Clin Endosc.  2015 Nov;48(6):516-521. 10.5946/ce.2015.48.6.516.

An Ultrathin Endoscope with a 2.4-mm Working Channel Shortens the Esophagogastroduodenoscopy Time by Shortening the Suction Time

• Shinozaki
• Miura Y
• Ino Y
• Shinozaki
• Lefor AK
• Yamamoto H

• KMID: 2380409
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2015.48.6.516

Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIMS
Poor suction ability through a narrow working channel prolongs esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). The aim of this study was to evaluate suction with a new ultrathin endoscope (EG-580NW2; Fujifilm Corp.) having a 2.4-mm working channel in clinical practice.
METHODS
To evaluate in vitro suction, 200 mL water was suctioned and the suction time was measured. The clinical data of 117 patients who underwent EGD were retrospectively reviewed on the basis of recorded video, and the suction time was measured by using a stopwatch.
RESULTS
In vitro, the suction time with the EG-580NW2 endoscope was significantly shorter than that with the use of an ultrathin endoscope with a 2.0-mm working channel (EG-580NW; mean +/- standard deviation, 22.7+/-1.1 seconds vs. 34.7+/-2.2 seconds; p<0.001). We analyzed the total time and the suction time for routine EGD in 117 patients (50 in the EG-580NW2 group and 67 in the EG-580NW group). In the EG-580NW2 group, the total time for EGD was significantly shorter than that in the EG-580NW group (275.3+/-42.0 seconds vs. 300.6+/-46.5 seconds, p=0.003). In the EG-580NW2 group, the suction time was significantly shorter than that in the EG-580NW group (19.2+/-7.6 seconds vs. 38.0+/-15.9 seconds, p<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
An ultrathin endoscope with a 2.4-mm working channel considerably shortens the routine EGD time by shortening the suction time, in comparison with an endoscope with a 2.0-mm working channel.

Keyword

Endoscopes; Suction; Early detection of cancer; Diagnosis

MeSH Terms

Diagnosis
Early Detection of Cancer
Endoscopes*
Endoscopy, Digestive System*
Humans
Retrospective Studies
Suction*
Water
Water

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1. The tip of the ultrathin endoscopes: (A) EG-580NW (Fujifilm Corp.) with a 2.0-mm working channel (arrow) and 5.9-mm distal end diameter, and (B) EG- 580NW2 with a 2.4-mm working channel (arrow) and 5.8-mm distal end diameter. The common specifications for the two endoscopes are as follows: field of view, 140o; flexible portion diameter, 5.9 mm; and total length, 1,400 mm.

• 

  Fig. 2. Comparison of the time needed to aspirate 200 mL water in vitro by using the EG-580NW and EG-580NW2 (Fujifilm Corp.) endoscopes. The values are expressed as mean±SD.

Reference

1. Kadayifci A, Atar M, Parlar S, Balkan A, Koruk I, Koruk M. Transnasal endoscopy is preferred by transoral endoscopy experienced patients. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis. 2014; 23:27–31.

2. Murata A, Akahoshi K, Motomura Y, et al. Prospective comparative study on the acceptability of unsedated transnasal endoscopy in younger versus older patients. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2008; 42:965–968.

3. Atar M, Kadayifci A. Transnasal endoscopy: technical considerations, advantages and limitations. World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2014; 6:41–48.

4. Trevisani L, Cifalà V, Sartori S, Gilli G, Matarese G, Abbasciano V. Unsedated ultrathin upper endoscopy is better than conventional endoscopy in routine outpatient gastroenterology practice: a randomized trial. World J Gastroenterol. 2007; 13:906–911.

5. Dumortier J, Josso C, Roman S, et al. Prospective evaluation of a new ultrathin one-plane bending videoendoscope for transnasal EGD: a comparative study on performance and tolerance. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007; 66:13–19.

6. 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; 125:1606–1612.

7. ASGE Technology Committee, Rodriguez SA, Banerjee S, et al. Ultrathin endoscopes. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010; 71:893–898.