Standard endoscopic examination of the esophagus, stomach, and duodenum was performed by endoscopy specialists from the Gastroenterology Department of our hospital. All examiners had more than 10 years of experience in endoscopy. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy was performed using a conventional single-channel endoscope (GIF-H290, -HQ290, or -H290Z; Olympus, Tokyo, Japan). A hiatal hernia was diagnosed by the presence of a gastric wall above the diaphragmatic hiatus unaccompanied by underlying longitudinally arrayed vessels.15 (link) EE was diagnosed according to the Los Angeles classification system.16 (link) In this study, EE higher than grade A was defined as EE. Endoscopic findings from each subject were validated independently by a double endoscopy specialist.
Hq 290
Manufactured by Olympus
Sourced in Japan
The HQ-290 is a high-quality laboratory equipment product manufactured by Olympus. It is designed to perform specific core functions required in a laboratory setting. Detailed technical specifications and intended use are not available at this time.
Automatically generated - may contain errors
5 protocols using hq 290
1
Endoscopic Examination of Esophagus, Stomach, and Duodenum
2
Endoscopic Atrophy Grading in Gastric Assessment
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
We performed endoscopic examinations using endoscopes (Q-260, HQ-260, and HQ-290 and others, Olympus, Tokyo, Japan and EG-L590ZW, Fujifilm Co, Tokyo, Japan). Endoscopic atrophy was assessed according to the Kimura–Takemoto classification.(16 ) This classification system includes the following classifications: 1) close-type, when an atrophic border remains on the lesser curvature of the stomach; or 2) open-type, when the atrophic border extends along the anterior and posterior walls of the stomach and is not associated with the lesser curvature of the stomach. In this study, atrophy grade was scored as follows: absence of any atrophy, 0; C1, 1; C2, 2; C3, 3; O1, 4; O2, 5; and O3, 6, respectively.
3
Endoscopic Grading of Gastric Atrophy
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
Endoscopic examinations were performed using Olympus electroscopes (models Q-260, Q-290, HQ-290, and others; Tokyo, Japan). Endoscopic atrophy was diagnosed using the endoscopic atrophic-border scale of Kimura and Takemoto.(24 ) This scale correlates with histological atrophy grades determined before and after HPE:(24 –26 (link)) 1) closed (C) type, in which the atrophic border remains on the lesser curvature of the stomach; and 2) open (O) type, in which the atrophic border extends along the anterior and posterior walls of the stomach and is not associated with the lesser curvature. The grade of atrophy was further classified into C0, C1, C2, C3 and O1, O2, O3. Each atrophy status were scored, as C0–C3 (0 to 3) and O1–O3 (4 to 6). Score 0 indicated that atrophy was absence and score 6 indicated that atrophy was most severe.
4
Endoscopic Assessment of Gastric Atrophy
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
Endoscopy was performed using an electroscope (model PQ-260, HQ-290, or others; Olympus, Tokyo, Japan). Nodular gastritis was evaluated by endoscopic observation. Endoscopic atrophy was defined using an endoscopic-atrophic-border scale previously reported by Kimura and Takemoto.(13 ) Endoscopic atrophy grades were scored as C0: 0, C1: 1, C2: 2, C3: 3, O1: 4, O2: 5, and O3: 6, respectively, with 0 representing absence of atrophy and 6 indicating severe atrophy.
5
Endoscopic Evaluation of Esophageal Palisade Vessels
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
All patients underwent image-enhanced endoscopy (endoscopes: GIF-Q260, -H260, -H260Z, -H290, -HQ290, or -H290Z; Olympus Medical Systems, Tokyo, Japan) with an electronic endoscopic system (Elite CV290; Olympus Medical Systems). Endoscopy was performed by a single highly experienced endoscopist (T.T.) certified by the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society. Patients lay on their left side, with the upper body slightly elevated under conscious sedation. After air was suctioned from the stomach, the examinee inhaled deeply with the lower esophagus adequately stretched and endoscopic observation of the palisade vessels was performed using white light imaging (WLI) first, followed by NBI for visualizing the palisade vessels if they were undetectable by WLI [27 (link),28 (link)]. All NBI images of palisade vessels were obtained in normal mode with confirmation under magnification. During observation, we adequately washed the esophageal mucosa with dimethicone solution. The location of the tumor epicenter was defined as the mid-point on the longitudinal axis, and the distance of tumor invasion from the EGJ line was estimated based on the endoscope’s diameter or measured directly if the length was within 1 or 2 cm.
About PubCompare
Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.
We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.
However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.
Ready to get started?
Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required
Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!