FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2001180572> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2001180572 endingPage "A62" @default.
• W2001180572 startingPage "A62.1" @default.
• W2001180572 abstract "<h3>Introduction</h3> Transnasal gastroscopy is a far more acceptable form of gastroscopy to the patient, with benefits including reduced gagging, ability to communicate during the procedure, greater flexibility of endoscope allowing easier visualisation of difficult areas and closer inspection of the laryn x.¹ Due to the smaller working channel, 2.0mm as compared with 2.8 mm of a standard oral gastroscope, the biopsy forceps used in transnasal gastroscopy are smaller, leading to questions about the suitability of transnasal gastroscopy for Barrett’s surveillance. As an early adopter of transnasal gastroscopy, Braintree community hospital endoscopy service has performed many thousands of diagnostic transnasal gastroscopies including Barrett’s surveillance. This study compares the dysplasia and malignancy rate of transnasal gastroscopy biopsies and oral gastroscopy biopsies. <h3>Methods</h3> All patients attending for a follow up gastroscopy for Barrett’s surveillance over the past three years were included in the study. Patients attending for gastroscopy are sent information on the types of procedure when the appointment is booked. The patient is free to choose whichever form of gastroscopy they wish. On admission, the nurse will explain both procedures again and the patient will then choose. The vast majority choose to have transnasal gastroscopy. For those that choose to have oral gastroscopy, a standard oral gastroscope is used rather than a transnasal gastroscope. All endoscopists take quadrantic biopsies of the Barrett’s segment in accordance with the BSG guidelines. The study looked back at 3 years of Barrett’s surveillance and compared the rates of dysplasia found in the transnasal series and the oral series. The overall dysplasia rate, including adenocarcinoma, was compared. <h3>Results</h3> In the three year period there were a total of 1282 patients who underwent Barrett’s surveillance. Of these, 905 (70.6%) chose to have transnasal gastroscopy, the remainder, 377 (29.4%) chose to have oral gastroscopy. Of the transnasal series, 12 (1.3%) had LGD, 5 (0.6%) had HGD, 3(0.3%) had ACA and 9 (1%) were indefinite for dysplasia. Of the oral series, 7 (1.8%) had LGD, 0(0%) had HGD, 2(0.5%) had ACA and 7 (1.8%) were indefinite for dysplasia. The overall dysplasia and malignancy rate in the trans nasal group versus the oral group was 2.2% vs. 2.4% (p = 0.4048). <h3>Conclusion</h3> Our series at Braintree community hospital shows that there is not a significant difference in the dysplasia and malignance rate found on transnasal biopsies as compared with oral gastroscopy biopsies. <h3>Reference</h3> Knuth J, Kunze DE, Benz C, Bullian DR, Heiss MM, Lefering R, Saad S, Saers T, Krakamp B. Is the transnasal access for esophagogastroduodenoscopy in routine use equal to the transoral route? A prospective, randomized trial. <i>Z Gastroenterol</i> 2013 Dec;51(12):1369–1376 <h3>Disclosure of Interest</h3> None Declared." @default.
• W2001180572 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2001180572 creator A5027003710 @default.
• W2001180572 date "2014-06-01" @default.
• W2001180572 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W2001180572 title "PTU-054 Transnasal Gastroscopy – Are The Biopsies Suitable For Barrett’s Surveillance?" @default.
• W2001180572 cites W2317548407 @default.
• W2001180572 doi "https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2014-307263.128" @default.
• W2001180572 hasPublicationYear "2014" @default.
• W2001180572 type Work @default.
• W2001180572 sameAs 2001180572 @default.
• W2001180572 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W2001180572 countsByYear W20011805722014 @default.
• W2001180572 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2001180572 hasAuthorship W2001180572A5027003710 @default.
• W2001180572 hasBestOaLocation W20011805721 @default.
• W2001180572 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2001180572 hasConcept C126838900 @default.
• W2001180572 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2001180572 hasConcept C2775894508 @default.
• W2001180572 hasConcept C2775934546 @default.
• W2001180572 hasConcept C2776820786 @default.
• W2001180572 hasConcept C2776914593 @default.
• W2001180572 hasConcept C2778451229 @default.
• W2001180572 hasConcept C61434518 @default.
• W2001180572 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2001180572 hasConceptScore W2001180572C126322002 @default.
• W2001180572 hasConceptScore W2001180572C126838900 @default.
• W2001180572 hasConceptScore W2001180572C141071460 @default.
• W2001180572 hasConceptScore W2001180572C2775894508 @default.
• W2001180572 hasConceptScore W2001180572C2775934546 @default.
• W2001180572 hasConceptScore W2001180572C2776820786 @default.
• W2001180572 hasConceptScore W2001180572C2776914593 @default.
• W2001180572 hasConceptScore W2001180572C2778451229 @default.
• W2001180572 hasConceptScore W2001180572C61434518 @default.
• W2001180572 hasConceptScore W2001180572C71924100 @default.
• W2001180572 hasIssue "Suppl 1" @default.
• W2001180572 hasLocation W20011805721 @default.
• W2001180572 hasLocation W20011805722 @default.
• W2001180572 hasOpenAccess W2001180572 @default.
• W2001180572 hasPrimaryLocation W20011805721 @default.
• W2001180572 hasRelatedWork W100034263 @default.
• W2001180572 hasRelatedWork W2017372847 @default.
• W2001180572 hasRelatedWork W2018741928 @default.
• W2001180572 hasRelatedWork W2057399498 @default.
• W2001180572 hasRelatedWork W2079306566 @default.
• W2001180572 hasRelatedWork W2079664446 @default.
• W2001180572 hasRelatedWork W2105020462 @default.
• W2001180572 hasRelatedWork W2122419747 @default.
• W2001180572 hasRelatedWork W2362077868 @default.
• W2001180572 hasRelatedWork W3150122151 @default.
• W2001180572 hasVolume "63" @default.
• W2001180572 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2001180572 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2001180572 magId "2001180572" @default.
• W2001180572 workType "article" @default.