Safety of conscious sedation in patients with sleep apnea in a veteran population

Adverse events in patients with obstructive sleep apnea undergoing procedural sedation in ambulatory settings: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) may be at increased risk for adverse events during procedural sedation, however, there remains a gap in the literature quantifying these risks. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the risk of peri-procedural adverse events in OSA patients undergoing procedural sedation in ambulatory settings, compared to those without OSA.

METHODS

Four databases were systematically searched for studies published from January 1, 2011 to January 4, 2024. The inclusion criteria were: adult patients with OSA undergoing procedural sedation in ambulatory settings, peri-procedural adverse events reported, and control group included. The primary outcome was the incidence of peri-procedural adverse events amongst patients with vs without OSA.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies (27,973 patients) were included. The odds of respiratory adverse events were significantly increased for patients with OSA (OR 1.65, 95 % CI 1.03-2.66, P = 0.04). Furthermore, the odds of requiring an airway maneuver/intervention were significantly greater for patients with OSA (OR 3.28, 95 % CI 1.43-7.51, P = 0.005). The odds of cardiovascular adverse events were not significantly increased for patients with OSA.

CONCLUSION

Patients with OSA undergoing procedural sedation in ambulatory settings had 1.7-fold greater odds of respiratory adverse events and 3.3-fold greater odds of requiring airway maneuvers/interventions.

Predictors of Intraprocedural Respiratory Bronchoscopy Complications

PURPOSE

Sleep apnea can increase adverse outcomes during ambulatory surgery but not during gastrointestinal endoscopy. We hypothesize that STOP-BANG is associated with intraprocedural bronchoscopy respiratory complications.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing bronchoscopy under moderate sedation were prospectively administered the STOP-BANG questionnaire. Participants were assessed for intraprocedural complications including hypoxemia (oxygen saturation≤85%), bradypnea (respiratory rate<8), premature procedure cessation as well as the use of nonrebreather mask, bag-mask ventilation, jaw lift/chin tilt, nasal/oral airway, and naloxone administration. Associations were assessed via logistic regression. Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator was used for multivariable model variable selection.

RESULTS

The 223 participants-mean age 61.1±15.5 years, body mass index 25.4kg/m (interquartile range: 22.4 to 30.7), 50.7% female, and 45.3% inpatient-had a high rate of respiratory complications (37.7%). There were no associations between STOP-BANG score and respiratory complications [odds ratio (OR)=1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.92-1.25]. Asthma was protective in univariable models (OR=0.26, 95% CI: 0.04-0.98), whereas endobronchial ultrasound (OR=2.34, 95% CI: 1.35-4.10) and the number of procedure types (OR=1.24, 95% CI: 1.01-1.51) was associated with increased complications. The following factors were associated with respiratory complications in both multivariable and univariate analyses: increasing age (OR=1.28/decade, 95% CI: 1.03-1.61), baseline oxygen use per each liters per minute (OR=1.57, 95% CI: 1.21-2.09), and bronchoscopy duration (OR=1.20/10 min, 95% CI: 1.08-1.33).

CONCLUSION

Bronchoscopy respiratory complications are common. STOP-BANG was not associated with increased immediate bronchoscopy complication risk. Increasing age, oxygen use, and bronchoscopy duration were associated with respiratory complications; increased vigilance in these circumstances may prevent complications.

Safety of gastrointestinal endoscopy with conscious sedation in obstructive sleep apnea

AIM

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the safety of conscious sedation in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA).

METHODS

A comprehensive electronic search of MEDLINE and EMBASE was performed from inception until March 1, 2015. In an effort to include unpublished data, abstracts from prior gastroenterological society meetings as well as other reference sources were interrogated. After study selection, two authors utilizing a standardized data extraction form collected the data independently. Any disagreements between authors were resolved by consensus among four authors. The methodological quality was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa tool for observational studies. The primary variables of interest included incidence of hypoxia, hypotension, tachycardia, and bradycardia. Continuous data were summarized as odds ratio (OR) and 95%CI and pooled using generic inverse variance under the random-effects model. Heterogeneity between pooled studies was assessed using the I² statistic.

