PURPOSE: Our aim in this study is to investigate efficacy of topical lidocaine spray for sedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in children. METHODS: The endoscopy of children aged between 3-18 years who underwent EGD in our endoscopy unit. Intravenous (IV) midazolam and ketamine were used for sedation. Prior to sedation, endoscopy nurse applied topical lidocaine 10% with pump spray at 1 mg/kg dose in group 1, and distilled water via identically scaled pump spray in group 2, in a double blinded fashion. RESULTS: Sedation was not applied in 24.1% of the cases in topical lidocaine spray group (LS group) and in 5.7% of the cases in distilled water spray group (DS group). Gag reflex was observed in 6.5% of cases in LS group and 33.3% of cases in DS group (p=0.024), increased oral secretion was observed in 9.3% of cases in LS group and 51.7% of cases in DS group (p=0.038), sore throat was observed in 3.7% of cases in LS group and 35.6% of cases in DS group (p=0.019) and the difference was statistically significant. CONCLUSION: The study showed that topical pharyngeal lidocaine reduces both requirement and amount of IV sedation before EGD in children and sore throat, gag reflex and decreased oral secretion increase.
Child* ; Endoscopy ; Endoscopy, Digestive System* ; Humans ; Ketamine ; Lidocaine* ; Midazolam ; Pharyngitis ; Reflex ; Water

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to determine the involvement of the upper gastrointestinal system (GIS) in patients diagnosed with Crohn's disease (CD), ulcerative colitis (UC), and non-inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and to compare their differences. METHODS: This study included patients aged between 2 and 18 years who underwent colonoscopy and esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for the first time due to the prediagnosis of IBD. In EGD, samples were taken from duodenum, antrum, corpus, and esophagus; and gastritis, duodenitis, and esophagitis were identified through histopathologic examination. The data gathered the ends of the research were compared between IBD with non-IBD groups and between CD-UC with non-IBD groups, and the presence of significant differences between groups were determined. RESULTS: In our study, 16 patients were diagnosed with CD, 13 with UC, 3 with undeterminate colitis, and 13 with non-IBD. In the histopathological examination of the groups, GIS involvement was found in 94.1% of patients diagnosed with IBD and in 38.5% of non-IBD patients. Moreover, the difference was found to be statistically significant (p=0.032). No significant difference was found between the CD and UC groups. Gastritis was mostly observed in 93.8% of CD-diagnosed patients, 76.8% of UC-diagnosed patients, 81.2% of IBD-diagnosed patients, and 38.5% of non-IBD-diagnosed patients. On the other hand, significant differences were found between CD and non-IBD groups (p=0.03), UC and non-IBD groups (p=0.047), and IBD and non-IBD groups (p=0.03). CONCLUSION: The results of the study show that gastritis was highly observed in UC- and CD-diagnosed patients than in non-IBD-diagnosed patients.
Child ; Colitis ; Colitis, Ulcerative* ; Colonoscopy ; Crohn Disease* ; Duodenitis ; Duodenum ; Endoscopy, Digestive System ; Esophagitis ; Esophagus ; Gastritis* ; Hand ; Humans ; Ulcer*