Is the transnasal access for esophagogastroduodenoscopy in routine use equal to the transoral route? A prospective, randomized trial.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Routine esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is increasingly performed without sedation. Transoral (TO) and transnasal (TN) EGD offer different patient comfort and complications. PATIENTS AND METHODS: For a controlled, randomized, clinical trial comparing TN-EGD with TO-EGD without sedation, patients were assigned to TN-EGD using a thin endoscope (group 1, 93 patients), or TO-EGD using a standard endoscope (group 2, 90 patients). Physician-rated procedural time and complications as well as patient-rated side effects and preferences were compared. In group 3, patients (118) who had previously undergone TO-EGD, now underwent TN-EGD. RESULTS: Between group 1 and 2 there was no significant difference for procedural time. Nausea (p = 0.047) and epistaxis (p < 0.001) were significantly more frequent for TN-EGD. Conversion rate from TN- to TO-EGD was low with 4.3 %. For TN-EGD, patients' tolerance was better (p < 0.001), gagging was less (p < 0.001). In case of a future EGD, patients who know both procedures (group 3), strongly vote for TN-EGD (80 %). All groups vote against sedation for future procedures (90 %/90 %/89 %). CONCLUSIONS: Epistaxis can be relevant after TN-EGD, but can mostly be managed conservatively. TN-EGD is superior to TO-EGD regarding subjective and objective gagging as well as procedural tolerance. Patients who experienced both access routes, prefer TN-EGD. TN-EGD without sedation should be aspired for patient comfort and is recommended for routine use.