Four-Hour Fasting for Semifluids and 2-Hour Fasting for Water Improves the Patient Experience of Esophagogastroduodenoscopy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background/Aims: We aimed to investigate the comfort, safety, and endoscopic visibility during esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) afforded by a modified 4-hour semifluid and 2-hour water ("4+2") fasting protocol. Methods: In this parallel group, endoscopist-blinded, randomized controlled trial, outpatients undergoing unsedated diagnostic EGD from 10:30 AM to 12:00 PM were randomly assigned to either a "4+2" protocol group or a conventional fasting group. The participants' comfort during the fasting period and procedure was measured using the visual analog scale, and mucosal visibility was measured by endoscopists using the total visibility score. Satisfaction was defined as a visual analog scale score of ≤3. The primary outcome was the participants' comfort during fasting. Results: One hundred and six and 108 participants were randomized to the "4+2" protocol and control groups, respectively. Participants' comfort before EGD was significantly higher in the "4+2" protocol group measured by both the proportion of satisfaction (86.8% vs 63.9%, p=0.002) and the visual analog scale score (median [interquartile range]: 1.0 [1.0-2.0] vs 3.0 [1.0-4.0], p<0.001). The proportion of satisfaction during EGD also significantly improved (59.4% vs 45.4%, p=0.039) in the "4+2" protocol group. The total visibility score was unaffected by the fasting protocol (5.0 [4.0-5.0] vs 4.0 [4.0-5.0], p=0.266). No adverse events were observed during the study. Conclusions: The "4+2" protocol was more comfortable and provided equal mucosal visibility and safety compared with conventional fasting for unsedated EGD.

Setting 6-Minute Minimal Examination Time Improves the Detection of Focal Upper Gastrointestinal Tract Lesions During Endoscopy: A Multicenter Prospective Study.

INTRODUCTION: Positive correlation between examination time and neoplasm detection using esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) has been described by observational studies, but the effect of setting minimal examination time still requires investigation. METHODS: This prospective, 2-stage, interventional study was conducted in 7 tertiary hospitals in China, enrolling consecutive patients undergoing intravenously sedated diagnostic EGDs. In stage I, the baseline examination time was collected without informing the endoscopists. In stage II, the minimal examination time was set for the same endoscopist according to the median examination time of normal EGDs in stage I. The primary outcome was the focal lesion detection rate (FDR), defined as the proportion of subjects with at least one focal lesion among all subjects. RESULTS: A total of 847 and 1,079 EGDs performed by 21 endoscopists were included in stages I and II, respectively. In stage II, the minimal examination time was set as 6 minutes, and the median time for normal EGD increased from 5.8 to 6.3 minutes ( P < 0.001). Between the 2 stages, the FDR was significantly improved (33.6% vs 39.3%, P = 0.011), and the effect of the intervention was significant (odds ratio, 1.25; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.52; P = 0.022) even after adjusting for subjects' age, smoking status, endoscopists' baseline examination time, and working experience. The detection rate of high-risk lesions (neoplastic lesions and advanced atrophic gastritis) was also significantly higher in stage II (3.3% vs 5.4%, P = 0.029). In the endoscopist-level analysis, all practitioners reached a median examination time of 6 minutes, and the coefficients of variation of FDR (36.9%-26.2%) and examination time (19.6%-6.9%) decreased in stage II. DISCUSSION: Setting a 6-minute minimal examination time significantly improved the detection of focal lesions during EGDs and has the potential to be implemented for quality improvement.