|
1
|
Calabrese EC, Slater BJ, Babidge W, Sylla P, Maddern G. The dissemination of surgical clinical practice guidelines-evaluating SAGES' strategies for distribution. Surg Endosc 2025:10.1007/s00464-025-11778-2. [PMID: 40355741 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-025-11778-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/14/2025] [Accepted: 04/27/2025] [Indexed: 05/14/2025]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The Society of Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) has been a leader in the development of surgical clinical practice guidelines; however, the dissemination and implementation of these remains a challenge. We aim to analyze the user interaction with the SAGES website (sages.org) guidelines' page and guideline downloads from their associated journal Surgical Endoscopy to help inform the organization about its distribution and dissemination methods. METHODS Google analytics from the sages.org website and Surgical Endoscopy downloads for each guideline were obtained from July 2023 to April 2024, as well as number of downloads for the lifetime of the guideline. Data were organized by overall guideline popularity, defined as number of sages.org views or number of journal downloads, and its associated citations. Popularity by country was only informed by google analytics data from sages.org. The country's associated economic status-high, upper middle, lower middle, and low-income was obtained and a chi-squared test, applied to proportions, was performed on each guideline to determine if the economic status of the country significantly influences guideline popularity (p-value less than 0.05, confidence interval 95%). RESULTS The hiatal hernia guideline had the most sages.org views and citations over the 9-month period; however, the management of diverticulitis guideline had the most journal downloads from time of publication. Colorectal surgery (CRS) guidelines were the most popular category in journal downloads which was not observed in sages.org views. Additionally, the popularity significantly differed in four guidelines based on the country's economic status. CONCLUSIONS Society websites and journals were found to be reasonable platforms for dissemination of guidelines, with viewership and download numbers in the tens of thousands for some articles. The variability in engagement across platforms may suggest different audiences with different needs. The data emphasizes the importance of SAGES diversifying their platforms for broader dissemination.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elisa C Calabrese
- Department of Surgery, University of California San Francisco-East Bay, Oakland, CA, USA.
- School of Medicine, University of Adelaide, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Adelaide, Australia.
- Research, Audit & Academic Surgery, Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, Adelaide, Australia.
- , 1411 E 31st St, Oakland, CA, 94602, USA.
| | | | - Wendy Babidge
- School of Medicine, University of Adelaide, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Adelaide, Australia
- Research, Audit & Academic Surgery, Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Patricia Sylla
- Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, NY, USA
| | - Guy Maddern
- School of Medicine, University of Adelaide, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Adelaide, Australia
- Research, Audit & Academic Surgery, Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, Adelaide, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
|
2
|
Wehrmann T, Riphaus A, Eckardt AJ, Klare P, Kopp I, von Delius S, Rosien U, Tonner PH. Updated S3 Guideline "Sedation for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy" of the German Society of Gastroenterology, Digestive and Metabolic Diseases (DGVS) - June 2023 - AWMF-Register-No. 021/014. ZEITSCHRIFT FUR GASTROENTEROLOGIE 2023; 61:e654-e705. [PMID: 37813354 DOI: 10.1055/a-2165-6388] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/11/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Till Wehrmann
- Clinic for Gastroenterology, DKD Helios Clinic Wiesbaden, Wiesbaden, Germany
| | - Andrea Riphaus
- Internal Medicine, St. Elisabethen Hospital Frankfurt Artemed SE, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Alexander J Eckardt
- Clinic for Gastroenterology, DKD Helios Clinic Wiesbaden, Wiesbaden, Germany
| | - Peter Klare
- Department Internal Medicine - Gastroenterology, Diabetology, and Hematology/Oncology, Hospital Agatharied, Hausham, Germany
| | - Ina Kopp
- Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany e.V. (AWMF), Berlin, Germany
| | - Stefan von Delius
- Medical Clinic II - Internal Medicine - Gastroenterology, Hepatology, Endocrinology, Hematology, and Oncology, RoMed Clinic Rosenheim, Rosenheim, Germany
| | - Ulrich Rosien
- Medical Clinic, Israelite Hospital, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Peter H Tonner
- Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Clinic Leer, Leer, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
|
3
|
Wehrmann T, Riphaus A, Eckardt AJ, Klare P, Kopp I, von Delius S, Rosien U, Tonner PH. Aktualisierte S3-Leitlinie „Sedierung in der gastrointestinalen Endoskopie“ der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Gastroenterologie, Verdauungs- und Stoffwechselkrankheiten (DGVS). ZEITSCHRIFT FUR GASTROENTEROLOGIE 2023; 61:1246-1301. [PMID: 37678315 DOI: 10.1055/a-2124-5333] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/09/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Till Wehrmann
- Klinik für Gastroenterologie, DKD Helios Klinik Wiesbaden, Wiesbaden, Deutschland
| | - Andrea Riphaus
