The efficacy of on-demand sedation colonoscopy: a STROBE-compliant retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy has been routinely performed with sedation. Previous studies showed that on-demand sedation colonoscopy is acceptable in patients. We aim to compare the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing colonoscopy with and without sedation. METHODS: A prospectively collected retrospective matched cohort study was performed. 290 consecutive patients who underwent colonoscopy without sedation were included into the study. Another 290 patients who underwent colonoscopy with sedation were then selected based on matched sex and age group distribution. Data were collected in a prospective database. Age, sex, race, and procedural variables were collected. Outcomes analyzed included adenoma detection rate, Boston bowel preparation scores, time spent in the recovery room, cecal intubation time, and presence of pain during colonoscopy. RESULTS: A total of 580 patients were included in the study. Of the 290 patients who underwent colonoscopy without sedation, 10 patients (3.45%) required sedation to be administered to complete the scope. Intention-to-treat analysis was performed. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that the administration of sedation was a significant predictor of prolonged recovery time (increase in 34.76 min, 95% CI 29.56-39.55, p < 0.001). Comparing the group who underwent colonoscopy without sedation to the group who underwent colonoscopy with sedation, there was no statistically significant difference in mean cecal intubation time (11.28 vs. 10.38 min, p = 0.129), adenoma detection rates (25.1 vs. 35.8%, p = 0.060), percentage of patients who experienced no pain at all during the procedure (93.5 vs. 93.5%, p = 1.000), and Boston bowel preparation scores (2.23 vs. 2.34, p = 0.370). CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that on-demand sedation colonoscopy can be performed in patients, with a significant decrease in time spent in the recovery room prior to discharge. Cecal intubation time, adenoma detection rates, and percentage of patients experiencing no pain at all during the procedure were similar in both groups of patients.

Continuous wound infusion with ropivacaine alone provides adequate analgesia following laparotomy.

BACKGROUND: Although continuous wound infusion (CWI) with local anaesthetic has been used as an adjunct for pain relief following laparotomy, its use as the main modality has not been studied. This approach negates side effects related to intravenous opioid administration, therefore promoting enhanced recovery from surgery. We conducted this study to investigate the feasibility and efficacy of CWI following laparotomy. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent laparotomy from June 2016 to December 2019 were analysed. All patients were given CWI with only oral supplementation. Pain was assessed based on the numeric rating scale (NRS). RESULTS: One hundred and three patients were analysed. Mean age was 61.1 (standard deviation 16.7). 47.6% of patients were operated for intestinal obstruction. Large bowel resection was the most common operation performed (49.5%). 69.9% of patients underwent emergency surgery, whilst 51.5% of patients had surgery for cancer. On postoperative day 0, NRS was 3.2 (standard deviation (sd) 2.6) which decreased to 1.5 (sd 1.9) on day 3, and 1.1 (sd 1.8) on day 5. Mean time to flatus was 2.3 (sd 1.4) days, whilst mean time to first bowel movement was 3.1 (sd 1.7) days. Patients were able to commence ambulation by 2.5 (sd 1.8) days. Patients could tolerate a normal diet on day 3.9 (sd 3.3), and IV drip was removed on day 3.5 (sd 3.0). Mean length of stay was 9.1 (sd 6.9) days. Only two patients suffered from respiratory depression (1.9%) whilst five patients suffered from hypotension (4.9%). No patients had pruritus. 23.3% of patients had nausea or vomiting. Only one patient had a catheter-related complication which was easily addressed. CONCLUSION: CWI provides adequate pain relief as the principle modality of analgesia after surgery, without opioid side effects.

Perioperative and oncologic outcomes in young and octogenarian patients with colorectal cancer: a comparison at the extremes.

INTRODUCTION: In colorectal cancer (CRC), surgical outcomes in the young (< 50) and octogenarian populations are believed to be poor due to an aggressive phenotype in the former, and increased frailty in the latter. Given that age-related effects are inversely related between groups, we compared short- and long-term outcomes of young and octogenarian patients with CRC to determine the dominance of one age-related factor over another. METHODS: A prospectively collected database from 2015 to 2020 of all CRC was analyzed. Cases were divided into metastatic and non-metastatic groups. RESULTS: Among non-metastatic cases, there were 34 young and 113 octogenarian patients. Mean CEA was higher among octogenarians (11.2 vs 32.8 units/ml; p = 0.041). Octogenarians suffered from more comorbidities than younger counterparts, with increased rates of postoperative UTI (3.3% vs 10.3%; p = 0.246) and pneumonia (3.1% vs 8.8%; p = 0.331). There was no increased rate of reintervention or Clavien-Dindo scores. We noticed a statistically significant higher proportion of extramural vascular invasion (EMVI) (8.8% vs 32.3%; p = 0.003) among the young. When excluding octogenarians who had declined surgery, Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no difference in disease-free (p = 0.290) or overall survival (p = 0.111). Among metastatic cases, there were 21 young and 19 octogenarian patients. Young patients were treated more aggressively with chemotherapy (55.6% vs 12.5%; p = 0.040). There was however no difference in overall survival between groups (p = 0.610). CONCLUSIONS: Octogenarians may have more comorbidities, but can achieve similar surgical outcomes with younger patients. There is no reason to suspect a more aggressive phenotype in younger patients.

A belly of blood: A case report describing surgical intervention in a gastric intramural haematoma precipitated by therapeutic endoscopy in an anticoagulated patient.

Gastric intramural hematoma, "intramural dissection" or "false aneurysm", is a rare and dangerous condition which may be more broadly classified as a spectrum of acute gastric mucosal injury. It is postulated that disruption of the mucosa and blood vessels within the submucosal layer results in dissection of the muscularis propria from the mucosa, with eventual clot formation. While a majority of cases resolve with conservative management, we describe a successfully managed case requiring surgical intervention. Progression of the haematoma was documented both endoscopically and surgically in an elderly anticoagulated patient who suffered a complication of therapeutic endoscopic intervention. A review of the literature is presented.