Analysis of painful situations during unsedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy

Abstract

Background and study aims Although esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is a widely used technique, the procedure is often associated with discomfort. This study aimed to analyze painful situations, their frequency, and factors associated with patient discomfort during EGD.

Patients and methods This prospective observational study included patients scheduled to undergo EGD. Seven endoscopists recruited patients scheduled for EGD screening or surveillance. Each endoscopist enrolled 20 patients, performing 10 EGD procedures using ultraslim endoscopes and 10 with standard-sized endoscopes. Data regarding painful situations and frequency were collected using specialized buttons pressed by the patients during EGD. A survey about overall discomfort was conducted after the procedure.

Results We analyzed data from 140 patients. Esophageal insertion and duodenal observation were associated with the highest incidence of pressing the pain button, accounting for 59.3% and 40.7% of the cases, respectively. The factor associated with pressing the pain button during esophageal insertion was endoscopist experience (< 10 years). In contrast, younger age and female sex were the factors associated with pressing the pain button during duodenal observation. In the post-procedure survey, 63.6% of patients reported discomfort. Factors associated with patient discomfort included pressing the pain button during esophageal insertion (odds ratio [OR]: 2.84, P = 0.01) and previous painful EGD experience (OR: 2.41, P = 0.03).

Concusions This study provides objective data on painful situations, their frequency, and related factors during EGD. Further research and interventions focusing on pain reduction during endoscopic procedures are warranted. The results of this study will help endoscopists manage painful situations and potentially improve skills.

Keywords

Endoscopy Upper GI Tract - Quality and logistical aspects - Training - Quality management - Performance and complications

Publication History

Received: 13 February 2024

Accepted after revision: 23 August 2024

Accepted Manuscript online:
30 September 2024

Article published online:
07 November 2024

• References

• 1 Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL. et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2021; 71: 209-249
• 2 Forbes N, Elhanafi SE, Al-Haddad MA. ASGE standards of practice committee. et al. American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on endoscopic submucosal dissection for the management of early esophageal and gastric cancers: summary and recommendations. Gastrointest Endosc 2023; 98: 271-284
• 3 Pimentel-Nunes P, Libânio D, Bastiaansen BAJ. et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial gastrointestinal lesions: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Update 2022. Endoscopy 2022; 54: 591-622
• 4 Ono H, Yao K, Fujishiro M. et al. Guidelines for endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection for early gastric cancer (second edition). Dig Endosc 2021; 33: 4-20
• 5 Foundation for promotion of Cancer Research. Cancer statistics in Japan 2022. https://ganjoho.jp/public/qa_links/report/statistics/pdf/cancer_statistics_2022_fig_E.pdf
• 6 Yashima K, Shabana M, Kurumi H. et al. Gastric cancer screening in Japan: A narrative review. J Clin Med 2022; 11: 4337
• 7 Sami SS, Subramanian V, Ortiz-Fernández-Sordo J. et al. Performance characteristics of unsedated ultrathin video endoscopy in the assessment of the upper GI tract: systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 82: 782-792
• 8 McQuaid KR, Laine L. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials of moderate sedation for routine endoscopic procedures. Gastrointest Endosc 2008; 67: 910-923
• 9 Early DS, Lightdale JR, Vargo 2nd JJ. ASGE Standards of Practice Committee. et al. Guidelines for sedation and anesthesia in GI endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2018; 87: 327-337
• 10 Abraham NS, Fallone CA, Mayrand S. et al. Sedation versus no sedation in the performance of diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: a Canadian randomized controlled cost-outcome study. Am J Gastroenterol 2004; 99: 1692-1699
• 11 Lin OS. Sedation for routine gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures: a review on efficacy, safety, efficiency, cost and satisfaction. Intest Res 2017; 15: 456-466
• 12 Mulcahy HE, Riches A, Kiely M. et al. A prospective controlled trial of an ultrathin versus a conventional endoscope in unsedated upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Endoscopy 2001; 33: 311-316
• 13 Birkner B, Fritz N, Schatke W. et al. A prospective randomized comparison of unsedated ultrathin versus standard esophagogastroduodenoscopy in routine outpatient gastroenterology practice: does it work better through the nose?. Endoscopy 2003; 35: 647-51
• 14 Aya I, Ichijima R, Sugita T. et al. A-single-center prospective study on pain alleviation during peroral upper endoscopy with an ultrathin endoscope. BMC Gastroenterol 2023; 23: 325
• 15 Trevisani L, Cifalà V, Sartori S. et al. Unsedated ultrathin upper endoscopy is better than conventional endoscopy in routine outpatient gastroenterology practice: a randomized trial. World J Gastroenterol 2007; 13: 906-11
• 16 Bisschops R, Areia M, Coron E. et al. Performance measures for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: a European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Quality Improvement Initiative. Endoscopy 2016; 48: 843-864
• 17 Fitzgerald TL, Dennis SO, Kachare SD. et al. Increasing incidence of duodenal neuroendocrine tumors: Incidental discovery of indolent disease?. Surgery 2015; 158: 466-471
• 18 Yoshida M, Yabuuchi Y, Kakushima N. et al. The incidence of non-ampullary duodenal cancer in Japan: The first analysis of a national cancer registry. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2021; 36: 1216-1221