Catheter-free method is sufficient for preparation for transnasal endoscopy

Randomized controlled trial

Yong Sub Lee, Chang Seok Bang, Ki Tae Suk, Yoon Hyeong Lee, Young Lim Ham, Hotaik Sung, Ji Soo Ko, Won Woo Kim, Jung Hyun Kim, Hyunsoo Kim, Hong Jun Park, Min Sang Kim

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background and Aim Although transnasal endoscopy (TNE) is generally a comfortable and safe procedure, it has some disadvantages, such as complicated preprocessing and occasional repulsion reaction during catheterization. In an attempt to simplify the preprocessing method, the efficacy of a catheter-free method in which a catheter is not inserted into the nasal cavity was assessed. Methods The present study was a prospective, open-label, single-center, randomized controlled study with parallel assignment allocation 1:1. Between March 2009 and August 2009, a total of 93 TNE-naïve patients were enrolled and randomized. Patients were prospectively randomized into two groups (catheter-free vs catheter-insertion method). Patients who prepared according to the catheter-free method and who were unsuccessful underwent the catheter-insertion method. Clinical characteristics, success rate, complications, vital signs, acceptability, and tolerability were assessed and compared. Results Success rates of the catheter-free and catheter-insertion methods were 88% (n=44) and 88% (n=38) (P>0.05), respectively. Causes of failure in the catheter-free method included severe rhinalgia (n=1, 2%) and narrowing of the nasal cavity (n=5, 10%). Causes of failure in the catheter-insertion method included narrowing of the nasal cavity (n=5, 11%). Six patients whose TNE failed with the catheter-free method also experienced failed TNE with the catheter-insertion method. There were no statistical differences in vital signs, acceptability, and tolerability. Conclusion The catheter-free method is sufficient for preparation for TNE. The success rate of TNE depends more on the structure of the nasal cavity than the preprocessing method.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)385-391
Number of pages7
JournalDigestive Endoscopy
Volume26
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014 Jan 1

Fingerprint

Endoscopy
Catheters
Randomized Controlled Trials
Nasal Cavity
Vital Signs
Catheterization

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

Lee, Y. S., Bang, C. S., Suk, K. T., Lee, Y. H., Ham, Y. L., Sung, H., ... Kim, M. S. (2014). Catheter-free method is sufficient for preparation for transnasal endoscopy: Randomized controlled trial. Digestive Endoscopy, 26(3), 385-391. https://doi.org/10.1111/den.12209
Lee, Yong Sub ; Bang, Chang Seok ; Suk, Ki Tae ; Lee, Yoon Hyeong ; Ham, Young Lim ; Sung, Hotaik ; Ko, Ji Soo ; Kim, Won Woo ; Kim, Jung Hyun ; Kim, Hyunsoo ; Park, Hong Jun ; Kim, Min Sang. / Catheter-free method is sufficient for preparation for transnasal endoscopy : Randomized controlled trial. In: Digestive Endoscopy. 2014 ; Vol. 26, No. 3. pp. 385-391.
@article{175e01a337b243d2b3b15501e0abd6a2,
title = "Catheter-free method is sufficient for preparation for transnasal endoscopy: Randomized controlled trial",
abstract = "Background and Aim Although transnasal endoscopy (TNE) is generally a comfortable and safe procedure, it has some disadvantages, such as complicated preprocessing and occasional repulsion reaction during catheterization. In an attempt to simplify the preprocessing method, the efficacy of a catheter-free method in which a catheter is not inserted into the nasal cavity was assessed. Methods The present study was a prospective, open-label, single-center, randomized controlled study with parallel assignment allocation 1:1. Between March 2009 and August 2009, a total of 93 TNE-na{\"i}ve patients were enrolled and randomized. Patients were prospectively randomized into two groups (catheter-free vs catheter-insertion method). Patients who prepared according to the catheter-free method and who were unsuccessful underwent the catheter-insertion method. Clinical characteristics, success rate, complications, vital signs, acceptability, and tolerability were assessed and compared. Results Success rates of the catheter-free and catheter-insertion methods were 88{\%} (n=44) and 88{\%} (n=38) (P>0.05), respectively. Causes of failure in the catheter-free method included severe rhinalgia (n=1, 2{\%}) and narrowing of the nasal cavity (n=5, 10{\%}). Causes of failure in the catheter-insertion method included narrowing of the nasal cavity (n=5, 11{\%}). Six patients whose TNE failed with the catheter-free method also experienced failed TNE with the catheter-insertion method. There were no statistical differences in vital signs, acceptability, and tolerability. Conclusion The catheter-free method is sufficient for preparation for TNE. The success rate of TNE depends more on the structure of the nasal cavity than the preprocessing method.",
author = "Lee, {Yong Sub} and Bang, {Chang Seok} and Suk, {Ki Tae} and Lee, {Yoon Hyeong} and Ham, {Young Lim} and Hotaik Sung and Ko, {Ji Soo} and Kim, {Won Woo} and Kim, {Jung Hyun} and Hyunsoo Kim and Park, {Hong Jun} and Kim, {Min Sang}",
year = "2014",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/den.12209",
language = "English",
volume = "26",
pages = "385--391",
journal = "Digestive Endoscopy",
issn = "0915-5635",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "3",

