Digestive diseases and sciences · 2024
Safety of Endoscopy in Cirrhosis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Edelson Jerome C, Rockey Don C
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic procedures are among the most commonly performed medical procedures and the serious adverse event rate is reported to be 1-3 adverse events per 1000 procedures.
AIMS: Here, we have examined the safety of endoscopy specifically in cirrhotic populations.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective case (cirrhosis)-control (non-cirrhosis) study of the outcomes of patients undergoing endoscopy in a large academic medical center. The primary outcome was a procedural or post-procedural complication. Complete clinical data were collected for all patients undergoing endoscopic procedures-including esophagogastroduodenoscopy, colonoscopy, EUS, ERCP, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and others. Cirrhosis was carefully defined based on clinico-pathological grounds.
RESULTS: We identified 16,779 patients who underwent endoscopy, including 2618 with cirrhosis and 14,161 without cirrhosis. There were 167 complications (0.99%), which included 15/2618 cirrhotics (0.6%) and 152/14,161 (1.1%) non-cirrhotics. The most common complications were cardiopulmonary (including hypotension and hypoxemia) found in 67% of patients; procedurally related complications occurred in 19% of patients. The complication rate was the same or lower in cirrhotics than controls undergoing esophagogastroduodenoscopy (0.6% vs 0.9%, p = 0.03), colonoscopy (0.6% vs. 0.6%, p = NS), or ERCP (0.7% vs. 1.4%, p = NS) Logistic regression analysis identified the following features to be associated with an increased risk of having a complication: inpatient status, history of myocardial infarction, and an EUS procedure.
CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopy in cirrhotic patients was as safe or safer than non-cirrhotic patients undergoing similar procedures.
AIMS: Here, we have examined the safety of endoscopy specifically in cirrhotic populations.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective case (cirrhosis)-control (non-cirrhosis) study of the outcomes of patients undergoing endoscopy in a large academic medical center. The primary outcome was a procedural or post-procedural complication. Complete clinical data were collected for all patients undergoing endoscopic procedures-including esophagogastroduodenoscopy, colonoscopy, EUS, ERCP, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and others. Cirrhosis was carefully defined based on clinico-pathological grounds.
RESULTS: We identified 16,779 patients who underwent endoscopy, including 2618 with cirrhosis and 14,161 without cirrhosis. There were 167 complications (0.99%), which included 15/2618 cirrhotics (0.6%) and 152/14,161 (1.1%) non-cirrhotics. The most common complications were cardiopulmonary (including hypotension and hypoxemia) found in 67% of patients; procedurally related complications occurred in 19% of patients. The complication rate was the same or lower in cirrhotics than controls undergoing esophagogastroduodenoscopy (0.6% vs 0.9%, p = 0.03), colonoscopy (0.6% vs. 0.6%, p = NS), or ERCP (0.7% vs. 1.4%, p = NS) Logistic regression analysis identified the following features to be associated with an increased risk of having a complication: inpatient status, history of myocardial infarction, and an EUS procedure.
CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopy in cirrhotic patients was as safe or safer than non-cirrhotic patients undergoing similar procedures.