Is a six hour fast after a rice meal sufficient before upper gastrointestinal endoscopy?

Silva, Arjuna P. De; Niriella, Madunil Anuk; Perera, H. Suharshi S.; Aryasingha, Sanjeewa; Kalubovila, Udaya; Manchanayake, Jayani; Dassanayake, Anuradha S; Devanarayana, Niranga Manjuri; Pathmeswaran, A.; Silva, H Janaka de

doi:10.3109/00365521003710174

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Fasting is also a prerequisite for clear visualization of the gastric mucosa. In another study by De Silva et al , 19 the protocol of fasting 6 hours after a rice meal led to poor endoscopic vision in 28.6% of participants, suggesting that it may be inappropriate to further shorten the fasting time for solid food. In the present study, the mucosal visibility of the “4+2” protocol group and the control group was similar (TVS: 5.0 [4.0–5.0] vs 4.0 [4.0–5.0], p = 0.266), suggesting that the rice porridge meal resulted in gastric emptying within 4 hours.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Four-Hour Fasting for Semifluids and 2-Hour Fasting for Water Improves the Patient Experience of Esophagogastroduodenoscopy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Cai

Gao

et al. 2022

Gut and Liver

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/Aims: We aimed to investigate the comfort, safety, and endoscopic visibility during esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) afforded by a modified 4-hour semifluid and 2-hour water ("4+2") fasting protocol. Methods:In this parallel group, endoscopist-blinded, randomized controlled trial, outpatients undergoing unsedated diagnostic EGD from 10:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. were randomly assigned to either a "4+2" protocol group or a conventional fasting group. The participants' comfort during the fasting period and procedure was measured using the visual analog scale, and mucosal visibility was measured by endoscopists using the total visibility score. Satisfaction was defined as a visual analog scale score of ≤3. The primary outcome was the participants' comfort during fasting.Results: One hundred and six and 108 participants were randomized to the "4+2" protocol and control groups, respectively. Participants' comfort before EGD was significantly higher in the "4+2" protocol group measured by both the proportion of satisfaction (86.8% vs 63.9%, p=0.002) and the visual analog scale score (median [interquartile range]: 1.0 [1.0-2.0] vs 3.0 [1.0-4.0], p<0.001). The proportion of satisfaction during EGD also significantly improved (59.4% vs 45.4%, p=0.039) in the "4+2" protocol group. The total visibility score was unaffected by the fasting protocol (5.0 [4.0-5.0] vs 4.0 [4.0-5.0], p=0.266). No adverse events were observed during the study. Conclusions:The "4+2" protocol was more comfortable and provided equal mucosal visibility and safety compared with conventional fasting for unsedated EGD.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%