The SCENT Trial: The UK's First Prospective Randomised Head-to-Head Trial of Transnasal Endoscopy Against Conventional Oral Endoscopy - Preliminary Results

Despott, Edward J.; Tripoli, Eric; Polecina, Adel; Butcher, Jayne; Fraser, Chris

doi:10.1016/j.gie.2009.03.907

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Unsedated nasal endoscopy is perhaps the most comparable modality being performed in the community, with no sedation and high levels of patient acceptability. Further on in its development, there has been an improvement in the quality of images obtained and high levels of diagnostic accuracy demonstrated (12,(26)(27)(28).…”

Section: Implications For Clinical Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnosis of Barrett’s esophagus and esophageal varices using a magnetically assisted capsule endoscopy system

Beg

Card

Warburton

et al. 2020

Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundMagnetically Assisted Capsule Endoscopy (MACE) potentially offers a comfortable, patient friendly and community-based alternative to gastroscopy (EGD). This pilot study aims to explore whether this approach can be used to accurately diagnose Barrett's oesophagus and esophageal varices. MethodsThe MiroCam Navi capsule system was used to examine the upper gastrointestinal tract in patients due to undergo a clinically indicated EGD. A total of 50 participants were enrolled, of which 34 had known pathology, 17 Barrett's Esophagus (BE), 17 Esophageal Varices (EV), with 16 controls. Patients underwent the MACE procedure, with the operator blinded to the indication and any previous endoscopic diagnoses. The subsequent EGD was performed by an endoscopist blinded to the MACE findings. Diagnostic yield, comfort and patient preference between the two modalities were compared. ResultsParticipants had a mean age of 61 years old, a M: F of 2.1:1, a mean BMI of 29.5, with an average chest measurement of 105.3cms. 47 patients undertook both procedures, 3 patients were unable to swallow the capsule. With the use of the magnet, it was possible to hold the capsule within the esophagus for a mean duration of 190 secs and up to a maximum of 634 secs. A correct real-time MACE diagnosis was made in 11/15 patients with EV (sensitivity 73.3% (44.9-92.2%) and specificity 100% (89.1-100%) and 15/16 patients with BE (sensitivity 93.8% (69.8-99.8%) and a specificity of 100% (88.8-100%). MACE was considered more comfortable than conventional endoscopy (p<0.0001) with a mean score of 9.2 with MACE compared to 6.7 with EGD, when assessed on a 10-point scale. No MACE or EGD related adverse events occurred. ConclusionThis pilot study demonstrates that MACE is both safe and well tolerated by patients. Accuracy for the diagnosis of BE was high and may therefore have a role in screening for this condition.

show abstract

Section: Implications For Clinical Practicementioning

confidence: 99%