Abstract
Unsedated transnasal esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is emerging as a viable alternative to conventional sedated EGD in a number of clinical settings. The success of this technique depends upon careful patient selection, the endoscope technology available and selection of the optimal method of topical nasal anesthesia. This Practice Point commentary discusses a randomized, prospective study by Hu that compared endoscopic-guided nasal anesthesia with cotton-tipped applicator nasal anesthesia for unsedated transnasal EGD in Taiwanese patients. In this study, endoscopic-guided nasal anesthesia was associated with superior patient tolerability, less epistaxis, better visualization capacity and a shorter procedure time compared with cotton-tipped applicator nasal anesthesia. This study was, however, performed at a single center by a single investigator and involved a single racial group without patient crossover. It is well recognized that nasal cavity anatomical differences exist between white and Asian individuals. It is our opinion that the most important factor for successful unsedated transnasal EGD is the size of the outer diameter of the endoscope.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on SpringerLink
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
Dumortier J et al. (2003) Unsedated transnasal EGD in daily practice: results with 1100 consecutive patients. Gastrointest Endosc 57: 198–204
Cho S et al. (2008) Unsedated transnasal endoscopy: a Canadian experience in daily practice. Can J Gastroenterol 22: 243–246
Elfant AB et al. (1996) Prospective controlled trial of transnasal endoscopy (T-EGD) versus per-oral endoscopy (P-EGD) [abstract]. Gastrointest Endosc 43: 311. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Gastroenterological Association at Digestive Disease Week (DDW): 1996 May 19–22, San Francisco, CA
Jobe BA et al. (2006) 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 101: 2693–2703
Hu CT (2008) Endosopic-guided versus cotton-tipped applicator methods of nasal anesthesia for transnasal esophagogastroduodenoscopy: a randomized, prospective, controlled study. Am J Gastroenterol 103: 1114–1121
Dumortier J et al. (2007) Prospective evaluation of a new ultrathin one-plane bending videoendoscope for transnasal EGD: a comparative study on performance and tolerance. Gastrointest Endosc 66: 13–19
Noar M (2008) Full screen digital image CCD chip transnasal esophagoscopy with disposable Endosheath (TNE/DE) is equal to standard video endoscopy as initial screening tool in chronic GERD patients. Gastrointest Endosc 67: AB129–AB130
Craig A et al. (1999) A comparison of transnasal and transoral endoscopy with small-diameter endoscopes in unsedated patients. Gastrointest Endosc 49: 292–296
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lee, E., Marcon, N. Endoscopic-guided or cotton-tipped applicator nasal anesthesia for transnasal esophagogastroduodenoscopy?. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 5, 666–667 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncpgasthep1284
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncpgasthep1284