Comparison of the diagnostic utility of the ultrathin endoscope and the conventional endoscope in early gastric cancer screening: How i do it

Digestive Endoscopy

Volumn 21, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 116-121

  Hayashi, Yuko ^a,b   Yamamoto, Yorimasa ^b   Suganuma, Takanori ^b   Okada, Kazuhisa ^b   Nego, Masami ^b   Imada, Shin Ichi ^b   Imai, Mizuka ^b   Yoshimoto, Kazuhito ^b   Ueki, Nobue ^b   Hirasawa, Toshiaki ^b   Uragami, Naoyuki ^b   Tsuchida, Tomohiro ^b   Fujisaki, Junko ^b   Hoshino, Etsuo ^b   Takahashi, Hiroshi ^a   Igarashi, Masahiro ^b  

^a CANCER INSTITUTE HOSPITAL   (Japan)

^b CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY CENTER   (Japan)

Author keywords

Diagnostic utility; Early gastric cancer; Endoscopic submucosal dissection; Transnasal esophagogastroduodenoscopy; Ultrathin endoscope

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER LOCALIZATION; CANCER SCREENING; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONVENTIONAL ESOPHAGOGASTRODUODENOSCOPY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; EARLY CANCER; ESOPHAGOGASTRODUODENOSCOPY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; STOMACH CANCER; TUMOR VOLUME; ULTRATHIN ESOPHAGOGASTRODUODENOSCOPY;

AGED; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; ENDOSCOPES; ENDOSCOPY, DIGESTIVE SYSTEM; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; STOMACH NEOPLASMS;

EID: 62449111729     PISSN: 09155635     EISSN: 14431661     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1443-1661.2009.00840.x     Document Type: Article

References (11)

1. Amin MR, Postma GN, Setzen M, Koufman JA. Transnasal esophagoscopy: A position statement from the American Bronchoesophagological Association. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 2008 138 : 411 4.
2. Yagi J, Adachi K, Arima N et al. A prospective randomized comparative study on the safety and tolerability of transnasal esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Endoscopy 2005 37 : 1226 31.
3. Thota PN, Zuccaro G. Jr., Vargo JJ 2nd., Conwell DL, Dumot JA, Xu M. A randomized prospective trial comparing unsedated esophagoscopy via transnasal and transoral routes using a 4-mm video endoscope with conventional endoscopy with sedation. Endoscopy 2005 37 : 559 65.
4. Preiss C, Charton JP, Schumacher B, Neuhaus H. A randomized trial of unsedated transnasal small-caliber esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) versus peroral small-caliber EGD versus conventional EGD. Endoscopy 2003 35 : 641 6.
5. Mori A, Fushimi N, Asano T et al. Cardiovascular tolerance in unsedated upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: Prospective randomized comparison between transnasal and conventional oral procedures. Dig. Endosc. 2006 18 : 282 7.
6. Mori A, Ohashi N, Tatebe H et al. Autonomic nervous function in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: A prospective randomized comparison between transnasal and oral procedures. J. Gastroenterol. 2008 43 : 38 44.
7. Murata A, Akahoshi K, Sumida Y, Yamamoto H, Nakamura K, Nawata H. Prospective randomized trial of transnasal versus peroral endoscopy using an ultrathin videoendoscope in unsedated patients. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2007 22 : 482 5.
8. 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.
9. Sorbi D, Gostout CJ, Henry J, Lindor KD. Unsedated small-caliber esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) versus conventional EGD: A comparative study. Gastroenterology 1999 117 : 1301 7.
10. 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 703.
11. Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Gastric Cancer Treatment Guidelines [in Japanese], 2nd edn. Tokyo : Kanehara-Shuppan, 2004.