Endoscopy 2007; 39(8): 673-680
DOI: 10.1055/s-2007-966351
Original article

© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Accuracy and interobserver agreement of small-caliber vs. conventional esophagogastroduodenoscopy for evaluating esophageal varices

S.  Pungpapong1 , A.  Keaveny1 , M.  Raimondo1 , R.  Dickson1 , T.  Woodward1 , D.  Harnois1 , M.  Wallace1
  • 1Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Jacksonville, Florida, USA
Further Information

Publication History

submitted 4 November 2006

accepted after revision 16 January 2007

Publication Date:
22 June 2007 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

See also:

Commentaire de travail de S. Pungpapong et al., pp. 673Endoscopy 2007; 39(08): 844-844
DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1306964

Background and study aims: Advances in endoscope design have allowed high-quality imaging using small-caliber endoscopes (< 6 mm), and these have been proposed as providing an accurate modality for evaluating esophageal varices in several small studies. We aimed to evaluate the accuracy and interobserver agreement of small-caliber esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) compared with conventional EGD for evaluating esophageal varices in a large prospective cohort.

Patients and methods: A total of 115 patients with end-stage liver disease and/or portal hypertension were prospectively enrolled into the study. EGD procedures were performed using conventional (8.6-mm) and small-caliber (4.9-mm) endoscopes, back to back and under standard sedation, by two different endoscopists. Esophageal varices were graded at the time of EGD (the “real-time” grade); and by retrospective review of photographs by three endoscopists, when a “consensus” grade (i. e. a grading agreed by two out of the three endoscopists) was used as the final result.

Results: Of the 115 patients, 33 patients (29 %) were classified as Child’s class A, 47 patients (41 %) as Child’s class B, and 35 patients (30 %) as Child’s class C. The mean model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score was 13.6. Thirty-six patients (31 %) had undergone previous ligation of esophageal varices. Compared with conventional EGD, the accuracy of small-caliber EGD for esophageal varices grading was 94 % (consensus grade) and 95 % (real-time grade). Excellent concordance was demonstrated between real-time grade and consensus grade, with a kappa of 0.95 for both types of EGD. There was excellent interobserver agreement between endoscopists, regardless of the type of EGD. The severity of hepatic dysfunction and the presence or absence of a history of previous esophageal varices ligation did not have any impact on the accuracy or interobserver agreement.

Conclusions: Small-caliber EGD performed under sedation via oral intubation is a highly accurate and reliable modality for evaluating esophageal varices in patients with end-stage liver disease and/or portal hypertension, regardless of the degree of hepatic dysfunction or history of previous esophageal varices ligation.