RESULTS

Initial search of MEDLINE and EMBASE identified 357 citations. A search of meeting abstracts did not yield any relevant citations. After systematic review and exclusion consensus meetings, seven studies met the a priori determined inclusion criteria. The overall methodological quality of included studies ranged from moderate to low. No significant differences between OSA patients and controls were identified among any of the study variables: Incidence of hypoxia (7 studies, 3005 patients; OR = 1.11; 95%CI: 0.73-1.11; P = 0.47; I² = 0%), incidence of hypotension (4 studies, 2125 patients; OR = 1.10; 95%CI: 0.75-1.60; P = 0.63; I² = 0%), incidence of tachycardia (3 studies, 2030 patients; OR = 0.94; 95%CI: 0.53-1.65; P = 0.28; I² = 21%), and incidence of bradycardia (3 studies, 2030 patients; OR = 0.88; 95%CI: 0.63-1.22; P = 0.59; I² = 0%).

CONCLUSION

OSA is not a significant risk factor for cardiopulmonary complications in patients undergoing endoscopic procedures with conscious sedation.

Society of Anesthesia and Sleep Medicine Guidelines on Preoperative Screening and Assessment of Adult Patients With Obstructive Sleep Apnea

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

The purpose of the Society of Anesthesia and Sleep Medicine guideline on preoperative screening and assessment of adult patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is to present recommendations based on the available clinical evidence on the topic where possible. As very few well-performed randomized studies in this field of perioperative care are available, most of the recommendations were developed by experts in the field through consensus processes involving utilization of evidence grading to indicate the level of evidence upon which recommendations were based. This guideline may not be appropriate for all clinical situations and all patients. The decision whether to follow these recommendations must be made by a responsible physician on an individual basis. Protocols should be developed by individual institutions taking into account the patients’ conditions, extent of interventions and available resources. This practice guideline is not intended to define standards of care or represent absolute requirements for patient care. The adherence to these guidelines cannot in any way guarantee successful outcomes and is rather meant to help individuals and institutions formulate plans to better deal with the challenges posed by perioperative patients with OSA. These recommendations reflect the current state of knowledge and its interpretation by a group of experts in the field at the time of publication. While these guidelines will be periodically updated, new information that becomes available between updates should be taken into account. Deviations in practice from guidelines may be justifiable and such deviations should not be interpreted as a basis for claims of negligence.

Obstructive Sleep Apnea Is Not Associated with Higher Health Care Use after Colonoscopy under Conscious Sedation

RATIONALE

The use of sedation allows medical procedures to be performed outside the operating room while ensuring patient comfort and a controlled environment to increase the yield of the procedure. There is concern about a higher risk of adverse events with use of sedation in patients with obstructive sleep apnea.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to determine if the presence of obstructive sleep apnea increased the risk of hospitalization and/or health care use after patients received moderate conscious sedation for an elective, ambulatory colonoscopy.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective case-control database and chart review study. We compared hospital admissions, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, and emergency room visits at 24 hours, 7 days, and 30 days in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (n = 3,860) and without obstructive sleep apnea (n = 2,374) who had undergone an elective, ambulatory colonoscopy with sedation.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We found no significant differences in hospital admissions, ICU admissions, or emergency room visits between the two groups at any time point within the 30 days following the procedures. In a sensitivity analysis in which we compared 827 individuals with polysomnographically confirmed sleep apnea with control subjects, there was still no difference in hospital admissions, ICU admissions, or emergency room visits in the 30 days after receiving sedation for the procedure. Outcomes were not different in individuals with various severities of obstructive sleep apnea.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of obstructive sleep apnea was not associated with increased early hospital admissions, ICU admissions, or emergency room visits after colonoscopy with sedation.

