Safety and risk factors for difficult endoscopist-directed ERCP sedation in daily practice: a hospital-based case-control study.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data concerning endoscopist-directed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography deep sedation. The aim of this study was to establish the safety and risk factors for difficult sedation in daily practice. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Hospital-based, frequency matched case-control study. All patients were identified from a database of 1,008 patients between 2014 and 2015. The cases were those with difficult sedations. This concept was defined based on the combination of the receipt of high-doses of midazolam or propofol, poor tolerance, use of reversal agents or sedation-related adverse events. The presence of different factors was evaluated to determine whether they predicted difficult sedation. RESULTS: One-hundred and eighty-nine patients (63 cases, 126 controls) were included. Cases were classified in terms of high-dose requirements (n = 35, 55.56%), sedation-related adverse events (n = 14, 22.22%), the use of reversal agents (n = 13, 20.63%) and agitation/discomfort (n = 8, 12.7%). Concerning adverse events, the total rate was 1.39%, including clinically relevant hypoxemia (n = 11), severe hypotension (n = 2) and paradoxical reactions to midazolam (n = 1). The rate of hypoxemia was higher in patients under propofol combined with midazolam than in patients with propofol alone (2.56% vs. 0.8%, p < 0.001). Alcohol consumption (OR: 2.674 [CI 95%: 1.098-6.515], p = 0.030), opioid consumption (OR: 2.713 [CI 95%: 1.096-6.716], p = 0.031) and the consumption of other psychoactive drugs (OR: 2.015 [CI 95%: 1.017-3.991], p = 0.045) were confirmed to be independent risk factors for difficult sedation. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopist-directed deep sedation during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is safe. The presence of certain factors should be assessed before the procedure to identify patients who are high-risk for difficult sedation.

Association between bacteremia due to Streptococcus gallolyticus subsp. gallolyticus (Streptococcus bovis I) and colorectal neoplasia: a case-control study.

BACKGROUND: The association between bacteremia by Streptococcus gallolyticus subsp. gallolyticus (SGG) and colorectal neoplasia (CRN) is well established but the frequency of the association varies widely in different studies. We conducted a case-control study to assess the association between SGG bacteremia and CRN. METHODS: An analysis of all SGG bacteremias was performed during the period 1988-2011. The frequency of CRN in patients with SGG bacteremia was compared with the frequency of CRN in a symptomatic control group of patients matched at a 1:2 ratio for gender and age (±3 years) without S. bovis bacteremia and personal history of CRN and with increased risk of CRN (by the presence of symptoms, signs, or test suspicious of colonic pathology or by family history of CRN). RESULTS: One hundred nine cases of SGG bacteremia were detected (mean age, 66 years; 87% male). Colonoscopy was performed in 98 cases, diagnosing 69 cases of CRN: 57 adenomas (39 advanced adenomas) and 12 invasive carcinomas. Only 4 cases had suspected CRN before the blood culture. The prevalence of CRN was higher in patients with SGG bacteremia than in the 196 control patients (70% vs 32%; odds ratio [OR], 5.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.0-8.6). This difference was not significant when comparing nonadvanced adenomas (19% vs 12%), but we found significant differences in advanced adenomas (40% vs 16%; OR, 3.5; 95% CI, 2.0-6.1) and invasive carcinomas (12% vs 5%; OR, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.2-6.9). CONCLUSIONS: The frequency of CRN among SGG infected patients is significantly increased compared with symptomatic age-matched controls, indicating that SGG infection is a strong indicator for underlying occult malignancy.

Safety and risk factors for difficult endoscopist-directed ERCP sedation in daily practice: a hospital-based case-control study

Background: There are limited data concerning endoscopistdirected endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography deep sedation. The aim of this study was to establish the safety and risk factors for difficult sedation in daily practice. Patients and methods: Hospital-based, frequency matched case-control study. All patients were identified from a database of 1,008 patients between 2014 and 2015. The cases were those with difficult sedations. This concept was defined based on the combination of the receipt of high-doses of midazolam or propofol, poor tolerance, use of reversal agents or sedation-related adverse events. The presence of different factors was evaluated to determine whether they predicted difficult sedation. Results: One-hundred and eighty-nine patients (63 cases, 126 controls) were included. Cases were classified in terms of high-dose requirements (n = 35, 55.56%), sedation-related adverse events (n = 14, 22.22%), the use of reversal agents (n = 13, 20.63%) and agitation/discomfort (n = 8, 12.7%). Concerning adverse events, the total rate was 1.39%, including clinically relevant hypoxemia (n = 11), severe hypotension (n = 2) and paradoxical reactions to midazolam (n = 1). The rate of hypoxemia was higher in patients under propofol combined with midazolam than in patients with propofol alone (2.56% vs. 0.8%, p < 0.001). Alcohol consumption (OR: 2.674 [CI 95%: 1.098-6.515], p = 0.030), opioid consumption (OR: 2.713 [CI 95%: 1.096-6.716], p = 0.031) and the consumption of other psychoactive drugs (OR: 2.015 [CI 95%: 1.017-3.991], p = 0.045) were confirmed to be independent risk factors for difficult sedation. Conclusions: Endoscopist-directed deep sedation during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is safe. The presence of certain factors should be assessed before the procedure to identify patients who are high-risk for difficult sedation (AU)

No disponible

Hepatopatía glicogénica: una causa infrecuente y reversible de aumento de transaminasas en el paciente diabético. Caso clínico / Glycogenic hepatopathy: A rare and reversible cause of elevated transaminases in diabetic patients. Case report

No disponible