- Innere Medizin, St. Elisabethen Krankenhaus Frankfurt Artemed SE, Frankfurt, Deutschland
| | - Alexander J Eckardt
- Klinik für Gastroenterologie, DKD Helios Klinik Wiesbaden, Wiesbaden, Deutschland
| | - Peter Klare
- Abteilung Innere Medizin - Gastroenterologie, Diabetologie und Hämato-/Onkologie, Krankenhaus Agatharied, Hausham, Deutschland
| | - Ina Kopp
- Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften e. V. (AWMF), Berlin, Deutschland
| | - Stefan von Delius
- Medizinische Klinik II - Innere Medizin - Gastroenterologie, Hepatologie, Endokrinologie, Hämatologie und Onkologie, RoMed Klinikum Rosenheim, Rosenheim, Deutschland
| | - Ulrich Rosien
- Medizinische Klinik, Israelitisches Krankenhaus, Hamburg, Deutschland
| | - Peter H Tonner
- Anästhesie- und Intensivmedizin, Klinikum Leer, Leer, Deutschland
| |
Collapse
|
|
4
|
Dossa F, Megetto O, Yakubu M, Zhang DDQ, Baxter NN. Sedation practices for routine gastrointestinal endoscopy: a systematic review of recommendations. BMC Gastroenterol 2021; 21:22. [PMID: 33413147 PMCID: PMC7792218 DOI: 10.1186/s12876-020-01561-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 56] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/19/2020] [Accepted: 11/25/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Sedation is commonly used in gastrointestinal endoscopy; however, considerable variability in sedation practices has been reported. The objective of this review was to identify and synthesize existing recommendations on sedation practices for routine gastrointestinal endoscopy procedures. METHODS We systematically reviewed guidelines and position statements identified through a search of PubMed, guidelines databases, and websites of relevant professional associations from January 1, 2005 to May 10, 2019. We included English-language guidelines/position statements with recommendations relating to sedation for adults undergoing routine gastrointestinal endoscopy. Documents with guidance only for complex endoscopic procedures were excluded. We extracted and synthesized recommendations relating to: 1) choice of sedatives, 2) sedation administration, 3) personnel responsible for monitoring sedated patients, 4) skills and training of individuals involved in sedation, and 5) equipment required for monitoring sedated patients. We assessed the quality of included documents using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE) II tool. RESULTS We identified 19 guidelines and 7 position statements meeting inclusion criteria. Documents generally agreed that a single, trained registered nurse can administer moderate sedation, monitor the patient, and assist with brief, interruptible tasks. Documents also agreed on the routine use of pulse oximetry and blood pressure monitoring during endoscopy. However, recommendations relating to the drugs to be used for sedation, the healthcare personnel capable of administering propofol and monitoring patients sedated with propofol, and the need for capnography when monitoring sedated patients varied. Only 9 documents provided a grade or level of evidence in support of their recommendations. CONCLUSIONS Recommendations for sedation practices in routine gastrointestinal endoscopy differ across guidelines/position statements and often lack supporting evidence with potential implications for patient safety and procedural efficiency.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fahima Dossa
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
- Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
| | - Olivia Megetto
- Ontario Health, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Mafo Yakubu
- Ontario Health, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - David D Q Zhang
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Nancy N Baxter
- Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
|
5
|
Patient Safety and Anesthesia Considerations for Office-Based Otolaryngology Procedures. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2019; 52:379-390. [DOI: 10.1016/j.otc.2019.02.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
|
|
6
|
Anderson J, Bensoussan Y, Townsley R, Kell E. In-Office Endoscopic Laryngeal Laser Procedures: A Patient Safety Initiative. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2018; 159:136-142. [DOI: 10.1177/0194599818774511] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
Objective To review complications of in-office endoscopic laryngeal laser procedures after implementation of standardized safety protocol. Methods A retrospective review was conducted of the first 2 years of in-office laser procedures at St Michaels Hospital after the introduction of a standardized safety protocol. The protocol included patient screening, procedure checklist with standardized reporting of processes, medications, and complications. Primary outcomes measured were complication rates of in-office laryngeal laser procedures. Secondary outcomes included hemodynamic changes, local anesthetic dose, laser settings, total laser/procedure time, and incidence of sedation. Results A total of 145 in-office KTP procedures performed on 65 patients were reviewed. In 98% of cases, the safety protocol was fully implemented. The overall complication rate was 4.8%. No major complications were encountered. Minor complications included vasovagal episodes and patient intolerance. The rate of patient intolerance resulting early termination of anticipated procedure was 13.1%. Total local anesthetic dose averaged 172.9 mg lidocaine per procedure. The mean amount of laser energy dispersed was 261.2 J, with mean total procedure time of 48.3 minutes. Sixteen percent of patients had preprocedure sedation. Vital signs were found to vary modestly. Systolic blood pressure was lower postprocedure in 13.8% and symptomatic in 4.1%. Discussion The review of our standardized safety protocol has revealed that in-office laser treatment for laryngeal pathology has extremely low complication rates with safe patient outcomes. Implications for Practice The trend of shifting procedures out of the operating room into the office/clinic setting requires new processes designed to promote patient safety.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer Anderson
- Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, St Michaels Hospital, Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Yael Bensoussan
- Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Richard Townsley
- Otolaryngology, University Hospital Crosshouse, Ayrshire, Scotland
| | - Erika Kell
- St Michaels Hospital, Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
|
7
|
Bensoussan Y, Anderson J. In-office laryngeal procedures (IOLP) in Canada: current safety practices and procedural care. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2018; 47:23. [PMID: 29615125 PMCID: PMC5883580 DOI: 10.1186/s40463-018-0270-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/15/2017] [Accepted: 03/12/2018] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The advent of chip tip technology combined with advanced endoscopy has revolutionized the field of laryngology in the past decade. Procedures such as transnasal esophagoscopy, site-specific steroid injections, injection laryngoplasty and laryngeal laser treatment can now be performed in the office setting under local anaesthesia. Although In-Office Laryngeal Procedures (IOLPs) have become standard-of-care in many American and several Canadian centers, there are no guidelines regulating the practice of these procedures. The goal of this report was to evaluate the current method of IOLP delivery in Canada. METHODS An electronic survey was dispersed to 22 practicing Canadian laryngologists to assess safety and procedural care measures undertaken when performing IOLP. The survey consisted of 37 questions divided into 6 categories; 1) Demographic data 2) Facilities 3) Staff/personnel 4) Patient screening/monitoring 5) Procedure and emergency equipment 6) Reporting of adverse events. RESULTS Data was collected for 16/22 laryngologists (72.7% response rate). Only 1 respondent did not perform IOLP. All performed injection augmentation laryngoplasty. Most performed laryngeal biopsies, intramuscular injection and/or electromyography guided injection for the treatment of spasmodic dysphonia and glottic/subglottic steroid injections. Only 4 respondents performed in-office KTP laser. Significant variation was found in procedural processes including intra procedural monitoring, anticoagulation screening, access to emergency equipment and documentation. CONCLUSION Our survey demonstrates that the delivery of IOLP in Canada varies considerably. The construct of IOLP practice guidelines based on the evidence with consistent documentation would promote safe, efficient and quality care for patient with voice disorders.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yael Bensoussan
- Department of Otolaryngology Head & Neck Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
| | - Jennifer Anderson
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Toronto, St-Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, ON, M5B 1W8, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
|
8
|
Fencl JL. Guideline Implementation: Moderate Sedation/Analgesia. AORN J 2016; 103:500-11. [DOI: 10.1016/j.aorn.2016.03.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/19/2015] [Revised: 01/23/2016] [Accepted: 03/02/2016] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
|
|
9
|
Fearon MC, Ogg MJ. Clinical Issues—April 2016. AORN J 2016. [DOI: 10.1016/j.aorn.2016.02.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
|
|
10
|
Orel R, Brecelj J, Dias JA, Romano C, Barros F, Thomson M, Vandenplas Y. Review on sedation for gastrointestinal tract endoscopy in children by non-anesthesiologists. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 7:895-911. [PMID: 26240691 PMCID: PMC4515424 DOI: 10.4253/wjge.v7.i9.895] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/03/2015] [Revised: 06/05/2015] [Accepted: 06/18/2015] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
AIM To present evidence and formulate recommendations for sedation in pediatric gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy by non-anesthesiologists. METHODS The databases MEDLINE, Cochrane and EMBASE were searched for the following keywords "endoscopy, GI", "endoscopy, digestive system" AND "sedation", "conscious sedation", "moderate sedation", "deep sedation" and "hypnotics and sedatives" for publications in English restricted to the pediatric age. We searched additional information published between January 2011 and January 2014. Searches for (upper) GI endoscopy sedation in pediatrics and sedation guidelines by non-anesthesiologists for the adult population were performed. RESULTS From the available studies three sedation protocols are highlighted. Propofol, which seems to offer the best balance between efficacy and safety is rarely used by non-anesthesiologists mainly because of legal restrictions. Ketamine and a combination of a benzodiazepine and an opioid are more frequently used. Data regarding other sedatives, anesthetics and adjuvant medications used for pediatric GI endoscopy are also presented. CONCLUSION General anesthesia by a multidisciplinary team led by an anesthesiologist is preferred. The creation of sedation teams led by non-anesthesiologists and a careful selection of anesthetic drugs may offer an alternative, but should be in line with national legislation and institutional regulations.
