Background: Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is conventionally performed transorally, although this is often a rather unpleasant experience for the patient. In the present study, we examined the merits and demerits of transnasal EGD. Materials and Methods: We used two types of small-diameter endoscope, produced by Olympus Co. and Fujinon Toshiba ES Systems Co., Ltd. Results: Transnasal EGD was performed successfully in 98.8% (955/967) of patients examined. When questioned about premedication and the degree of discomfort, the great majority of patients stated that transnasal EGD was more comfortable than a transoral procedure. The incidences of nausea and vomiting were low at 8.6% (82/955) and 0.8% (8/955), respectively. Other identified adverse reactions were nasal pain in 42.9% (415/967) of patients, and epistaxis in 1.1% (11/ 967). The average time taken for transnasal EGD was 8.2 ± 0.7 min, approximately 1 min longer than for the transoral method. Conclusion: Transnasal EGD is less stressful to patients than transoral EGD, and is a feasible and safe alternative.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.