Safety of Endoscopy in Cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic procedures are among the most commonly performed medical procedures and the serious adverse event rate is reported to be 1-3 adverse events per 1000 procedures. AIMS: Here, we have examined the safety of endoscopy specifically in cirrhotic populations. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective case (cirrhosis)-control (non-cirrhosis) study of the outcomes of patients undergoing endoscopy in a large academic medical center. The primary outcome was a procedural or post-procedural complication. Complete clinical data were collected for all patients undergoing endoscopic procedures-including esophagogastroduodenoscopy, colonoscopy, EUS, ERCP, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and others. Cirrhosis was carefully defined based on clinico-pathological grounds. RESULTS: We identified 16,779 patients who underwent endoscopy, including 2618 with cirrhosis and 14,161 without cirrhosis. There were 167 complications (0.99%), which included 15/2618 cirrhotics (0.6%) and 152/14,161 (1.1%) non-cirrhotics. The most common complications were cardiopulmonary (including hypotension and hypoxemia) found in 67% of patients; procedurally related complications occurred in 19% of patients. The complication rate was the same or lower in cirrhotics than controls undergoing esophagogastroduodenoscopy (0.6% vs 0.9%, p = 0.03), colonoscopy (0.6% vs. 0.6%, p = NS), or ERCP (0.7% vs. 1.4%, p = NS) Logistic regression analysis identified the following features to be associated with an increased risk of having a complication: inpatient status, history of myocardial infarction, and an EUS procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopy in cirrhotic patients was as safe or safer than non-cirrhotic patients undergoing similar procedures.

Stage-Stratified Incidence Rates of Colorectal Adenocarcinoma Among Patients Aged 46 to 49 in the United States.

This cross-sectional study uses Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry data to analyze colorectal adenocarcinoma staging incidence of patients aged 46 to 49 years from 2000 to 2020.

Randomized Controlled Trial of Ketamine and Moderate Sedation for Outpatient Endoscopy in Adults.

INTRODUCTION: Ketamine is an effective sedative agent in a variety of settings due to its desirable properties including preservation of laryngeal reflexes and lack of cardiovascular depression. We hypothesized that ketamine is an effective alternative to standard moderate sedation (SMS) regimens for patients undergoing endoscopy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a randomized controlled trial comparing ketamine to SMS for outpatient colonoscopy or esophagogastroduodenoscopy at Brooke Army Medical Center. The ketamine group received a 1-mg dose of midazolam along with ketamine, whereas the SMS group received midazolam/fentanyl. The primary outcome was patient satisfaction measured using the Patient Satisfaction in Sedation Instrument, and secondary outcomes included changes in hemodynamics, time to sedation onset and recovery, and total medication doses. RESULTS: Thirty-three subjects were enrolled in each group. Baseline characteristics were similar. Endoscopies were performed for both diagnostic and screening purposes. Ketamine was superior in the overall sedation experience and in all analyzed categories compared to the SMS group (P = .0096). Sedation onset times and procedure times were similar among groups. The median ketamine dose was 75 mg. The median fentanyl and midazolam doses were 150 mcg and 5 mg, respectively, in SMS. Vital signs remained significantly closer to the physiological baseline in the ketamine group (P = .004). Recovery times were no different between the groups, and no adverse reactions were encountered. CONCLUSIONS: Ketamine is preferred by patients, preserves hemodynamics better than SMS, and can be safely administered by endoscopists. Data suggest that ketamine is a safe and effective sedation option for patients undergoing esophagogastroduodenoscopy or colonoscopy (clinicaltrials.gov NCT03461718).