Collapse
|
|
11
|
Kim N, Yoo YC, Lee SK, Kim H, Ju HM, Min KT. Comparison of the efficacy and safety of sedation between dexmedetomidine-remifentanil and propofol-remifentanil during endoscopic submucosal dissection. World J Gastroenterol 2015; 21:3671-3678. [PMID: 25834336 PMCID: PMC4375593 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i12.3671] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/12/2014] [Revised: 11/16/2014] [Accepted: 01/08/2015] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
AIM: To compare the efficacy and safety of sedation protocols for endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) between dexmedetomidine-remifentanil and propofol-remifentanil.
METHODS: Fifty-nine patients scheduled for ESD were randomly allocated into a dexmedetomidine-remifentanil (DR) group or a propofol-remifentanil (PR) group. To control patient anxiety, dexmedetomidine or propofol was infused to maintain a score of 4-5 on the Modified Observer’s Assessment of Alertness/Sedation scale. Remifentanil was infused continuously at a rate of 6 μg/kg per hour in both groups. The ease of advancing the scope into the throat, gastric motility grading, and satisfaction of the endoscopist and patient were assessed. Hemodynamic variables and hypoxemic events were compared to evaluate patient safety.
RESULTS: Demographic data were comparable between the groups. The hemodynamic variables and pulse oximetry values were stable during the procedure in both groups despite a lower heart rate in the DR group. No oxygen desaturation events occurred in either group. Although advancing the scope into the throat was easier in the PR group (“very easy” 24.1% vs 56.7%, P = 0.010), gastric motility was more suppressed in the DR group (“no + mild” 96.6% vs 73.3%, P = 0.013). The endoscopists felt that the procedure was more favorable in the DR group (“very good + good” 100% vs 86.7%, P = 0.042), whereas patient satisfaction scores were comparable between the groups. En bloc resection was performed 100% of the time in both groups, and the complete resection rate was 94.4% in the DR group and 100% in the PR group (P = 0.477).
CONCLUSION: The efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine and remifentanil were comparable to propofol and remifentanil during ESD. However, the endoscopists favored dexmedetomidine perhaps due to lower gastric motility.
Collapse
|
|
12
|
El Chafic AH, Eckert G, Rex DK. Prospective description of coughing, hemodynamic changes, and oxygen desaturation during endoscopic sedation. Dig Dis Sci 2012; 57:1899-907. [PMID: 22271416 DOI: 10.1007/s10620-012-2057-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/14/2011] [Accepted: 01/05/2012] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Deep sedation is increasingly used for endoscopy. The impact of sedation level on hemodynamic status, oxygenation, and aspiration risk is incompletely described. AIMS To describe the incidence of intraprocedural cough, hemodynamic changes, oxygen desaturation, and their relationship to clinical factors and sedation level. METHODS Detailed prospective recordings of hemodynamic changes, oxygen desaturation, and cough during 757 nonemergent endoscopic procedures done under sedation using propofol, midazolam, and/or fentanyl. RESULTS Thirteen percent of patients had at least one cough and 3% had prolonged cough. Cough was more common in nonsmokers (P = 0.05), upper endoscopy (P < 0.0001), with propofol (P = 0.0008), longer procedures (P = 0.0001), and hiccups (P = 0.01). The association between supine positioning during colonoscopy and cough approached significance (P = 0.06). Oxygen desaturation was rare (4%) and associated only with deep sedation (P = 0.02). Mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP) dropped by 7.3 and 5.6% respectively. Decreases in systolic BP were more common in whites (P = 0.03), males (P = 0.004), nonsmokers (P = 0.04), during colonoscopy (P < 0.0001), and in patients receiving midazolam and fentanyl (P = 0.01). Heart rate (HR) dropped >20% from baseline in 15% of patients and was more common during colonoscopy (P = 0.002). HR increased >20% in 20% of patients and was more common with coughing (P < 0.0001) and in younger patients (P = 0.0002). No patient required pharmacologic treatment of BP or HR. CONCLUSIONS We have described procedural predictors of cough that may help clinicians reduce the risk of aspiration during endoscopy. Hemodynamic changes during endoscopy are common but largely clinically insignificant.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abdul Hamid El Chafic
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
13
|
Abstract
Sedation is the drug-induced reduction of a patient's consciousness. The aim of sedation in endoscopic procedures is to increase the patient's comfort and to improve endoscopic performance, especially in therapeutic procedures. The most commonly used sedation regimen for conscious sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy is still the combination of benzodiazepines with opioids. However, the use of propofol has increased enormously in the past decade and several studies show advantages of propofol over the traditional regimes in terms of faster recovery time. It is important to be aware that the complication rate of endoscopies increases when sedation is used; therefore, a thorough risk evaluation before the procedure and monitoring during the procedure must be performed. In addition, properly trained staff and emergency equipment should be available. The best approach to sedation in endoscopy is to choose a sedation regimen for the individual patient, tailored according to the clinical risk assessment and the anxiety level of the patient, as well as to the type of planned endoscopic procedure.
