OBJECTIVE: We wanted to evaluate the feasibility and usefulness of a newly designed balloon sheath for gastrointestinal guidance and access by conducting a phantom study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The newly designed balloon sheath consisted of an introducer sheath and a supporting balloon. A coil catheter was advanced over a guide wire into two gastroduodenal phantoms (one was with stricture and one was without stricture); group I was without a balloon sheath, group ll was with a deflated balloon sheath, and groups III and IV were with an inflated balloon and with the balloon in the fundus and body, respectively. Each test was performed for 2 minutes and it was repeated 10 times in each group by two researchers, and the positions reached by the catheter tip were recorded. RESULTS: Both researchers had better performances with both phantoms in order of group IV, III, II and I. In group IV, both researchers advanced the catheter tip through the fourth duodenal segment in both the phantoms. In group I, however, the catheter tip never reached the third duodenal segment in both the phantoms by both the researchers. The numeric values for the four study groups were significantly different for both the phantoms (p < 0.001). A significant difference was also found between group III and IV for both phantoms (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The balloon sheath seems to be feasible for clinical use, and it has good clinical potential for gastrointestinal guidance and access, particularly when the inflated balloon is placed in the gastric body.
OBJECTIVE: We wanted to evaluate the feasibility and usefulness of a newly designed balloon sheath for gastrointestinal guidance and access by conducting a phantom study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The newly designed balloon sheath consisted of an introducer sheath and a supporting balloon. A coil catheter was advanced over a guide wire into two gastroduodenal phantoms (one was with stricture and one was without stricture); group I was without a balloon sheath, group ll was with a deflated balloon sheath, and groups III and IV were with an inflated balloon and with the balloon in the fundus and body, respectively. Each test was performed for 2 minutes and it was repeated 10 times in each group by two researchers, and the positions reached by the catheter tip were recorded. RESULTS: Both researchers had better performances with both phantoms in order of group IV, III, II and I. In group IV, both researchers advanced the catheter tip through the fourth duodenal segment in both the phantoms. In group I, however, the catheter tip never reached the third duodenal segment in both the phantoms by both the researchers. The numeric values for the four study groups were significantly different for both the phantoms (p < 0.001). A significant difference was also found between group III and IV for both phantoms (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The balloon sheath seems to be feasible for clinical use, and it has good clinical potential for gastrointestinal guidance and access, particularly when the inflated balloon is placed in the gastric body.