Complications Associated With Anesthesia Services in Endoscopic Procedures Among Patients With Cirrhosis

Safety of Endoscopy in Cirrhosis

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.

Safety and tolerability of esketamine in propofol based sedation for endoscopic variceal ligation with or without injection sclerotherapy: Randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

Esketamine is an S (+) enantiomer of ketamine with greater potency and similar psychomimetic effects compared to racemic ketamine. We aimed to explore the safety of esketamine in different doses as an adjuvant to propofol in patients undergoing endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) with or without injection sclerotherapy.

METHODS

One hundred patients were randomized to receive sedation with propofol 1.5 mg/kg in combination with sufentanil 0.1 μg/kg (group S), esketamine 0.2 mg/kg (group E0.2), esketamine 0.3 mg/kg (group E0.3), or esketamine 0.4 mg/kg (group E0.4) for EVL (n = 25 each). Hemodynamic and respiratory parameters were recorded during the procedure. The primary outcome was the incidence of hypotension; secondary outcomes included the incidence of desaturation, positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS) after the procedure, pain score after the procedure, and secretion volume.

RESULTS

The incidence of hypotension was significantly lower in groups E0.2 (36%), E0.3 (20%), and E0.4 (24%) than in group S (72%). The incidence of SpO2  ≤94% was significantly lower in group E0.4 (4%) than in group S (32%). No significant intergroup difference was found in the PANSS assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

Combining 0.4 mg/kg esketamine with propofol sedation was optimal to facilitate EVL with stable hemodynamic status and better respiratory function during the procedure, without significant psychomimetic side-effects.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (Trial ID: ChiCTR2100047033, http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=127518).

General anesthesia in patients with hepatic encephalopathy and acute variceal bleeding undergoing endoscopic treatment: A retrospective study

The management of cirrhotic patient with encephalopathy and acute variceal bleeding (AVB) remains a clinical challenge with a high mortality. Early endoscopic therapies are frequently applied in patients with AVB. However, the application of general anesthesia in endoscopic surgery for patients with hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is pretty challenging. The present study aimed to evaluate the possible effect of general anesthesia with tracheal intubation on patient complicated with encephalopathy and AVB during endoscopic procedure. Thirty-six cirrhotic patients with encephalopathy and AVB were retrospectively studied, 14 patients underwent endoscopic treatment under general anesthesia with tracheal intubation, and 22 patients received pharmacological treatment, or and endoscopic therapy without general anesthesia served as the control group. Routine clinical and laboratory data were collected. The total mortality rate was 13.9% (5/36), 2 (14.3%) in the anesthesia group, 3 (13.6%) in the control group. The child-Pugh class of death cases were all grade C, 3 (60%) of them were in the stage IV of HE. The stage of HE was all improved in the 2 groups, 12 (85.8 %) patients were totally recovered from consciousness disturbance in the anesthesia group and 16 (72.7 %) in the control group respectively, the difference between the 2 groups was not significant (P>0.05). Except the death cases, there were still 3 patients in the control group had impaired consciousness at discharge. Child-Pugh score, Child-Pugh class and the stage of HE in the anesthesia group were significantly improved at discharge compared with those before operation. General anesthesia does not aggravate the severity of encephalopathy, and endoscopic treatment under general anesthesia with tracheal intubation is effective for HE patients complicated with AVB.

Sedation during endoscopic procedures: a Hellenic Society of Gastroenterology Position Statement

Administration of sedation by non-anesthesiologists during gastrointestinal endoscopy remains highly controversial in Greece. The aim of this set of 16 position statements prepared by experts in the field on behalf of the Hellenic Society of Gastroenterology is to aid gastroenterologists in their everyday clinical practice and provide evidence for the best use of drugs for the sedation of patients who undergo an endoscopy. The statements address issues such as the level of sedation required, the best drugs used, their mode of action, their side-effects and possible ways to counter their action, and were adopted if at least 80% of all participants agreed upon them.

Efficient Initial Eradication of Large Esophageal Varices by Balloon-compression Endoscopic Injection Sclerotherapy

BACKGROUND

The management of large esophageal varices (EVs) remains challenging because of the difficulty of endoscopic variceal ligation and fatal post-endoscopic variceal ligation bleeding ulcers. The current study evaluated the efficacy and safety of balloon-compression endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (bc-EIS) in the treatment of large EVs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study included 105 patients with cirrhosis exhibiting large EVs (64 in the bc-EIS group and 41 in the EIS group). Primary outcomes included the initial rate of variceal eradication and intraoperative bleeding signs. Secondary outcomes included incidences of rebleeding, mortality, complications, and optimal time of balloon-compression (bc).

