AIM:To investigate the efficacy of premedication with pronase,a proteolytic enzyme,in improving imagequality during magnifying endoscopy.METHODS:The study was of a blinded,randomized,prospective design.Patients were a...AIM:To investigate the efficacy of premedication with pronase,a proteolytic enzyme,in improving imagequality during magnifying endoscopy.METHODS:The study was of a blinded,randomized,prospective design.Patients were assigned to groups administered oral premedication of either pronase and simethicone(Group A)or simethicone alone(Group B).First,the gastric mucosal visibility grade(1-4)was determined during conventional endoscopy,and then a magnifying endoscopic examination was conducted.The quality of images obtained by magnifying endoscopy at the stomach and the esophagus was scored from1 to 3,with a lower score indicating better visibility.The endoscopist used water flushes as needed to obtain satisfactory magnifying endoscopic views.The main study outcomes were the visibility scores during magnifying endoscopy and the number of water flushes.RESULTS:A total of 144 patients were enrolled,and data from 143 patients(M:F=90:53,mean age 57.5 years)were analyzed.The visibility score was significantly higher in the stomach following premedication with pronase(73%with a score of 1 in Group A vs 49%in Group B,P<0.05),but there was no difference in the esophagus visibility scores(67%with a score of 1in Group A vs 58%in Group B).Fewer water flushes[mean 0.7±0.9 times(range:0-3 times)in Group A vs 1.9±1.5 times(range:0-6 times)in Group B,P<0.05]in the pronase premedication group did not affect the endoscopic procedure times[mean 766 s(range:647-866 s)for Group A vs 760 s(range:678-854 s)for Group B,P=0.88].The total gastric mucosal visibility score was also lower in Group A(4.9±1.5 vs 8.3±1.8in Group B,P<0.01).CONCLUSION:The addition of pronase to simethicone premedication resulted in clearer images during magnifying endoscopy and reduced the need for water flushes.展开更多
AIM To analyze the effects of premedication with Pronase for endoscopic ultrasound(EUS) examination of the stomach.METHODS This was a prospective, randomized and controlled clinical study. All patients were randomly a...AIM To analyze the effects of premedication with Pronase for endoscopic ultrasound(EUS) examination of the stomach.METHODS This was a prospective, randomized and controlled clinical study. All patients were randomly assigned to either the Pronase group or placebo group. The pretreatment solution was a mixed solution of 20000 U of Pronase and 60 m L sodium bicarbonate solution in the Pronase group, while an equal amount of sodium bicarbonate solution was administered to the placebo group. All operators, image evaluators and experimental recorders in EUS did not participate in the preparation and allocation of pretreatment solution. Two blinded investigators assessed the obscurity scores for the EUS images according to the size of artifacts(including ultrasound images of the gastric cavity and the gastric wall). Differences in imaging quality, the duration of examination and the usage of physiological saline during the examination process between the Pronase group and the control group were compared.RESULTS No differences existed in patient demographics between the two groups. For the gastric cavity, the Pronase group had significantly lower mean obscurity scores than the placebo group(1.0476 ± 0.77 vs 1.6129 ± 0.96, respectively, P = 0.000). The mean obscurity scores for the gastric mucosal surface were significantly lower in the Pronase group than the placebo group(1.2063 ± 0.90 vs 1.7581 ± 0.84, respectively, P = 0.001). The average EUS procedure duration for the Pronase group was 11.60 ± 3.32 min, which was significantly shorter than that of the placebo group(13.13 ± 3.81 min, P = 0.007). Less saline was used in the Pronase group than the placebo group, and the difference was significant(417.94 ± 121.38 m L vs 467.42 ± 104.52 mL, respectively, P = 0.016).CONCLUSION The group that had Pronase premedication prior to the EUS examination had clearer images than the placebo group. With Pronase premedication, the examination time was shorter, and the amount of saline used during the EUS examination was less.展开更多
Clear visualization of the gastrointestinal mucosal surface is essential for thorough endoscopy. An unobstructed assessment can reduce the need for additional timeconsuming manipulations such as frequent washing and s...Clear visualization of the gastrointestinal mucosal surface is essential for thorough endoscopy. An unobstructed assessment can reduce the need for additional timeconsuming manipulations such as frequent washing and suction,which tend to prolong total procedure time. However,mucus,foam,and bubbles often hinder clear visibility during endoscopy. Premedication with pronase,a compound of mixed proteolytic enzymes,has been studied in order to improve mucosal visibility during endoscopy. Although its effects differ according to the location in the stomach,premedication with pronase 10 to 20 min before endoscopy significantly improves mucosal visibility without affecting the accuracy of Helicobacter pylori identification. The effects of pronase as premedication also extend to chromoendoscopy,narrow-band imaging,magnifying endoscopy,and endoscopic ultrasonography. In addition,endoscopic flushing with pronase during endoscopy may improve the quantity and the quality of a biopsy to some degree. Although improved mucosal visibility does not necessarily improve clinical outcomes,premedication with pronase may be helpful for increasing the detection rate of early cancers.展开更多
