Abstract
To compare the feasibility, tolerability, and safety of ultrathin EGD (UT-EGD) with those of conventional EGD (C-EGD) as a screening method at medical checkup, unsedated EGD was performed in 196 patients undergoing medical checkup using either an ultrathin endoscope 5 mm in diameter (GIF-XP260, Olympus Corp.) or a conventional one 9.0-10.2 mm in diameter. Three endoscopists with different experience times randomly performed the endoscopies. After the examinations, the patients were asked to complete questionnaires regarding their tolerance of the procedure. Sixty-five of the 121 (54%) patients in the UT-EGD group and 21 of the 75 (28%) in the C-EGD group reported none/mild discomfort. Eighty of the 109 (73%) patients who had previously undergone C-EGD in the UT-EGD group and 17 of the 60 (28%) who had previously undergone C-EGD in the C-EGD group reported none/mild discomfort. In both comparisons, there were significant differences, and this tendency was especially prominent with the well-experienced endoscopists. There was no misdiagnosis in either group, and all patients were given complete examinations without any complications. UT-EGD is a more well-tolerated and useful endoscopic method at medical checkup than C-EGD.
