Functional lumen imaging probe use in a high-volume practice: Practical and technical implications

Table 2 Characteristics of functional lumen imaging probe procedures by sedation type, n (%)/mean ± SD

---

---

	Anesthesia 196 (51.4)	Moderate sedation 185 (48.6)
		Midazolam dose (median), 5 mg
		Fentanyl dose (median), 125 mcg
Patient age	56.6 ± 16.5	54.0 ± 16.0
Sex
Male	64 (32.7)	77 (41.6)
Female	132 (67.3)	108 (58.4)
Race
White	124 (63.3)	106 (57.3)
Black	5 (2.6)	9 (4.9)
Hispanic	22 (11.2)	16 (8.7)
Asian	20 (10.2)	25 (13.5)
Other	21 (10.7)	25 (13.5)
Unknown	4 (2.0)	4 (2.2)
Procedure indicationa
Abnormal imaging	5 (2.6)	2 (1.1)
Abnormal manometry	31 (15.8)	36 (19.5)
Achalasia	26 (13.3)	14 (7.6)
Achalasia post therapy	29 (14.8)	28 (15.1)
Dysphagia	63 (32.1)	54 (29.2)
EoE	7 (3.6)	20 (10.8)
GERD	29 (14.8)	31 (16.8)
Other	6 (3.1)	0 (0)
Patient opioid usea	46 (23.5)	17 (9.2)
Prior foregut surgery	73 (37.2)	53 (28.7)
Procedure time (mean min)a	21.4 ± 8.8	17.0 ± 6.4
Procedure typea
EndoFLIP	175 (89.3)	184 (99.5)
EsoFLIP	21 (10.7)	1 (0.05)

^aP < 0.01, indicates a statistically significant difference between two groups.

EoE: Eosinophilic esophagitis; GERD: Gastroesophageal reflux disease.