基金Supported by Research grant from Pharmbio Korea,Co.Ltd.,Seoul,South Korea
文摘AIM:To investigate the efficacy of premedication with pronase,a proteolytic enzyme,in improving imagequality during magnifying endoscopy.METHODS:The study was of a blinded,randomized,prospective design.Patients were assigned to groups administered oral premedication of either pronase and simethicone(Group A)or simethicone alone(Group B).First,the gastric mucosal visibility grade(1-4)was determined during conventional endoscopy,and then a magnifying endoscopic examination was conducted.The quality of images obtained by magnifying endoscopy at the stomach and the esophagus was scored from1 to 3,with a lower score indicating better visibility.The endoscopist used water flushes as needed to obtain satisfactory magnifying endoscopic views.The main study outcomes were the visibility scores during magnifying endoscopy and the number of water flushes.RESULTS:A total of 144 patients were enrolled,and data from 143 patients(M:F=90:53,mean age 57.5 years)were analyzed.The visibility score was significantly higher in the stomach following premedication with pronase(73%with a score of 1 in Group A vs 49%in Group B,P<0.05),but there was no difference in the esophagus visibility scores(67%with a score of 1in Group A vs 58%in Group B).Fewer water flushes[mean 0.7±0.9 times(range:0-3 times)in Group A vs 1.9±1.5 times(range:0-6 times)in Group B,P<0.05]in the pronase premedication group did not affect the endoscopic procedure times[mean 766 s(range:647-866 s)for Group A vs 760 s(range:678-854 s)for Group B,P=0.88].The total gastric mucosal visibility score was also lower in Group A(4.9±1.5 vs 8.3±1.8in Group B,P<0.01).CONCLUSION:The addition of pronase to simethicone premedication resulted in clearer images during magnifying endoscopy and reduced the need for water flushes.
基金Supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China,No.81470908
文摘AIM To analyze the effects of premedication with Pronase for endoscopic ultrasound(EUS) examination of the stomach.METHODS This was a prospective, randomized and controlled clinical study. All patients were randomly assigned to either the Pronase group or placebo group. The pretreatment solution was a mixed solution of 20000 U of Pronase and 60 m L sodium bicarbonate solution in the Pronase group, while an equal amount of sodium bicarbonate solution was administered to the placebo group. All operators, image evaluators and experimental recorders in EUS did not participate in the preparation and allocation of pretreatment solution. Two blinded investigators assessed the obscurity scores for the EUS images according to the size of artifacts(including ultrasound images of the gastric cavity and the gastric wall). Differences in imaging quality, the duration of examination and the usage of physiological saline during the examination process between the Pronase group and the control group were compared.RESULTS No differences existed in patient demographics between the two groups. For the gastric cavity, the Pronase group had significantly lower mean obscurity scores than the placebo group(1.0476 ± 0.77 vs 1.6129 ± 0.96, respectively, P = 0.000). The mean obscurity scores for the gastric mucosal surface were significantly lower in the Pronase group than the placebo group(1.2063 ± 0.90 vs 1.7581 ± 0.84, respectively, P = 0.001). The average EUS procedure duration for the Pronase group was 11.60 ± 3.32 min, which was significantly shorter than that of the placebo group(13.13 ± 3.81 min, P = 0.007). Less saline was used in the Pronase group than the placebo group, and the difference was significant(417.94 ± 121.38 m L vs 467.42 ± 104.52 mL, respectively, P = 0.016).CONCLUSION The group that had Pronase premedication prior to the EUS examination had clearer images than the placebo group. With Pronase premedication, the examination time was shorter, and the amount of saline used during the EUS examination was less.
文摘Clear visualization of the gastrointestinal mucosal surface is essential for thorough endoscopy. An unobstructed assessment can reduce the need for additional timeconsuming manipulations such as frequent washing and suction,which tend to prolong total procedure time. However,mucus,foam,and bubbles often hinder clear visibility during endoscopy. Premedication with pronase,a compound of mixed proteolytic enzymes,has been studied in order to improve mucosal visibility during endoscopy. Although its effects differ according to the location in the stomach,premedication with pronase 10 to 20 min before endoscopy significantly improves mucosal visibility without affecting the accuracy of Helicobacter pylori identification. The effects of pronase as premedication also extend to chromoendoscopy,narrow-band imaging,magnifying endoscopy,and endoscopic ultrasonography. In addition,endoscopic flushing with pronase during endoscopy may improve the quantity and the quality of a biopsy to some degree. Although improved mucosal visibility does not necessarily improve clinical outcomes,premedication with pronase may be helpful for increasing the detection rate of early cancers.
