Anesthesia, Epistaxis
Conditions
Keywords
Nasal anesthesia, endoscopes, transnasal endoscopy
Brief summary
Unsedated ultrathin transnasal esophago-gastro-duodenoscopy (UT-EGD), in comparison with conventional peroral EGD (P-EGD) has been shown to be more tolerable, safer, cost-effective and time-efficient. The investigators and in other studies have showed that nasal pledgetting (or commonly termed nasal packing) is better than nasal spray in terms of patient tolerance and visual capacity. Although pledgetting method to a selected meatus can achieve better decongestion effect, epistaxis and nasal pain in some patients are still frustrating to endoscopists. The investigator has proposed a novel meatus scoring scale to evaluate nasal insertability by anterior rhinoscopy using a transnasal endoscope. The investigator also suggest endoscopic-guided gauze pledgetting can provide precise nasal anesthesia, thereby reducing trauma/bleeding in the nasal cavity and increasing patient tolerance during transnasal endoscopy. Endoscopic guidance to deliver a gauze strip can confirm delivering it to at least the posterior end of a turbinate. We hypothesize that by using endoscopic-guided method, gauze pledgetting to both the inferior nasal meatus (INM) and middle nasal meatus (MNM) simultaneously is more tolerable than only gauze pledgetting to a single meatus.
Detailed description
Nasal anesthesia is the rate-limiting step for a well tolerable unsedated transnasal esophago-gastro-duodenoscopy (UT-EGD) procedure. The investigator has proposed that a simple Endoscopic-Guided Gauze Pledgetting method (EGGP) is more tolerable than the blind cotton-tippled applicator method to deliver a gauze strip for anesthetizing the nasal cavity. The initial idea of EGGP is to anesthetize only one single selected meatus. To compare patient tolerance, safety and adverse events between double pledget (DPNA, i.e. INM and MNM) versus single pledget (SPNA, i.e. INM or MNM) methods of nasal anesthesia, the investigator is going to conduct a prospective randomized-controlled trial. The rationale for using double pledget is threefold: (1) the middle meatus is bounded by the INT and MNT; (2) the inserting and exserting meatuses may be different; (3) erective spongy tissue is mainly distributed in the inferior and middle turbinates and the nasal septum. Therefore, the primary objective of this study is to evaluate whether DPNA is more tolerable and safer than DPNA before UT-EGD.
Interventions
DEVICEDouble pledget nasal anesthesia (DPNA)
By using a transnasal endoscope as a guide and a biopsy forceps, two gauze strips soaked with decongestant and anesthesia will be delivered to the middle meatus followed by the inferior meatus under real-time transnasal endoscopic guidance.
DEVICESingle pledget nasal anesthesia (SPNA)
Another randomized group of patients will also receive endoscopic-guided gauze pledgetting using a transnasal endoscope as a guide and a biopsy forceps. One gauze strip soaked with decongestant and anesthesia will be delivered to either the middle meatus or inferior meatus determined by anterior rhinoscopy.
Sponsors
Buddhist Tzu Chi General Hospital
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
All outpatients with epigastric discomfort (non-ulcer dyspepsia), aged 18-65 years are eligibility for this study.
Exclusion criteria
* Patients who can not answer questionnaires, who have prior nasal trauma or surgery, recent or present upper gastrointestinal bleeding and coagulopathy are excluded from this study. * Patients who are allergic to lidocaine and who have uncontrolled hypertension or coronary artery disease are not recruited.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| The primary outcome measures are tolerability profiles on a validated visual analogue scale | Immediately after transnasal endoscopy up to all questionnaires answered (about 15 minutes) | The primary outcome measures are tolerability profiles on a validated visual analogue scale (VAS) and difficulty in inserting the transnasal endoscope through a selected meatus based on a Likert scale. The Likert scale has 5 points of difficulty: minimal, slight, moderate, substantial, and extreme. Facing a 5-point VAS card (1 = minimal discomfort to 5 = severe discomfort), all patients give real-time feedback immediately after UT-EGD by speaking or pointing out their scorings for the following: (1) pain during anesthesia, (2) pain during nasal insertions, (3) pain during exsertion, and (4) overall tolerance. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Secondary outcome measures evaluate the side effects of nasal anesthesia | The immediate secondary outcome measures will be evaluated by questionnaires immediately after UT-EGD within 15 minutes and the delayed secondary outcome measures will be evaluated by otolaryngologists within two weeks after UT-EGD. | Secondary outcome measures will be evaluated by assisting nurses, who record (a) immediate responses including: (i) epistaxis, (ii) immediately post-procedural side effects including headache, light headiness, and mucous discharge, and (iii) patient's willingness to receive the same procedure the next time, and (b) delayed side effect including (i) persisting nasal discharge, (ii) epistaxis 24 hours after UT- EGD, and (iii) sinusitis all confirmed by otolaryngologists within two weeks after UT-EGD. The visual capacity for the anterior nasal cavity ranking on a 5-point scale (5 represented standard EGD and 1 poor visual quality) is also evaluated by assisting nurses during endoscopic insertion after nasal decongestive anesthesia. |
Countries
Taiwan
Contacts
Primary ContactChi-Tan Hu, MD, PhD
Outcome results
None listed