Journal of digestive diseases · 2017
Role of esophagogastroduodenoscopy in detecting distal duodenal lesions: A single-center pilot study in Southern China.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Qiao Wei Guang, Han Ze Min, Ren Yu Tang, Xing Tong Yin, Tan Wen Xin, De Liu Si, Zhi Fa Chao
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is a standard instrument for detecting upper gastrointestinal lesions. However, the distal duodenum is often missed. This study aimed to clarify the diagnostic role of EGD in the distal duodenum.
METHODS: This retrospective study enrolled patients with distal duodenal lesions who underwent EGD between January 2004 and July 2016 at our center. The rate of missed diagnosis using EGD examination was calculated. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the factors associated with the missed diagnoses.
RESULTS: Sixty-three patients were included in the study. The overall diagnostic rate of distal duodenal lesions on EGD was 58.7%. After excluding the patients in whom the EGD did not reach the distal duodenum, this rate rose to 82.2%. In univariate analysis, intravenous sedation (26.8% vs 68.2%, odds ratio [OR] 0.171, P = 0.002), signs of lesions adjacent to the stomach (19.4% vs 62.5%, OR 0.099, P = 0.001), prior enteroscopy experience (15.0% vs 87.0%, OR 0.026, P < 0.001), and endoscopists with experiences of over 10 years (13.8% vs 64.7%, OR 0.087, P = 0.000) were associated with a decreased risk of missed diagnosis. In multivariate analysis, signs of lesions adjacent to the stomach (OR 0.167, P = 0.039) and prior enteroscopy experience (OR 0.035, P < 0.001) were significant independent protective factors.
CONCLUSION: EGD may be important in diagnosing distal duodenal lesions. Patients with gastric retention, blood in the stomach or erosion in the proximal duodenum may benefit from the deep insertion of EGD.
METHODS: This retrospective study enrolled patients with distal duodenal lesions who underwent EGD between January 2004 and July 2016 at our center. The rate of missed diagnosis using EGD examination was calculated. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the factors associated with the missed diagnoses.
RESULTS: Sixty-three patients were included in the study. The overall diagnostic rate of distal duodenal lesions on EGD was 58.7%. After excluding the patients in whom the EGD did not reach the distal duodenum, this rate rose to 82.2%. In univariate analysis, intravenous sedation (26.8% vs 68.2%, odds ratio [OR] 0.171, P = 0.002), signs of lesions adjacent to the stomach (19.4% vs 62.5%, OR 0.099, P = 0.001), prior enteroscopy experience (15.0% vs 87.0%, OR 0.026, P < 0.001), and endoscopists with experiences of over 10 years (13.8% vs 64.7%, OR 0.087, P = 0.000) were associated with a decreased risk of missed diagnosis. In multivariate analysis, signs of lesions adjacent to the stomach (OR 0.167, P = 0.039) and prior enteroscopy experience (OR 0.035, P < 0.001) were significant independent protective factors.
CONCLUSION: EGD may be important in diagnosing distal duodenal lesions. Patients with gastric retention, blood in the stomach or erosion in the proximal duodenum may benefit from the deep insertion of EGD.