Disposable versus reusable gastroscopes: a prospective randomized noninferiority trial

被引:11
|
作者
Luo, Xiaoya [1 ]
Ji, Ming [1 ]
Zhang, Shutian [1 ]
Chen, Xin [2 ]
Zong, Ye [1 ]
Zhang, Xi [1 ]
Hu, Haiyi [1 ]
Hao, Xiaowen [1 ]
Shao, Linlin [1 ]
Sun, Can [1 ]
Shi, Haiyun [1 ]
Wang, Junxiong [1 ]
Wang, Bangmao [2 ]
Li, Peng [1 ]
机构
[1] Capital Med Univ, Natl Clin Res Ctr Digest Dis, Beijing Friendship Hosp,Beijing Digest Dis Ctr, Dept Gastroenterol,Beijing Key Lab Precanc Les Di, Beijing 100050, Peoples R China
[2] Tianjin Med Univ, Gen Hosp, Dept Gastroenterol & Hepatol, Tianjin, Peoples R China
关键词
UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY; QUALITY; SOCIETY;
D O I
10.1016/j.gie.2022.03.024
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Background and Aims: Disposable gastroscopes have recently been developed to eliminate the risk of infection transmission from contaminated reusable gastroscopes. We compared the performance of disposable and reusable gastroscopes in patients undergoing gastroscopy. Methods: Patients requiring gastroscopy were randomized to either the disposable or reusable digital gastroscope group. The primary endpoint was the success rate of photographing customary anatomic sites, with a non-inferiority margin of -8%. Secondary endpoints were technical performance factors such as gastroscope imaging quality, maneuverability, gastroscopy completion rate, device failure/defect rate, operating time, and safety. Data were analyzed using the Newcombe-Wilson score method and Fisher exact 2-tailed t test. Results: Of 110 patients, 55 were treated using disposable gastroscopes and 55 using reusable gastroscopes. The success rate for capturing images of customary anatomic sites was 100% in both groups. The average imaging quality score was significantly lower (37.02 +/- 3.09 vs 39.47 +/- 1.92, P<.001) and the operating time significantly longer (P<.001) in the disposable gastroscope group. No significant differences in maneuverability, gastroscopy completion rate, device failure/defect rate, operating time, or safety were found between the 2 groups. Conclusions: Given the overall safety profile and similar technical performance, disposable gastroscopes represent an alternative to reusable gastroscopes for routine examination, bedside first aid, and some certain circumstances.
引用
收藏
页码:250 / 261
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Disposable-sheath, flexible gastroscope system versus standard gastroscopes: a prospective, randomized trial
    Mayinger, B
    Strenkert, M
    Hochberger, J
    Martus, P
    Kunz, B
    Hahn, EG
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 1999, 50 (04) : 461 - 467
  • [2] Disposable versus Reusable Ureteroscopes: A Prospective Multicenter Randomized Comparison
    Bozzini, Giorgio
    Filippi, Beatrice
    Alriyalat, Sulieman
    Calori, Alberto
    Besana, Umberto
    Mueller, Alexander
    Pushkar, Dmitri
    Romero-Otero, Javier
    Pastore, Antonio
    Sighinolfi, Maria Chiara
    Micali, Salvatore
    Buizza, Carlo
    Rocco, Bernardo
    RESEARCH AND REPORTS IN UROLOGY, 2021, 13 : 63 - 71
  • [3] A performance, safety and cost comparison of reusable versus disposable endoscopic biopsy forceps: A prospective randomized trial.
    Rizzo, J
    Bernstein, DE
    Tripodi, J
    Gress, F
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 1998, 47 (04) : AB58 - AB58
  • [4] TIME EFFICIENCY AND PERFORMANCE OF DISPOSABLE VERSUS REUSABLE CYSTOSCOPES: A PROSPECTIVE, RANDOMIZED BENCHTOP COMPARISON
    Baas, C.
    Chen, R.
    Peverini, D. R.
    Hartman, J. C.
    Amasyali, A.
    Belle, J. D.
    Baldwin, E.
    Baldwin, D.
    JOURNAL OF INVESTIGATIVE MEDICINE, 2022, 70 (01) : 248 - 248
  • [5] TIME EFFICIENCY AND PERFORMANCE OF DISPOSABLE VERSUS REUSABLE CYSTOSCOPES: A PROSPECTIVE, RANDOMIZED BENCHTOP COMPARISON
    Baas, Catalina
    Chen, Ricky
    Peverini, Daniel R.
    Hartman, John
    Amasyali, Akin S.
    Leu, Rose
    Assidon, Aviram
    Belle, Joshua D.
    Baldwin, Elizabeth
    Baldwin, D. Duane
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2023, 209 : E1026 - E1027
  • [6] Noninferiority Randomized Clinical Trial: KIM Sling With Reusable Trocars Versus TVT Exact Sling
    Margulies, Samantha L.
    Osment, Anna E.
    Bernard, Adele
    Schroeder, Michelle N.
    Askew, Amy L.
    Agu, Ijeoma S.
    Kunycky, Christina A.
    Geller, Elizabeth J.
    Willis-Gray, Marcella
    Chu, Christine M.
    Wu, Jennifer M.
    UROGYNECOLOGY, 2025, 31 (02): : 101 - 107
  • [7] The Effect of Reusable Versus Disposable Draping Material on Infection Rates in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction A Prospective Randomized Trial
    Showalter, Brian M.
    Crantford, J. Clayton
    Russell, Gregory B.
    Marks, Malcolm W.
    DeFranzo, Anthony J.
    Thompson, James T.
    Pestana, Ivo A.
    David, Lisa R.
    ANNALS OF PLASTIC SURGERY, 2014, 72 (06) : S165 - S169
  • [8] A performance, safety and cost comparison of reusable and disposable endoscopic biopsy forceps: a prospective, randomized trial
    Rizzo, J
    Bernstein, D
    Gress, F
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2000, 51 (03) : 257 - 261
  • [9] Prospective randomized comparison of disposable and reusable ERCP accessories.
    Maria-Anna
    Ortner, EJM
    Grebe, DD
    Rueden, HH
    Haile, EH
    Meisel, HH
    Ocran, KK
    Eckmann, TT
    Weber-Eibl, JJ
    Mansmann, UU
    Lochs, HH
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2000, 51 (04) : AB66 - AB66
  • [10] Disposable versus reusable biopsy forceps: A prospective evaluation of costs
    Kozarek, RA
    Raltz, SL
    Merriam, LD
    Sumida, SE
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 1996, 43 (01) : 10 - 13