Copyright
©2012 Baishideng Publishing Group Co.
World J Gastroenterol. Apr 21, 2012; 18(15): 1814-1821
Published online Apr 21, 2012. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v18.i15.1814
Published online Apr 21, 2012. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v18.i15.1814
Table 1 Clinical characteristics of patients
Patient characteristics | P group | M/F group | P value |
Patients, n | 49 | 51 | |
Gender (male/female), n | 24/25 | 23/28 | NS |
Mean age, yr (range) | 53 (27-77) | 55 (32-78) | NS |
Body weight, kg (mean ± SD) | 64.14 ± 10.21 | 63.84 ± 9.48 | NS |
Habit, cases (n) | |||
Alcohol consumption | NS | ||
Daily drinker | 8 | 5 | |
Social drinker | 10 | 5 | |
None-drinker | 31 | 41 | |
Tobacco | NS | ||
≥ 1 PD | 5 | 5 | |
< 1 PD | 3 | 5 | |
Quit smoking | 4 | 1 | |
None-smoker | 37 | 40 | |
ASA I | 34 | 37 | NS |
ASA II | 15 | 14 | NS |
Table 2 Proportion of good-quality endomicroscopic images of each examined area %
P group | M/F group | P value | |
Duodenal bulb | 72.17 (760/1053) | 50.22 (577/1149) | < 0.001 |
Lesser curvature of antrum | 66.44 (778/1171) | 45.73 (562/1229) | < 0.001 |
Greater curvature of antrum | 80.49 (916/1138) | 64.99 (776/1194) | < 0.001 |
Incisura angularis | 83.72 (581/694) | 50.17 (438/873) | < 0.001 |
Lesser curvature of gastric body | 71.41 (602/843) | 48.07 (448/932) | < 0.001 |
Greater curvature of gastric body | 81.85 (857/1047) | 66.46 (757/1139) | < 0.001 |
Fundus | 67.39 (217/322) | 46.00 (236/513) | < 0.001 |
Cardia | 71.83 (2068/2879) | 49.84 (1395/2799) | < 0.001 |
Esophagus | 67.94 (284/418) | 56.04 (297/530) | < 0.001 |
Lesions | 67.28 (1285/1910) | 52.53 (1161/2210) | < 0.001 |
Total | 72.75 (8348/11475) | 52.89 (6647/12568) | < 0.001 |
Table 3 Characteristics of endoscopic lesions in the two groups
P group | M/F group | P value | |
Number of lesions | 36 | 38 | NS |
Locations | NS | ||
Duodenum | 1 | 2 | |
Antrum | 15 | 14 | |
Incisure angularis | 9 | 6 | |
Gastric body/fundus | 3 | 3 | |
Cardia | 3 | 5 | |
Esophagus | 5 | 8 | |
Histopathology | NS | ||
Inflammation | 22 | 21 | |
Intestinal metaplasia | 10 | 10 | |
Neoplasia | 4 | 7 |
Table 4 Diagnostic capacity of integrated confocal laser endomicroscopy for endoscopic mucosal lesions of the upper gastrointestinal tract (95% CI)
Inflammation | Intestinal metaplasia | Neoplasia | |||||||
P group | M/F group | P value | P group | M/F group | P value | P group | M/F group | P value | |
Sensitivity (%) | 90.48 (71.09-97.35) | 89.47 (68.61-97.06) | NS | 90.00 (59.58-98.21) | 80.00 (49.02-94.33) | NS | 100(51.01-1) | 85.71 (48.69-97.43) | NS |
Specificity (%) | 92.86 (68.53-98.73) | 94.12 (73.02-98.95) | NS | 96.00 (80.46-99.29) | 95.65 (79.01-99.23) | NS | 96.77 (83.81-99.43) | 89.66 (73.61-96.42) | NS |
PLR | 12.67 | 15.21 | NS | 22.50 | 18.40 | NS | 31 | 8.29 | 0.015 |
NLR | 0.10 | 0.11 | NS | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.014 | 0 | 0.16 | < 0.001 |
Table 5 Quality of sedation
P group | M/F group | P value | |
Sedation time (min) | 3.22 ± 1.70 | 4.47 ± 2.40 | 0.002 |
Procedure time (min) | 25.00 ± 6.51 | 28.45 ± 8.04 | 0.028 |
Adverse events | 0.339 | ||
Hypoxemia | 0 | 0 | |
Hypotension | 3 | 1 | |
Bradycardia | 0 | 0 | |
Patient assessment | |||
Satisfaction | 10 (10–10) | 10 (9–10) | 0.105 |
Pain or discomfort | 0 (0–0) | 0 (0–1) | 0.145 |
Intraprocedural recall | 0 (0–0) | 0 (0–1) | 0.006 |
Willingness to repeat (n) | 0.559 | ||
Lighter | 5 | 4 | |
Deeper | 4 | 7 | |
Same level | 40 | 40 | |
Endoscopist assessment | |||
Satisfaction with sedation | 10 (9–10) | 9 (8–10) | 0.003 |
Patient cooperation | 4 (4–4) | 4 (3–4) | 0.002 |
Quality of endoscopy | 4 (4–4) | 4 (3–4) | 0.018 |
Level of sedation | 0.014 | ||
Apparently inadequate | 0 | 3 | |
Inadequate | 7 | 16 | |
Adequate | 41 | 31 | |
Oversedated | 1 | 1 | |
Assistant satisfaction | 9 (9–10) | 8 (7–10) | 0.001 |
Anesthetist satisfaction | 9 (9–10) | 7 (5–8) | < 0.001 |
- Citation: Zuo XL, Li Z, Liu XP, Li CQ, Ji R, Wang P, Zhou CJ, Liu H, Li YQ. Propofol vs midazolam plus fentanyl for upper gastrointestinal endomicroscopy: A randomized trial. World J Gastroenterol 2012; 18(15): 1814-1821
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v18/i15/1814.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v18.i15.1814