Comparison of Peroral Versus Ultrathin Transnasal Endoscopy in the Diagnosis of Upper Gastrointestinal Pathology

Al-Karawi, Mohamed A.; Sanai, Faisal M; Al-Madani, Abdallah; Kfoury, Hala; Yasawy, Mohamed I.; Sandokji, Abdulkareem

doi:10.5144/0256-4947.2000.328

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 10 publications

(23 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Duodenal biopsies demonstrating villous atrophy remain essential for a diagnosis of adult coeliac disease [53], particularly in cases that anti-tissue transglutaminase antibodies are not sufficiently high to be at diagnostic levels. Duodenal biopsies obtained by TNE have been shown to be adequate for the purposes of histological diagnoses [54], with villous atrophy readily identifiable on samples obtained [13]. There are currently, however, no studies which consider the use of TNE specifically in the diagnosis or follow-up of celiac disease.…”

Section: Celiac Diseasementioning

confidence: 99%

Unsedated Transnasal Endoscopy: A Safe, Well-Tolerated and Accurate Alternative to Standard Diagnostic Peroral Endoscopy

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Diagnostic unsedated transnasal endoscopy (uTNE) has been proven to be a safe and well-tolerated procedure. Although its utilization in the United Kingdom (UK) is increasing, it is currently available in only a few centers. Through consideration of recent studies, we aimed to perform an updated review of the technological advances in uTNE, consider their impact on diagnostic accuracy, and to determine the role of uTNE in the COVID-19 era. Current literature has shown that the diagnostic accuracy of uTNE for identification of esophageal pathology is equivalent to conventional esophagogastroduodenoscopy (cEGD). Concerns regarding suction and biopsy size have been addressed by the introduction of TNE scopes with working channels of 2.4 mm. Advances in imaging have improved detection of early gastric cancers. The procedure is associated with less cardiac stress and reduced aerosol production; when combined with no need for sedation and improved rates of patient turnover, uTNE is an efficient and safe alternative to cEGD in the COVID-19 era. We conclude that advances in technology have improved the diagnostic accuracy of uTNE to the point where it could be considered the first line diagnostic endoscopic investigation in the majority of patients. It could also play a central role in the recovery of diagnostic endoscopic services during the COVID-19 pandemic.

show abstract

Section: Celiac Diseasementioning

confidence: 99%