Safety of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy With Conscious Sedation in Patients With and Without Obstructive Sleep Apnea

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) undergoing endoscopy with sedation are considered by practitioners to be at a higher risk for cardiopulmonary complications. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the safety of conscious sedation in patients with OSA undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is an IRB-approved prospective cohort study performed at the James A. Haley VA. A total of 248 patients with confirmed moderate or severe OSA by polysomnography and 252 patients without OSA were enrolled. Cardiopulmonary variables such as heart rate, blood pressure, and level of blood oxygen saturation were recorded at 3-minute intervals throughout the endoscopic procedure.

RESULTS

In total, 302 colonoscopies, 119 esophagogastroduodenoscopies, 6 flexible sigmoidoscopies, and 60 esophagogastroduodenoscopy/colonoscopies were performed. None of the patients in the study required endotracheal intubation, pharmacologic reversal, or experienced an adverse outcome as a result of changes in blood pressure, heart rate, or blood oxygen saturation. There were no significant differences in the rate of tachycardia (P=0.749), bradycardia (P=0.438), hypotension (systolic/diastolic, P=0.460; mean arterial pressure, P=0.571), or hypoxia (P=0.787) between groups. The average length of time spent in each procedure and the average dose of sedation administered also did not differ significantly between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the presumed increased risk of cardiopulmonary complications, patients with OSA who undergo endoscopy with conscious sedation have clinically insignificant variations in cardiopulmonary parameters that do not differ from those without OSA. Costly preventative measures in patients with OSA are not warranted.

Post-gastrointestinal endoscopy complications in patients with obstructive sleep apnea or at high risk for sleep apnea: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is becoming increasingly more prevalent with the rise in obesity. Complications from gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy in this patient population have been reported in several studies, but the modest complication rates from these procedures make it difficult to come to definitive conclusions based on single studies. The objective of our study was to systematically review these studies reporting the incidence of post-procedure complications in patients with OSA undergoing endoscopy to determine whether the presence of OSA increases post-procedure complications.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review using the Cochrane Collaboration Methodology. We searched Medline via Ovid, PubMed, Embase, and Evidence Based Medicine Reviews databases from 1950 to August 2013. We rated the quality of evidence for each outcome using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Meta-analysis was done using Review Manager Version 5.0.20.

RESULTS

Our search resulted in seven eligible studies. There was no significant association between diagnosis of OSA and post-GI endoscopy complications including hypoxemia, respiratory distress, variations in blood pressure or heart rate, bradypnea, or need for significant interventions. Subgroup analysis based on the type of GI endoscopy or the type of anesthesia used did not show any significant associations either.

CONCLUSIONS

Obstructive sleep apnea patients and/or patients at high risk for obstructive sleep apnea do not appear to be at increased risk of adverse outcomes from GI endoscopy.

Preoperative screening and perioperative care of the patient with sleep-disordered breathing

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Emerging data are raising concerns that patients with known or suspected obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) are at increased risk for a myriad of perioperative complications. Strategies to identify patients preoperatively with OSA, or at risk for OSA, are being advocated. In addition, approaches to identify patients most at risk for OSA-related postoperative complications have been described. While lacking solid evidence, a number of perioperative management strategies have been proposed for the care of these patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies utilizing different methodologies have provided additional evidence regarding the impact that OSA can have on postoperative outcomes, including increased risk of difficult intubations, adverse pulmonary outcomes, and delirium. Tools, such as the STOP-Bang questionnaire and limited channel monitoring, have been investigated with regards to their utility to identify not only patients at risk for OSA but also those at risk for more severe OSA. Consensus-based guidelines for the perioperative care of OSA patients have recently been published.

SUMMARY

OSA is quite common in patients presenting for elective surgery and has been linked to increased perioperative complications. Attempts to identify these patients preoperatively appear prudent. Protocols on how best to manage these patients are available, although validation of their effectiveness is needed.