Midazolam with meperidine and dexmedetomidine vs. midazolam with meperidine for sedation during ERCP: prospective, randomized, double-blinded trial.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIM: The combination of midazolam and opioid has been widely used as a standard sedative regimen for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Following recent evidence that dexmedetomidine may exert a synergistic effect in combination with midazolam, this study compared the sedative effect and adverse events of midazolam - meperidine - dexmedetomidine (MMD) and midazolam - meperidine during ERCP. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 110 patients who were scheduled for ERCP were prospectively enrolled and randomly assigned, in a double-blind manner, to the MMD (n = 53) or midazolam - meperidine (n = 57) groups. Each patient received an intravenous (IV) bolus dose of midazolam and meperidine (0.06 mg/kg and 50 mg, 30 % reduction and 25 mg for patients aged ≥ 65 years, respectively). To this dose, a continuous IV infusion of dexmedetomidine (1 µg/kg/h; MMD group) or the same volume of normal saline (midazolam - meperidine group) was added. The sedation level (Ramsay Sedation Scale [RSS]) as well as hemodynamic and respiratory changes were assessed. RESULTS: Adequate sedation (RSS ≥ 3) was maintained during ERCP in 75.5 % and 36.8 % of the MMD and midazolam - meperidine group, respectively (P < 0.001). RSS scores were significantly higher in the MMD group (P < 0.001). Intraoperative bispectral index scores were significantly lower in the MMD group (P < 0.001) than in the midazolam - meperidine group. Lower additional (P = 0.001) and total (P = 0.003) doses of midazolam were required in the MMD group. Patients in the MMD group showed lower pain scores (P < 0.001) and higher satisfaction scores (P < 0.001). Desaturation occurred more frequently in the midazolam - meperidine group (11 vs. 1; P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of dexmedetomidine to the midazolam - meperidine regimen provided better sedative efficacy and a superior safety profile during ERCP compared with a midazolam - meperidine regimen.This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT01404689).

Presence of coronary artery disease increases the risk of biliary events in patients with asymptomatic gallstones.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Propensity score indicates a probability of having a confounding factor. It is used to match each patient with the closest propensity score between two groups, which is known as propensity score matching. This study aimed to evaluate the gallstone-related biliary events, defined as biliary colic and acute cholecystitis between coronary artery disease (CAD) and non-CAD patients using propensity score matching. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study evaluated 267 asymptomatic gallstone patients with CAD and 459 asymptomatic gallstone patients without CAD from March 2003 to December 2009 at two tertiary teaching hospitals in the Republic of Korea. After propensity score matching, total 378 patients, including 126 in study group (with CAD) and 252 in control group (without CAD), were evaluated. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 47 months, overall gallstone-related biliary event rate was 33.5% in the study group and 27.5% in the control group. The 5-year cumulative rates were 25.3% versus 17.7% in gallstone-related biliary event and 10.9% versus 1.6% in acute cholecystitis (study versus control group). After propensity score adjustment, the risk of gallstone-related biliary events in the CAD patients significantly increased (hazard ratio 2.11, 95% confidence interval 1.14-3.90, P = 0.017 in matched patients). CONCLUSION: In patients with asymptomatic gallstones, the coexistence of CAD can increase the risk of gallstone-related biliary events, particularly acute cholecystitis. Therefore, gallstone patients with CAD should be carefully monitored, even if they are asymptomatic.

Management for CBD stone-related mild to moderate acute cholangitis: urgent versus elective ERCP.

BACKGROUND: There is no doubt that urgent biliary decompression needs to be done in case of severe acute cholangitis. However, it remains to be determined how early biliary decompression should be performed and elective intervention would be comparable to urgent intervention, in case of mild to moderate choledocholithiasis associated cholangitis. METHODS: One hundred ninety-five patients were enrolled who were diagnosed with mild to moderate cholangitis with common bile duct (CBD) stones between January 2006 and August 2010. They were divided into two groups according to door to intervention time, and urgent (≤24 h, n = 130) versus elective (>24 h, n = 82). Primary outcomes of this study were technical success rate (CBD stones removal) and clinical success rate (improvement of cholangitis) between the two groups. Hospital stay and intervention-related complications were also evaluated. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in technical, clinical success rate and intervention-related complications between the urgent and elective groups (P = 0.737, 0.285, 0.398, respectively). Patients in the urgent group had significantly shorter hospitalization than in the elective group (6.8 vs. 9.2 days, P < 0.001), and furthermore, intervention to discharge time was also significantly shorter by 1.1 days in the urgent group (P = 0.035). In terms of laboratory parameters, initial CRP level was the only factor correlated with hospital stay and intervention to discharge time. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that urgent ERCP would be recommended in the management of patients with CBD stone-related mild to moderate acute cholangitis because of the advantage of short hospital stay and intervention to discharge time.