Endohepatology - current status.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This article discusses the most recent studies regarding the emerging field of endohepatology - the use of diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopic tools for the management of patients with liver disease and portal hypertension. RECENT FINDINGS: New research has shown that liver biopsy specimens obtained by each Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guidance, the percutaneous approach, and the transjugular approach contained sufficient portal triads to adequately analyzed by experienced pathologists - suggesting that any of these routes of liver biopsy is clinically acceptable; further, all had similar rates of adverse events. An initial prospective study showed that EUS guided portal pressure measurement was safe, effective, and accurate. A recent metanalysis showed that EUS-guided cyanoacrylate injection and coil embolization was statistically more efficacious and with less complications than EUS guided cyanoacrylate injection and EUS guided coil injection alone, suggesting that combination therapy appears to be the preferred approach for gastric varices (GV) bleeding. A prospective study evaluating focal liver lesions showed that the use of artificial intelligence had up to 100% sensitivity and 81% specificity for identifying malignant focal liver lesions. SUMMARY: EUS guided liver biopsy is safe and enables accurate diagnosis of underlying liver disease. EUS guided portal pressure measurement is also safe and is accurate. Combination therapy of EUS guided cyanoacrylate injection and coil embolization is more efficacious and has less complications than injection or coil therapy alone when used for GV bleeding. Artificial intelligence is highly sensitive and specific when used in conjunction with EUS in the diagnosis of malignant focal liver lesions. Endohepatology is a rapidly expanding field with great potential.

Updated strategies in the management of acute variceal haemorrhage.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This article reviews the most recent studies regarding the management of acute esophageal variceal haemorrhage. RECENT FINDINGS: New randomized control trials and meta-analyses confirmed the role of early transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) in the management of acute variceal haemorrhage in Child-Pugh C (10-13) and B patients with active bleeding. A recent randomized controlled trial focused on the duration of vasoactive therapy showed no difference between 2 and 5 days of octreotide. A randomized trial showed decreased use of blood products for the correction of coagulopathy using a thromboelastography-guided approach (vs. conventional parameters) as well as decreased bleeding rates when compared with standard of care. A meta-analysis found that for rescue of variceal bleeding, self-expanding metallic stents were more efficacious and safer than balloon tamponade. In addition, studies showed that Child-Pugh C patients and those with hepatic vein pressure gradient more than 20 were at the highest risk of treatment failure, while model for end-stage liver disease was highly predictive of in-hospital mortality. SUMMARY: In patients with severe coagulopathy and uncontrolled bleeding, TEG-based transfusion strategies are recommended. Antibiotics should be used for all cirrhotic patients presenting with upper gastrointestinal bleeding, but should be tailored in accordance to local resistance patterns. Early TIPS for high-risk patients has been shown to have a significant survival benefit. Certain aspects of the management of variceal bleeding remain poorly studied such as the role of early TIPS in Child-B patients as well as strategies for rescue therapy in patients who are not TIPS candidates, and require further investigation.

Sedation During Endoscopy in Patients with Cirrhosis: Safety and Predictors of Adverse Events.

BACKGROUND: Sedation during endoscopy in cirrhotic patients is typically via moderate sedation, most commonly using a combination of a benzodiazepine (i.e., midazolam) and narcotic (i.e., fentanyl) or with propofol using monitored anesthesia care (MAC). Here, we examined the safety of moderate sedation and MAC in patients with cirrhosis. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study of cirrhotic patients undergoing endoscopy from a large academic medical center between 2010 and 2014 examined extensive clinical data including the following: past history, physical findings, laboratory results, and procedural adverse events. Adverse events were defined a priori and included hypoxia, hypotension, bleeding, and death. RESULTS: We identified 2618 patients with cirrhosis who underwent endoscopic procedures; the mean age was 56 years, 36% were female, the mean Child-Pugh score was 9.3 (IQR: 8, 11), and Charlson Comorbidity Index score was 3.2 (IQR: 1, 4); 1157 had MAC; and 1461 had moderate sedation. There was no difference in the frequency of adverse events in MAC and moderate sedation groups, with a total of 15 adverse events (7/1157 MAC and 8/1461 moderate sedation). The most common procedure performed was esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD, n = 1667) and was associated with 10 adverse events. Overall, adverse events included bradycardia (1), hypoxia (7), bleeding (5), laryngospasm (1), and perforation (1). The frequency was similar for EGD, ERCP, and colonoscopy-each at a rate of 0.6%. CONCLUSIONS: Adverse events in cirrhotic patients undergoing endoscopy appeared to be similar with moderate sedation or MAC, and the frequency was the same for different types of procedures.