB, Fleischer DE, et al. Results from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy/U.S. Food and Drug Administration collaborative study on complication rates and drug use during gastrointestinal endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 1991;37:421-7.
11. Bell GD. Review article: Premedication and intravenous sedation for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1990;4:103-22.
12. Dean R, Dua K, Massey B, et al. A comparative study of unsedated transnasal esophagogastroduodenoscopy and conventional EGD. Gastrointest Endosc 1996;44:422-4.
13. Falk GW, Chittajallu R, Goldblum JR, et al. Surveillance of patients with Barrett's esophagus for dysplasia and cancer with balloon cytology. Gastroenterology 1997;112:1787-97.
14. Achkar E, Carey W. The cost of surveillance for adenocarcinoma complicating Barrett's esophagus. Am J Gastroenterol 1988;83:291-4.
15. 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;125:1606-12.
16. Gorelick AB, Inadomi JM, Barnett JL. Unsedated small-caliber esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD): Less expensive and less time-consuming than conventional EGD. J Clin Gastroenterol 2001;33:210-4.
17. Sorbi D, Gostout CJ, Henry J, et al. Unsedated small-caliber esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) versus conventional EGD: A comparative study. Gastroenterology 1999;117:1301-7.
18. Catanzaro A, Faulx A, Isenberg GA, et al. Prospective evaluation of 4-mm diameter endoscopes for esophagoscopy in sedated and unsedated patients. Gastrointest Endosc 2003;57:300-4.
19. Dumortier J, Ponchon T, Scoazec JY, et al. Prospective evaluation of transnasal esophagogastroduodenoscopy: Feasibility and study on performance and tolerance. Gastrointest Endosc 1999;49:285-91.
20. Shaker R, Saeian K. Unsedated transnasal laryngoesophagogastroduodenoscopy: An alternative to conventional endoscopy. Am J Med 2001;111(suppl 8A):153S-6S.
21. Saeian K, Staff DM, Vasilopoulos S, et al. Unsedated transnasal endoscopy accurately detects Barrett's metaplasia and dysplasia. Gastrointest Endosc 2002;56:472-8.
22. Sharma P, McQuaid K, Dent J, et al. A critical review of the diagnosis and management of Barrett's esophagus: The AGA Chicago Workshop. Gastroenterology 2004;127:310-30.
23. Wallner B, Sylvan A, Janunger KG. Endoscopic assessment of the "Z-line" (squamocolumnar junction) appearance: Reproducibility of the ZAP classification among endoscopists. Gastrointest Endosc 2002;55:65-9.
24. Lundell LR, Dent J, Bennett JR, et al. Endoscopic assessment of oesophagitis: Clinical and functional correlates and further validation of the Los Angeles classification. Gut 1999;45:172-80.
25. Lewin K, Appelman H. Tumors of the esophagus and stomach, atlas of tumor pathology. Washington, DC Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, 1996.
26. Zaman A, Hahn M, Hapke R, et al. A randomized trial of peroral versus transnasal unsedated endoscopy using an ultrathin videoendoscope. Gastrointest Endosc 1999;49:279-84.
27. Brennan P, Silman A. Statistical methods for assessing observer variability in clinical measures. BMJ 1992;304:1491-4.
28. Streitz JM Jr, Andrews CW Jr, Ellis FH Jr. Endoscopic surveillance of Barrett's esophagus. Does it help? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1993;105:383-7; discussion 387-8.
29. Streitz JM Jr, Ellis FH Jr, Tilden RL, et al. Endoscopic surveillance of Barrett's esophagus: A cost-effectiveness comparison with mammographic surveillance for breast cancer. Am J Gastroenterol 1998;93:911-5.
30. Conio M, Cameron AJ, Romero Y, et al. Secular trends in the epidemiology and outcome of Barrett's oesophagus in Olmsted County, Minnesota. Gut 2001;48:304-9.
31. Cameron AJ, Carpenter HA. Barrett's esophagus, high-grade dysplasia, and early adenocarcinoma: A pathological study. Am J Gastroenterol 1997;92:586-91.
32. Reid BJ, Blount PL, Feng Z, et al. Optimizing endoscopic biopsy detection of early cancers in Barrett's high-grade dysplasia. Am J Gastroenterol 2000;95:3089-96.
33. Tschanz ER. Do 40% of patients resected for Barrett esophagus with high-grade dysplasia have unsuspected adenocarcinoma? Arch Pathol Lab Med 2005;129:177-80.
34. Kusano M, Ino K, Yamada T, et al. Interobserver and intraobserver variation in endoscopic assessment of GERD using the "Los Angeles" classification. Gastrointest Endosc 1999;49:700-4.
35. Preiss C, Charton JP, Schumacher B, et al. A randomized trial of unsedated transnasal small-caliber esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) versus peroral small-caliber EGD versus conventional EGD. Endoscopy 2003;35:641-6.
36. 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;98:2383-9.