Huang Robert J, Perumpail Ryan B, Thosani Nirav, Cheung Ramsey, Friedland Shai
Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, CA.
Department of Medicine, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, CA.
Endosc Int Open. 2016 Sep;4(9):E947-52. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-111317. Epub 2016 Aug 8.
Cirrhotic patients are at a theoretically increased risk of bleeding. The safety of polypectomy in cirrhosis is poorly defined.
We performed a retrospective review of patients with cirrhosis who underwent colonoscopic polypectomy at a tertiary-care hospital. Patient characteristics and polyp data were collected. Development of complications including immediate bleeding, delayed bleeding, hospitalization, blood transfusion, perforation, and death were recorded to 30-day follow-up. Clinical characteristics between bleeders and non-bleeders were compared, and predictors of bleeding were determined.
A total of 307 colonoscopies with 638 polypectomies were identified. Immediate bleeding occurred in 7.5 % (95 % CI 4.6 % - 10.4 %) and delayed bleeding occurred in 0.3 % (95 % CI 0.0 % - 0.9 %) of colonoscopies. All cases of immediate bleeding were controlled endoscopically and none resulted in serious complication. The rate of hospitalization was 0.7 % (95 % CI 0.0 % - 1.6 %) and repeat colonoscopy 0.3 % (95 % CI 0.0 % - 0.9 %); no cases of perforation, blood transfusion, or death occurred. Lower platelet count, higher INR, presence of ascites, and presence of esophageal varices were associated with increased risk of bleeding. Use of electrocautery was associated with a lower risk of immediate bleeding. There was no significant difference between bleeding and non-bleeding polyps with regard to size, morphology, and histology.
Colonoscopy with polypectomy appears safe in patients with cirrhosis. There is a low risk of major complications. The risk of immediate bleeding appears higher than an average risk population; however, most bleeding is self-limited or can be controlled endoscopically. Bleeding tends to occur with more advanced liver disease. Both the sequelae of portal hypertension and coagulation abnormalities are predictive of bleeding.
肝硬化患者理论上出血风险增加。肝硬化患者息肉切除的安全性尚不明确。
我们对一家三级医疗中心医院接受结肠镜息肉切除术的肝硬化患者进行了回顾性研究。收集了患者特征和息肉数据。记录至30天随访时包括即时出血、延迟出血、住院、输血、穿孔和死亡等并发症的发生情况。比较了出血者与未出血者的临床特征,并确定了出血的预测因素。
共识别出307例结肠镜检查及638例息肉切除术。结肠镜检查中即时出血发生率为7.5%(95%置信区间4.6% - 10.4%),延迟出血发生率为0.3%(95%置信区间0.0% - 0.9%)。所有即时出血病例均经内镜控制,无一导致严重并发症。住院率为0.7%(95%置信区间0.0% - 1.6%),重复结肠镜检查率为0.3%(95%置信区间0.0% - 0.9%);未发生穿孔、输血或死亡病例。血小板计数较低、国际标准化比值(INR)较高、存在腹水以及存在食管静脉曲张与出血风险增加相关。使用电灼术与即时出血风险较低相关。出血性息肉与非出血性息肉在大小、形态和组织学方面无显著差异。
肝硬化患者行结肠镜息肉切除术似乎是安全的。严重并发症风险较低。即时出血风险似乎高于一般风险人群;然而,大多数出血是自限性的或可经内镜控制。出血倾向于在更晚期肝病患者中发生。门静脉高压后遗症和凝血异常均为出血的预测因素。