Published online Feb 16, 2021. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v13.i2.45
Peer-review started: December 4, 2020
First decision: December 18, 2020
Revised: December 31, 2020
Accepted: January 21, 2021
Article in press: January 21, 2021
Published online: February 16, 2021
Foreign object ingestion (FOI) and food bolus impaction (FBI) are common causes of emergent endoscopic intervention. The choice of sedation used is often dictated by physician experience. Many endoscopists frequently prefer to use monitored anesthesia care (MAC) and general anesthesia (GA) as opposed to conscious sedation (CS) due to the concern for inadequate airway protection. However, there is insufficient data examining the safety of different sedation modalities in emergent endoscopic management of FOI and FBI.
To investigate the complication rates of emergent endoscopic extraction performed under different sedation modalities.
We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients presenting with acute FBI and FOI between 2010 and 2018 in two hospitals. A standardized questionnaire was utilized to collect data on demographics, endoscopic details, sedation practices, hospital stay and adverse events. Complications recognized during and within 24 h of the procedure were considered early, whereas patients presenting with a procedure-related adverse event within two weeks of the index event were considered delayed complications. Complication rates of patients who underwent emergent endoscopic retrieval were compared based on sedation types, namely CS, MAC and GA. Chi-square analysis and multiple logistic regression were used to compare complication rate based on sedation type.
Among the 929 procedures analyzed, 353 procedures (38.0%) were performed under CS, 278 procedures (29.9%) under MAC and the rest (32.1%) under GA. The median age of the subjects was 52 years old, with 57.4% being male. The majority of the procedures (64.3%) were FBI with the rest being FOI (35.7%). A total of 132 subjects (14.2%) had chronic comorbidities while 29.0% had psychiatric disorders. The most commonly observed early complications were mucosal laceration (3.8%) and bleeding (2.6%). The most common delayed complication was aspiration pneumonia (1.8%). A total of 20 patients (5.6%) could not adequately be sedated with CS and had to be converted to MAC or GA. Patient sedated with MAC and GA were more likely to require hospitalization, P < 0.0001. Analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in the complication rate between patients sedated under CS (14.7%), MAC (14.7%) and GA (19.5%), P = 0.19.
For patients who present with FOI or FBI and undergo emergent endoscopic treatment, there is no significant difference in adverse event rates between CS, MAC and GA.
Core Tip: There is insufficient data examining the safety of different sedation modalities in emergent endoscopic management of food bolus impaction or foreign object ingestion. Many endoscopists frequently perform emergent endoscopy under monitored anesthesia care or general anesthesia instead of conscious sedation. This retrospective study aims to investigate the complication rate of emergent endoscopic extraction performed under different sedation modalities. Analysis revealed no significant difference in the complication rate among patients sedated under different sedation modalities. These findings can potentially lead to sedation practices that allow more timely access to emergent endoscopy and further cost savings to the health care system.