References

  • 1 Chalasani N, Imperiale T F, Ismail A. et al . Predictors of large esophageal varices in patients with cirrhosis.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;  94 3285-3291
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Zaman A, Becker T, Lapidus J. et al . Risk factors for the presence of varices in cirrhotic patients without a history of variceal hemorrhage.  Arch Intern Med. 2001;  161 2564-2570
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Predictors of the first variceal hemorrhage in patients with cirrhosis of the liver and esophageal varices: a prospective multicenter study. The North Italian Endoscopic Club for the Study and Treatment of Esophageal Varices.  N Engl J Med. 1988;  319 983-989
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Gores G J, Weisner R H, Dickson E R. et al . Prospective evaluation of esophageal varices in primary biliary cirrhosis: development, natural history and influence in survival.  Gastroenterology. 1989;  96 1552-1559
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Bosch J, Abraldes J G, Groszmann R. Current management of portal hypertension.  J Hepatol. 2003;  38 Suppl 1 S54-S68
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Graham D Y, Smith J L. The course of patients after variceal hemorrhage.  Gastroenterology. 1981;  80 800-809
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 McCormick P A, O’Keffe C. Improving prognosis following a first variceal hemorrhage over four decades.  Gut. 2001;  49 682-685
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Grace N D, Groszmann R J, Garcia-Tsao G. et al . Portal hypertension and variceal bleeding: an AASLD single topic symposium.  Hepatology. 1998;  28 868-880
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 de Franchis R. Evolving consensus in portal hypertension: report of the Baveno IV consensus workshop on methodology of diagnosis and therapy in portal hypertension.  J Hepatol. 2005;  43 167-176
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Grace N D. Diagnosis and treatment of gastrointestinal bleeding secondary to portal hypertension. American College of Gastroenterology Practice Parameters Committee.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1997;  92 1081-1091
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Teran J C, Imperiale T F, Mullen K D. et al . Primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding in cirrhosis: a cost-effectiveness analysis.  Gastroenterology. 1997;  112 473-482
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Arguedas M R, Heudebert G R, Eloubeidi M A. et al . Cost-effectiveness of screening, surveillance, and primary prophylaxis strategies for esophageal varices.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2002;  97 2441-2452
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Saab S, DeRosa V, Nieto J. et al . Costs and clinical outcomes of primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding in patients with hepatic cirrhosis: a decision analytic model.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2003;  98 763-770
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Spiegel B M, Targownik L, Dulai G S. et al . Endoscopic screening for esophageal varices in cirrhosis: is it ever cost effective?.  Hepatology. 2003;  37 366-377
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Assy N, Rosser B G, Grahame G R, Minuk G Y. Risk of sedation for upper GI endoscopy exacerbating subclinical hepatic encephalopathy in patients with cirrhosis.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1999;  49 690-694
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Zaman A, Hapke R, Sahagun G, Katon R M. Unsedated peroral endoscopy with a video ultrathin endoscope: patient acceptance, tolerance, and diagnostic accuracy.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1998;  93 1260-1263
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Gorelick A B, Inadomi J M, Barnett J L. Unsedated small-caliber esophagogastro-duodenoscopy (EGD): less expensive and less time-consuming than conventional EGD.  J Clin Gastroenterol. 2001;  33 210-214
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Faulx A L, Catanzaro A, Zyzanski S. et al . Patient tolerance and acceptance of unsedated ultrathin esophagoscopy.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2002;  55 620-623
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Saeian K, Staff D M, Vasilopoulos S. et al . Unsedated transnasal endoscopy accurately detects Barrett’s metaplasia and dysplasia.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2002;  56 472-478
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Garcia R T, Cello J P, Nguyen M H. et al . Unsedated ultrathin EGD is well accepted when compared with conventional sedated EGD: a multicenter randomized trial.  Gastroenterology. 2003;  125 1606-1612
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Saeian K, Staff D, Knox J. et al . Unsedated transnasal endoscopy: a new technique for accurately detecting and grading esophageal varices in cirrhotic patients.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2002;  97 2246-2249
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Madhotra R, Mokhashi M, Willner I. et al . Prospective evaluation of a
    3. 1-mm battery-powered esophagoscope in screening for esophageal varices in cirrhotic patients.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2003;  98 807-812
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Darwin P, Zangara J, Heller T. et al . Unsedated esophagoscopy for the diagnosis of esophageal varices in patients with cirrhosis.  Endoscopy. 2000;  32 971-973
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Anand C P, Lindsey J, Oprescu F. et al . Unsedated peroral small-caliber endoscopy for screening of cirrhotics for esophageal varices.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;  59 AB239
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Liu J, Singh H, White P F. Electroencephalogram bispectral analysis predicts the depth of midazolam-induced sedation.  Anesthesiology. 1996;  84 64-69
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Thuluvath P J, Krishnan A. Primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2003;  58 558-567
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Exact confidence limits for p. In: Lentner C, Lentner C, Wink A (eds) Geigy Scientific Tables. Vol. 2. West Caldwell, New Jersey; CIBA-Geigy Corp 1982: 89-102
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 28 Dufour M C. Chronic liver disease and cirrhosis. In: Everhart JE (eds) Digestive diseases in the United States: epidemiology and impact. NIH Publication no. 94; 1447. Washington, DC; US Dept of Health and Human Services 1994: 615-645
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 29 Kim W R, Gross Jr J B, Poterucha J J. et al . Outcome of hospital care of liver disease associated with hepatitis C in the United States.  Hepatology. 2001;  33 201-206
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Gralnek I M, Jensen D M, Kovacs T OG. et al . The economic impact of esophageal variceal hemorrhage: cost-effectiveness implications of endoscopic therapy.  Hepatology. 1999;  29 44-50
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Saadatmand F, Stinson F S, Grant B F. et al .Surveillance Report No. 52: Liver cirrhosis mortality in the United States, 1970 - 96. Rockville, MD; National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, Division of Biometry and Epidemiology 1999
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 32 Groszmann R J, Garcia-Tsao G, Bosch J. et al . Beta-blockers to prevent gastroesophageal varices in patients with cirrhosis.  N Engl J Med. 2005;  353 2254-2261
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar

S. Pungpapong, MD

Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology

Mayo Clinic College of Medicine

4500 San Pablo Road

Jacksonville

Florida 32224

USA

Fax: +1-904-953-7260

Email: pungpapong.surakit@mayo.edu

    additional material.