RESULTS

The initial rate of variceal eradication in the bc-EIS group was significantly higher than that in the EIS group (46.9 vs. 24.4%; P=0.021). The incidence of intraoperative bleeding, which was represented as oozing and spurting, in the bc-EIS group was markedly lower than that in the EIS group (43.8 vs. 61.0% and 9.4 vs. 39.0%, respectively; P=0.043). Patients in the bc-EIS group showed a significantly lower incidence of rebleeding (0.0 vs. 17.1%; P=0.001). However, no significant difference in mortality rate was observed between different groups. Chest pain or discomfort tended to be more common in the EIS group than in the bc-EIS group (58.5 vs. 17.2%; P=0.001). The cut-off value of 11.5-minutes appeared to have a maximum combined sensitivity and specificity of 80.0% and 58.8%, respectively. The area under the curve was 0.708 (95% confidence interval =0.576-0.839; P=0.004).

CONCLUSION

bc-EIS could achieve a higher variceal eradication rate and milder intraoperative bleeding signs in large EVs. Furthermore, 11.5-minutes appeared to be the optimal compression time in bc-EIS.

Pre-procedural Preparation and Sedation for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy in Patients with Advanced Liver Disease

Gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients with advanced liver disease poses various challenges, a major one being procedural sedation and its associated considerations. While sedation during endoscopy can improve patient comfort, decrease anxiety, and facilitate procedural completion, in patients with advanced liver disease, it is also associated with substantial and unique risks due to alterations in drug metabolism and other factors. As such, the choice of sedative agent(s) and related logistics may require careful inter-disciplinary planning and individualized considerations. Furthermore, a large proportion of agents require dose reductions and particular monitoring of the vital signs, level of consciousness, and other indices. In the present review, we provide a contemporary overview of procedural sedation considerations, commonly used intravenous sedatives, and second-line as well as novel sedatives for gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients with advanced liver disease.

Systematic review with meta-analysis: incidence of variceal hemorrhage in patients with cirrhosis undergoing transesophageal echocardiography

BACKGROUND

The presence of esophageal varices is considered a relative contraindication to transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) by cardiology professional societies, so gastroenterologists are often consulted to perform upper endoscopy prior to TEE in patients with cirrhosis.

AIM

To perform a systematic review to quantify the risk of bleeding complications in patients with cirrhosis following TEE.

METHODS

Two reviewers searched Ovid MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process and EMBASE databases from January 1992 to May 2021 for studies reporting bleeding complications from TEE in patients with cirrhosis. We calculated the pooled incidence rate of bleeding events using the metaprop command with a random effect model.

RESULTS

We identified 21 studies comprising 4050 unique patients with cirrhosis; 9 studies (n = 3015) assessed the risk of intraoperative TEE during liver transplant (LT) and 12 studies (n = 1035) assessed bleeding risk in patients undergoing TEE for other indications. The pooled incidence of bleeding post-TEE was 0.37% (95% CI 0.04-0.94%) across all studies. Bleeding complications were low among patients undergoing TEE during LT as well as those undergoing TEE for other diagnostic reasons (0.97% vs. 0.004%) and among studies with mean MELD >18 compared to those with mean MELD <18 (0.43% vs. 0.08%). Few studies had a comparator arm, and data on patient-level factors impacting bleeding complications (including degree of liver dysfunction and coagulopathy) were limited across studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of bleeding complications following TEE is low in patients with cirrhosis, suggesting TEE is safe and risk stratification with upper endoscopy may not be necessary.

Small varices in chronic liver diseases

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Gastroesophageal varices are common complications of chronic liver diseases (CLDs) and portal hypertension. Small varices have the risk of progressing to larger varices, causing bleeding or even death. Thus, early detection and appropriate management of small varices are necessary. The purpose of this review is to summarize the advance in the recent 5years about diagnosing and managing the small varices in CLDs.

RECENT FINDINGS

The diagnosing methods of small varices in recent studies include improved endoscopic examinations, such as capsule endoscopy, and many noninvasive methods, including blood tests, ultrasound, computed tomography and magnetic resonance. For the management of small varices, though it is controversial, prevention using nonselective beta-blockers is still an essential part.

