Park Chan Hyuk, Han Dong Soo, Jeong Jae Yoon, Eun Chang Soo, Yoo Kyo-Sang, Jeon Yong Cheol, Sohn Joo Hyun
Department of Internal Medicine, Guri Hospital, Hanyang University College of Medicine, 153 Gyeongchun-ro, Guri, 471-701, Republic of Korea.
Dig Dis Sci. 2016 Mar;61(3):825-34. doi: 10.1007/s10620-015-3942-z. Epub 2015 Nov 5.
Although propofol-based sedation can be used during emergency endoscopy for upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB), there is a potential risk of sedation-related adverse events, especially in patients with variceal bleeding.
We compared adverse events related to propofol-based sedation during emergency endoscopy between patients with non-variceal and variceal bleeding.
Clinical records of patients who underwent emergency endoscopy for UGIB under sedation were reviewed. Adverse events, including shock, hypoxia, and paradoxical reaction, were compared between the non-variceal and variceal bleeding groups.
Of 703 endoscopies, 539 and 164 were performed for non-variceal and variceal bleeding, respectively. Shock was more common in patients with variceal bleeding compared to those with non-variceal bleeding (12.2 vs. 3.5%, P < 0.001). All patients except one recovered from shock after normal saline hydration, and emergency endoscopy could be finished without interruption in most cases. The incidence of hypoxia and paradoxical reaction did not differ based on the source of bleeding (non-variceal bleeding vs. variceal bleeding: hypoxia, 3.5 vs. 1.8%, P = 0.275; paradoxical reaction interfering with the procedure, 4.1 vs. 5.5%, P = 0.442).
Although shock was more common in patients with variceal bleeding compared to those with non-variceal bleeding, most cases could be controlled without procedure interruption. Paradoxical reaction, rather than shock or hypoxia, was the most common cause of procedure interruption in patients with variceal bleeding, but the rate did not differ between patients with non-variceal and variceal bleeding.
尽管丙泊酚镇静可用于上消化道出血(UGIB)的急诊内镜检查,但存在与镇静相关的不良事件的潜在风险,尤其是在静脉曲张出血患者中。
我们比较了非静脉曲张性出血和静脉曲张性出血患者在急诊内镜检查期间丙泊酚镇静相关的不良事件。
回顾了在镇静下接受UGIB急诊内镜检查的患者的临床记录。比较了非静脉曲张性出血组和静脉曲张性出血组的不良事件,包括休克、缺氧和反常反应。
在703例内镜检查中,分别有539例和164例是针对非静脉曲张性出血和静脉曲张性出血进行的。与非静脉曲张性出血患者相比,静脉曲张性出血患者休克更为常见(12.2%对3.5%,P<0.001)。除1例患者外,所有患者经生理盐水补液后均从休克中恢复,并且在大多数情况下急诊内镜检查可以不间断地完成。缺氧和反常反应的发生率根据出血来源不同而无差异(非静脉曲张性出血与静脉曲张性出血:缺氧,3.5%对1.8%,P=0.275;干扰操作的反常反应,4.1%对5.5%,P=0.442)。
尽管与非静脉曲张性出血患者相比,静脉曲张性出血患者休克更为常见,但大多数病例可以在不中断操作的情况下得到控制。反常反应而非休克或缺氧是静脉曲张性出血患者操作中断的最常见原因,但非静脉曲张性出血和静脉曲张性出血患者的发生率无差异。