Preventive saline irrigation of the bile duct after the endoscopic removal of common bile duct stones.

BACKGROUND: Small stone fragments after an endoscopic stone extraction for choledocholithiasis may act as the nidus for recurrent choledocholithiasis. Therefore, efforts to eliminate the nidus might reduce the recurrence of choledocholithiasis and cholangitis related to choledocholithiasis. AIMS: The purpose of this study was to determine whether an additional preventive saline irrigation of the bile duct after the endoscopic removal of common bile duct stones would decrease residual stones and the recurrence of cholangitis. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed for the consecutively collected data about the patients who underwent the complete endoscopic treatment for common bile duct stone. RESULTS: Among 99 patients, 45 patients underwent saline irrigation. Residual stones were detected in 18 patients (18.2 %). The incidences of residual stones were 8.9 % (4 of 45 patients) in the irrigation group and 25.9 % (14 of 54 patients) in the non-irrigation group (P = 0.037). In multivariate analysis, preventive saline irrigation was found to be the only significant factor for the decrease of residual stones (HR = 0.258, P = 0.039). When analyzing the occurrence of recurrent cholangitis and the procedure related to complications, there were no significant differences according to the performance of preventive saline irrigation of the bile duct. CONCLUSIONS: Preventive saline irrigation could reduce the residual common bile duct stones without complications.

Risk factors of organ failure in patients with bacteremic cholangitis.

BACKGROUND: Bacteremic cholangitis carries a high mortality rate of up to 10 % in relation to organ failure (OF), including septic shock. AIM: The purpose of this study was to elucidate predictive factors for OF in bacteremic cholangitis. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients diagnosed with acute cholangitis and proven bacteremia from 2003 to 2011 was performed. Comprehensive clinical and laboratory data of 211 patients were analyzed. RESULTS: There were 42 cases (19.9 %) of OF and 5 deaths (2.4 %). In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, significant predictive factors for OF were successful biliary decompression, presence of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase organism (ESBL), higher total bilirubin, and higher blood urea nitrogen (BUN) level at admission with odds ratios (ORs) of 0.129, 6.793, 1.148, and 1.089, respectively. Subgroup analysis of 165 patients who underwent biliary decompression before an event (with OF: 20, without OF: 145) was performed to elucidate the risk factors for organ failure even after successful biliary drainage. Variables significantly associated with OF included ESBL and BUN (OR = 4.123 and 1.177, respectively). We developed a scoring system with regression coefficient of each significant variable. The organ failure score was calculated using the following equation: (1.4 × ESBL) + (0.2 × BUN). This scoring system for predicting OF was highly sensitive (85.0 %) and specific (83.4 %). CONCLUSIONS: Biliary decompression, ESBL, total bilirubin, and BUN are prognostic determinants in patients with bacteremic cholangitis. An organ failure scoring system may allow clinicians to identify groups with poor prognosis even after successful biliary decompression.

[Comparison among conventional 4 L polyethylene glycol, split method of 4 L polyethylene glycol and combination of 2 L polyethylene glycol and sodium phosphate solution for colonoscopy preparation].

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The aim of this study was to compare polyethylene glycol (PEG) 4 L, split method of PEG 4 L and PEG 2 L plus sodium phosphate (NaP) in the aspect of bowel preparation quality, safety, patients' compliance and preference. METHODS: Total 249 subjects were prospectively enrolled and received bowel preparation for colonoscopy from August to October in 2010; PEG 4 L (93 subjects), split method of 4 L PEG (74 subjects) and PEG 2 L plus NaP 90 mL group (82 subjects). To investigate the completion, preference for bowel preparation and safety, a questionnaire survey was conducted before colonoscopy. RESULTS: There were no significant intergroup differences in the aspect of completion of preparation, cecal intubation time and success rate. Satisfaction and preference were higher in PEG 2 L plus NaP 90 mL and split method of 4 L PEG compared with PEG 4 L. In the aspect of the bowel preparation quality PEG 4 L showed significantly higher quality in the morning colonoscopy (p<0.001). However, in the afternoon colonoscopy PEG 2 L plus NaP 90 mL showed better result than PEG 4 L (p=0.009). Hyperphosphatemia was most frequently observed in PEG 2 L plus NaP 90 mL, but no severe adverse events occurred (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: PEG 4 L showed better result than split method of 4 L PEG or PEG 2 L plus NaP 90 mL in the aspect of bowel preparation quality and safety.