SUMMARY

In this review, we summarize the classification of varices, the invasive and noninvasive diagnostic methods, their performances, and the emerging progression in the management of small varices in the recent 5 years. We hope that this review provides relevant information to understand better and appropriately manage small varices.

Evaluating the impact of frailty on periprocedural adverse events and mortality among patients with GI bleeding

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Frailty is a known predictor of mortality and adverse events in the inpatient setting; however, it has not been studied as a modality to assess risk among patients undergoing endoscopy for GI bleeding (GIB). We aimed to determine the association between frailty status and risk of adverse events in hospitalized patients with GIB who underwent endoscopy.

METHODS

We performed a cohort study using the 2016 and 2017 National Inpatient Sample database, using International Classification of Diseases diagnostic codes to identify adult patients with GIB who underwent endoscopic procedures within 2 days of admission and the Hospital Frailty Risk Score to classify patients as frail or nonfrail. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were constructed to assess the predictors of periprocedural adverse events, and marginal standardization analysis was performed to assess for possible interaction between age and frailty.

RESULTS

A total of 757,920 patients met inclusion criteria, of which 44.4% (336,895) were identified as frail and 55.6% (421,025) as nonfrail; 49.2% of frail patients had composite periprocedural adverse events compared with 25.5% of nonfrail patients (P < .001). Frail patients notably had more cardiovascular (32.1% vs 17.1%, P < .001), pulmonary (18.5% vs 4.3%, P < .001), GI (10.1% vs 6.1%, P < .001), and infectious (9.9% vs .7%, P < .001) adverse events compared with nonfrail patients. Frail patients also had higher all-cause inpatient mortality rates (4.8% vs .5%, P < .001). On multivariable analysis, positive frailty status was associated with a 2.13 times increased likelihood of having composite periprocedural adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

In hospitalized patients undergoing endoscopy for GIB, frailty status is associated with increased periprocedural adverse events including all-cause mortality. The use of frailty assessments can thus further guide clinical decision-making when considering endoscopy and risk of adverse events in adult patients with GI hemorrhage.

Propofol vs midazolam sedation for elective endoscopy in patients with cirrhosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Patients with cirrhosis frequently require sedation for elective endoscopic procedures. Several sedation protocols are available, but choosing an appropriate sedative in patients with cirrhosis is challenging.

AIM

To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare propofol and midazolam for sedation in patients with cirrhosis during elective endoscopic procedures in an attempt to understand the best approach.

METHODS

This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using the PRISMA guidelines. Electronic searches were performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Central Cochrane, LILACS databases. Only randomized control trials (RCTs) were included. The outcomes studied were procedure time, recovery time, discharge time, and adverse events (bradycardia, hypotension, and hypoxemia). The risk of bias assessment was performed using the Revised Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool for randomized trials (RoB-2). Quality of evidence was evaluated by GRADEpro. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager.

RESULTS

The search yielded 3,576 records. Out of these, 8 RCTs with a total of 596 patients (302 in the propofol group and 294 in the midazolam group) were included for the final analysis. Procedure time was similar between midazolam and propofol groups (MD: 0.25, 95%CI: -0.64 to 1.13, P = 0.59). Recovery time (MD: -8.19, 95%CI: -10.59 to -5.79, P < 0.00001). and discharge time were significantly less in the propofol group (MD: -12.98, 95%CI: -18.46 to -7.50, P < 0.00001). Adverse events were similar in both groups (RD: 0.02, 95%CI: 0-0.04, P = 0.58). Moreover, no significant difference was found for bradycardia (RD: 0.03, 95%CI: -0.01 to 0.07, P = 0.16), hypotension (RD: 0.03, 95%CI: -0.01 to 0.07, P = 0.17), and hypoxemia (RD: 0.00, 95%CI: -0.04 to 0.04, P = 0.93). Five studies had low risk of bias, two demonstrated some concerns, and one presented high risk. The quality of the evidence was very low for procedure time, recovery time, and adverse events; while low for discharge time.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review and meta-analysis based on RCTs show that propofol has shorter recovery and patient discharge time as compared to midazolam with a similar rate of adverse events. These results suggest that propofol should be the preferred agent for sedation in patients with cirrhosis.