Collapse
|
|
14
|
Zubek L, Szabó L, Gál J, Lakatos PL, Papp J, Elo G. [General anesthesia during double balloon enteroscopy--Hungarian experiences]. Orv Hetil 2010; 151:1976-1982. [PMID: 21084249 DOI: 10.1556/oh.2010.28935] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
UNLABELLED Double balloon enteroscopy needs sufficient sedation technique, because the examination is uncomfortable and lengthy. The most prevalent sedation method is conscious sedation world-wide. AIM To demonstrate that double balloon enteroscopy examination can also be safely performed in general anesthesia with intubation and that this method can be an option in patients with severe multiple morbidities. METHODS A retrospective evaluation of intubation narcosis in patients undergoing double balloon enteroscopy was performed at the 1st Department of Internal Medicine, Semmelweis University. Patients were grouped based on gender, age and physical state. Anesthesia records included the duration of anesthesia, the quantities of medications used and anesthesia-related complications. RESULTS Data obtained from 108 general anesthesia cases were analyzed. There were no permanent anesthesia-related complications in the period examined. The most frequent side effects of anesthesia were hypotension (30.55%), desaturation (21.29%), and apnea (17.59%). These complications were significantly more frequent among patients with multiple morbidities; however, their incidence was not proportional with the quantity of the medications used or the duration of anesthesia. CONCLUSION The findings confirm that the most important advantage of general anesthesia over other methods is that it ensures stable airways, which makes it easy to counter-act frequent complications such as desaturation, apnea and aspiration. The number of complications of anesthesia was higher among patients with multiple morbidities, but these complications could be easily overcome in all patient groups. Therefore, this method is highly recommended for patients with multiple morbidities. Intubation narcosis can be also a viable option of conscious sedation for patients without co-morbidities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- László Zubek
- Semmelweis Egyetem, Általános Orvostudományi Kar Aneszteziológiai és Intenzív Terápiás Klinika Budapest Kútvölgyi út 4. 1125.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
15
|
Zubek L, Szabo L, Lakatos PL, Papp J, Gal J, Elo G. Double balloon enteroscopy examinations in general anesthesia. World J Gastroenterol 2010; 16:3418-3422. [PMID: 20632445 PMCID: PMC2904889 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v16.i27.3418] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2010] [Revised: 04/26/2010] [Accepted: 05/03/2010] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
AIM To demonstrate that the double balloon enteroscopy (DBE) can be safely performed in general anesthesia with intubation. METHODS We performed a retrospective examination between August 2005 and November 2008 among patients receiving intubation narcosis due to DBE examination. The patients were grouped based on sex, age and physical status. Anesthesia records included duration of anesthesia, quantity of medication used and anesthesia-related complications. We determined the frequency of complications in the different groups and their relation with the quantity of medication used and the duration of anesthesia. RESULTS We compiled data for 108 cases of general anesthesia with intubation. We did not observe any permanent anesthesia-related complications; the most frequent side effects of anesthesia were hypotension (30.55%), desaturation (21.29%), and apnea (17.59%). These complications were significantly more frequent among patients with multiple additional diseases [hypotension (23.1% vs 76.9%, P = 0.005), de-saturation (12.3% vs 69.2%, P < 0.001) and apnea (7.7% vs 53.8%, P = 0.001)], however, their incidence was not proportional to the quantity of medication used or the duration of anesthesia. CONCLUSION General anesthesia with intubation is definitely a viable option among DBE methods. It is highly recommended in patients with multiple additional diseases.
Collapse
|