}

Lee, YS, Bang, CS, Suk, KT, Lee, YH, Ham, YL, Sung, H, Ko, JS, Kim, WW, Kim, JH, Kim, H, Park, HJ & Kim, MS 2014, 'Catheter-free method is sufficient for preparation for transnasal endoscopy: Randomized controlled trial', Digestive Endoscopy, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 385-391. https://doi.org/10.1111/den.12209

Catheter-free method is sufficient for preparation for transnasal endoscopy : Randomized controlled trial. / Lee, Yong Sub; Bang, Chang Seok; Suk, Ki Tae; Lee, Yoon Hyeong; Ham, Young Lim; Sung, Hotaik; Ko, Ji Soo; Kim, Won Woo; Kim, Jung Hyun; Kim, Hyunsoo; Park, Hong Jun; Kim, Min Sang.

In: Digestive Endoscopy, Vol. 26, No. 3, 01.01.2014, p. 385-391.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Catheter-free method is sufficient for preparation for transnasal endoscopy

T2 - Randomized controlled trial

AU - Lee, Yong Sub

AU - Bang, Chang Seok

AU - Suk, Ki Tae

AU - Lee, Yoon Hyeong

AU - Ham, Young Lim

AU - Sung, Hotaik

AU - Ko, Ji Soo

AU - Kim, Won Woo

AU - Kim, Jung Hyun

AU - Kim, Hyunsoo

AU - Park, Hong Jun

AU - Kim, Min Sang

PY - 2014/1/1

Y1 - 2014/1/1

N2 - Background and Aim Although transnasal endoscopy (TNE) is generally a comfortable and safe procedure, it has some disadvantages, such as complicated preprocessing and occasional repulsion reaction during catheterization. In an attempt to simplify the preprocessing method, the efficacy of a catheter-free method in which a catheter is not inserted into the nasal cavity was assessed. Methods The present study was a prospective, open-label, single-center, randomized controlled study with parallel assignment allocation 1:1. Between March 2009 and August 2009, a total of 93 TNE-naïve patients were enrolled and randomized. Patients were prospectively randomized into two groups (catheter-free vs catheter-insertion method). Patients who prepared according to the catheter-free method and who were unsuccessful underwent the catheter-insertion method. Clinical characteristics, success rate, complications, vital signs, acceptability, and tolerability were assessed and compared. Results Success rates of the catheter-free and catheter-insertion methods were 88% (n=44) and 88% (n=38) (P>0.05), respectively. Causes of failure in the catheter-free method included severe rhinalgia (n=1, 2%) and narrowing of the nasal cavity (n=5, 10%). Causes of failure in the catheter-insertion method included narrowing of the nasal cavity (n=5, 11%). Six patients whose TNE failed with the catheter-free method also experienced failed TNE with the catheter-insertion method. There were no statistical differences in vital signs, acceptability, and tolerability. Conclusion The catheter-free method is sufficient for preparation for TNE. The success rate of TNE depends more on the structure of the nasal cavity than the preprocessing method.

AB - Background and Aim Although transnasal endoscopy (TNE) is generally a comfortable and safe procedure, it has some disadvantages, such as complicated preprocessing and occasional repulsion reaction during catheterization. In an attempt to simplify the preprocessing method, the efficacy of a catheter-free method in which a catheter is not inserted into the nasal cavity was assessed. Methods The present study was a prospective, open-label, single-center, randomized controlled study with parallel assignment allocation 1:1. Between March 2009 and August 2009, a total of 93 TNE-naïve patients were enrolled and randomized. Patients were prospectively randomized into two groups (catheter-free vs catheter-insertion method). Patients who prepared according to the catheter-free method and who were unsuccessful underwent the catheter-insertion method. Clinical characteristics, success rate, complications, vital signs, acceptability, and tolerability were assessed and compared. Results Success rates of the catheter-free and catheter-insertion methods were 88% (n=44) and 88% (n=38) (P>0.05), respectively. Causes of failure in the catheter-free method included severe rhinalgia (n=1, 2%) and narrowing of the nasal cavity (n=5, 10%). Causes of failure in the catheter-insertion method included narrowing of the nasal cavity (n=5, 11%). Six patients whose TNE failed with the catheter-free method also experienced failed TNE with the catheter-insertion method. There were no statistical differences in vital signs, acceptability, and tolerability. Conclusion The catheter-free method is sufficient for preparation for TNE. The success rate of TNE depends more on the structure of the nasal cavity than the preprocessing method.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84899470895&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84899470895&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/den.12209

DO - 10.1111/den.12209

M3 - Article

VL - 26

SP - 385

EP - 391

JO - Digestive Endoscopy

JF - Digestive Endoscopy

SN - 0915-5635

IS - 3

ER -