Copyright
©The Author(s) 2015.
World J Gastroenterol. Mar 7, 2015; 21(9): 2793-2799
Published online Mar 7, 2015. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i9.2793
Published online Mar 7, 2015. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i9.2793
Table 2 Change in vital signs and procedure time
| Variables | NBI (n = 25) | Lugol (n = 26) | P value |
| Increase in SBP after procedure (> 20 mmHg), n | 6 | 8 | 0.755 |
| Increase in DBP after procedure (> 20 mmHg), n | 1 | 5 | 0.190 |
| Increase in HR after procedure (> 20 bpm), n | 7 | 16 | 0.024 |
| Decrease in SpO2 (> 3 %), n | 1 | 3 | 0.609 |
| Gag reflex, n | 1 | 6 | 0.099 |
| Total procedure time, second | 450 ± 116 | 565 ± 174 | 0.004 |
| Esophageal observation time, second | 44 ± 26 | 151 ± 72 | < 0.001 |
- Citation: Yamasaki Y, Takenaka R, Hori K, Takemoto K, Kawano S, Kawahara Y, Okada H, Fujiki S, Yamamoto K. Tolerability of magnifying narrow band imaging endoscopy for esophageal cancer screening. World J Gastroenterol 2015; 21(9): 2793-2799
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v21/i9/2793.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v21.i9.2793