Suppr超能文献

门诊结肠镜检查中的麻醉辅助与吸入性肺炎、肠穿孔和脾损伤的风险。

Anesthesia Assistance in Outpatient Colonoscopy and Risk of Aspiration Pneumonia, Bowel Perforation, and Splenic Injury.

机构信息

Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Gastrointestinal Diseases Research Unit, Department of Medicine, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

Gastroenterology. 2018 Jan;154(1):77-85.e3. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2017.08.043. Epub 2017 Sep 1.

Abstract

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The increase in use of anesthesia assistance (AA) to achieve deep sedation with propofol during colonoscopy has significantly increased colonoscopy costs without evidence for increased quality and with possible harm. We investigated the effects of AA on colonoscopy complications, specifically bowel perforation, aspiration pneumonia, and splenic injury.

METHODS

In a population-based cohort study using administrative databases, we studied adults in Ontario, Canada undergoing outpatient colonoscopy from 2005 through 2012. Patient, endoscopist, institution, and procedure factors were derived. The primary outcome was bowel perforation, defined using a validated algorithm. Secondary outcomes were splenic injury and aspiration pneumonia. Using a matched propensity score approach, we matched persons who had colonoscopy with AA (1:1) with those who did not. We used logistic regression models under a generalized estimating equations approach to explore the relationship between AA and outcomes.

RESULTS

Data from 3,059,045 outpatient colonoscopies were analyzed; 862,817 of these included AA. After propensity matching, a cohort of 793,073 patients who had AA and 793,073 without AA was retained for analysis (51% female; 78% were age 50 years or older). Use of AA did not significantly increase risk of perforation (odds ratio [OR], 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84-1.16) or splenic injury (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.62-1.90]. Use of AA was associated with an increased risk of aspiration pneumonia (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.11-2.37).

CONCLUSIONS

In a population-based cohort study, AA for outpatient colonoscopy was associated with a significantly increased risk of aspiration pneumonia, but not bowel perforation or splenic injury. Endoscopists should warn patients, especially those with respiratory compromise, of this risk.

摘要

背景与目的

在结肠镜检查中使用麻醉辅助(AA)以实现异丙酚深度镇静,这显著增加了结肠镜检查的成本,而没有证据表明质量提高,并且可能存在危害。我们调查了 AA 对结肠镜检查并发症的影响,特别是肠穿孔、吸入性肺炎和脾损伤。

方法

在一项使用行政数据库的基于人群的队列研究中,我们研究了 2005 年至 2012 年期间在加拿大安大略省接受门诊结肠镜检查的成年人。患者、内镜医师、机构和程序因素均来源于研究。主要结局是肠穿孔,采用经过验证的算法定义。次要结局是脾损伤和吸入性肺炎。通过匹配倾向评分方法,我们将接受 AA(1:1)的结肠镜检查者与未接受 AA 的结肠镜检查者进行匹配。我们使用广义估计方程方法下的逻辑回归模型来探讨 AA 与结局之间的关系。

结果

分析了 3059045 例门诊结肠镜检查的数据;其中 862817 例包括 AA。经过倾向评分匹配后,保留了一组 793073 例接受 AA 和 793073 例未接受 AA 的患者进行分析(51%为女性;78%为 50 岁或以上)。AA 的使用并未显著增加穿孔(优势比 [OR],0.99;95%置信区间 [CI],0.84-1.16)或脾损伤(OR,1.09;95% CI,0.62-1.90)的风险。AA 的使用与吸入性肺炎的风险增加相关(OR,1.63;95% CI,1.11-2.37)。

结论

在一项基于人群的队列研究中,门诊结肠镜检查中使用 AA 与吸入性肺炎的风险显著增加相关,但与肠穿孔或脾损伤无关。内镜医师应告知患者,特别是有呼吸功能障碍的患者,存在这种风险。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验