Functional lumen imaging probe use in a high-volume practice: Practical and technical implications

Table 4 Patient and functional lumen imaging probe procedure details by balloon type, n (%)/mean ± SD

Balloon	EF-322 (n = 254, 70.4%)	EF-325 (n = 107, 29.6%)
Procedure datea
9/2017-9/2018	10 (3.9)	58 (54.2)
10/2017-10/2018	97 (38.2)	39 (36.5)
11/2018-11/2019	147 (57.9)	10 (9.4)
Patient details
Age	54.7 ± 16.0	56.0 ± 16.9
Sex
Male	92 (36.2)	41 (38.3)
Female	162 (63.8)	66 (61.7)
Race
White	144 (56.7)	73 (68.2)
Black	10 (3.9)	4 (3.7)
Hispanic	28 (11.0)	8 (7.5)
Asian	35 (13.8)	7 (6.5)
Other	31 (12.2)	13 (12.2)
Unknown	6 (2.4)	2 (1.9)
Indicationa
Abnormal imaging	6 (2.4)	1 (0.9)
Abnormal manometry	38 (15.0)	29 (27.1)
Achalasia pre therapy	17 (6.7)	10 (9.4)
Achalasia post therapy	26 (10.2)	25 (23.4)
Dysphagia	86 (33.9)	30 (28.0)
EoE	22 (8.7)	5 (4.7)
GERD	53 (20.9)	7 (6.5)
Other	6 (2.4)	0 (0)
Opioid use	43 (16.9)	18 (16.8)
Prior foregut surgerya	67 (26.4)	53 (49.5)
Procedure details
Anesthesia use	127 (50)	49 (45.8)
Moderate sedation	127 (50)	58 (54.2)
Midazolam dose (mg), (median)	5	6
Fentanyl dose (mcg), (median)	125	125
Procedure time (minute)
Anesthesia	22.3 ± 7.6	22.0 ± 11.4
Moderate sedation	17.5 ± 5.7	15.9 ± 7.6

^aP < 0.01, indicates a statistically significant difference group.

EoE: Eosinophilic esophagitis; GERD: Gastroesophageal reflux disease.