Literature DB >> 11323588

Prospective evaluation of complications in outpatient GI endoscopy: a survey among German gastroenterologists.

A Sieg1, U Hachmoeller-Eisenbach, T Eisenbach.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although most diagnostic GI endoscopic procedures in Germany are performed on an outpatient basis, there is no large-scale prospective evaluation of complication rates.
METHODS: Ninety-four gastroenterologists and internists from all regions of Germany recorded the number of EGD, colonoscopies, and polypectomies performed over a period of 1 year. All serious complications occurring in relation to the procedure, including the use of medication, were recorded in a structured protocol.
RESULTS: A total of 110,469 EGDs, 82,416 colonoscopies, and 14,249 polypectomies were evaluated. The "reach-the-cecum-rate" was 97% (median). The overall complication rates for EGD, colonoscopy, and polypectomy were low compared with published data (0.009%, 0.02%, and 0.36%, respectively). The perforation rates were 0.0009%, 0.005%, and 0.06%, respectively, the rates of significant hemorrhage 0.002%, 0.001%, and 0.26%, respectively, and the mortality rates 0.0009%, 0.001%, and 0.007%, respectively. The rates of cardiorespiratory complications associated with EGD and colonoscopy were 0.005% and 0.01%, respectively. The overall complication rate for all procedures (diagnostic and therapeutic) was lower for gastroenterologists (1 per 5155 procedures) than internists (1 per 1539 procedures). Most of the adverse events associated with diagnostic endoscopy were attributable to use of medication. The severity score ranged from 2 to 5 for most of the adverse events occurring as a result of diagnostic procedures and 2 to 50 for polypectomy. The severity sum score per 10,000 procedures was 26 for EGD, 67 for colonoscopy, and 1185 for polypectomy.
CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient endoscopy performed in practice settings by German gastroenterologists and internists is safe. The low complication rates may partly be explained by the high degree of experience resulting from the larger numbers of procedures performed relative to the numbers performed by gastroenterologists in hospitals and in other countries.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11323588     DOI: 10.1067/mge.2001.114422

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc        ISSN: 0016-5107            Impact factor:   9.427


  68 in total

1.  Are proximal colorectal cancers always associated with distal adenomas?

Authors:  A J M Watson
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 23.059

Review 2.  CT colonography: perforation rates and potential radiation risks.

Authors:  A Berrington de Gonzalez; Kwang Pyo Kim; Judy Yee
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am       Date:  2010-04

Review 3.  Adverse events in older patients undergoing colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Lukejohn W Day; Annette Kwon; John M Inadomi; Louise C Walter; Ma Somsouk
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 9.427

4.  Prospective description of coughing, hemodynamic changes, and oxygen desaturation during endoscopic sedation.

Authors:  Abdul Hamid El Chafic; George Eckert; Douglas K Rex
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2012-01-24       Impact factor: 3.199

5.  Role of colonoscopy in the diagnosis and treatment of pediatric lower gastrointestinal disorders.

Authors:  Jae Hong Park
Journal:  Korean J Pediatr       Date:  2010-09-13

6.  Cost-effectiveness of computerized tomographic colonography versus colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Steven J Heitman; Braden J Manns; Robert J Hilsden; Andrew Fong; Stafford Dean; Joseph Romagnuolo
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2005-10-11       Impact factor: 8.262

7.  Our results of lower gastrointestinal endoscopy: evaluation of 700 patients.

Authors:  Mustafa Özsoy; Bahadır Celep; Ogun Ersen; Taner Özkececi; Ahmet Bal; Sezgin Yılmaz; Yüksel Arıkan
Journal:  Ulus Cerrahi Derg       Date:  2014-06-01

8.  User's perspectives of barriers and facilitators to implementing quality colonoscopy services in Canada: a study protocol.

Authors:  Gilles Jobin; Marie Pierre Gagnon; Bernard Candas; Catherine Dubé; Anis Ben Abdeljelil; Sonya Grenier
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2010-11-02       Impact factor: 7.327

9.  Development of Evidence-Based Surveillance Intervals After Radiofrequency Ablation of Barrett's Esophagus.

Authors:  Cary C Cotton; Rehan Haidry; Aaron P Thrift; Laurence Lovat; Nicholas J Shaheen
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2018-04-13       Impact factor: 22.682

10.  Quality indicators for colorectal cancer screening for colonoscopy.

Authors:  Philip S Schoenfeld; Jonathan Cohen
Journal:  Tech Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2013-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.