Risks Associated With Anesthesia Services During Colonoscopy

Karen J Wernli, Alison T Brenner, Carolyn M Rutter, John M Inadomi, Karen J Wernli, Alison T Brenner, Carolyn M Rutter, John M Inadomi

Abstract

Background & aims: We aimed to quantify the difference in complications from colonoscopy with vs without anesthesia services.

Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study and analyzed administrative claims data from Truven Health Analytics MarketScan Research Databases from 2008 through 2011. We identified 3,168,228 colonoscopy procedures in men and women, aged 40-64 years old. Colonoscopy complications were measured within 30 days, including colonic (ie, perforation, hemorrhage, abdominal pain), anesthesia-associated (ie, pneumonia, infection, complications secondary to anesthesia), and cardiopulmonary outcomes (ie, hypotension, myocardial infarction, stroke), adjusted for age, sex, polypectomy status, Charlson comorbidity score, region, and calendar year.

Results: Nationwide, 34.4% of colonoscopies were conducted with anesthesia services. Rates of use varied significantly by region (53% in the Northeast vs 8% in the West; P < .0001). Use of anesthesia service was associated with a 13% increase in the risk of any complication within 30 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12-1.14), and was associated specifically with an increased risk of perforation (odds ratio [OR], 1.07; 95% CI, 1.00-1.15), hemorrhage (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.27-1.30), abdominal pain (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.05-1.08), complications secondary to anesthesia (OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.05-1.28), and stroke (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.00-1.08). For most outcomes, there were no differences in risk with anesthesia services by polypectomy status. However, the risk of perforation associated with anesthesia services was increased only in patients with a polypectomy (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.09-1.52). In the Northeast, use of anesthesia services was associated with a 12% increase in risk of any complication; among colonoscopies performed in the West, use of anesthesia services was associated with a 60% increase in risk.

Conclusions: The overall risk of complications after colonoscopy increases when individuals receive anesthesia services. The widespread adoption of anesthesia services with colonoscopy should be considered within the context of all potential risks.

Keywords: Anesthesia Services; Endoscopy; Gastroenterology; Propofol.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of interest

The authors disclose no conflicts.

Copyright © 2016 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Prevalence of anesthesia services in the 50 US states in (A) 2008–2009 and (B) 2010–2011.

References

    1. Joseph DA, King JB, Miller JW, et al. Prevalence of colorectal cancer screening among adults–Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, United States, 2010. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2012;61(Suppl):51–56.
    1. Vargo JJ, Cohen LB, Rex DK, et al. Position statement: nonanesthesiologist administration of propofol for GI endoscopy. Gastroenterology. 2009;137:2161–2167.
    1. Liu H, Waxman DA, Main R, et al. Utilization of anesthesia services during outpatient endoscopies and colonoscopies and associated spending in 2003–2009. JAMA. 2012;307:1178–1184.
    1. Khiani VS, Soulos P, Gancayco J, et al. Anesthesiologist involvement in screening colonoscopy: temporal trends and cost implications in the Medicare population. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012;10:58–64 e1.
    1. Inadomi JM, Gunnarsson CL, Rizzo JA, et al. Projected increased growth rate of anesthesia professional-delivered sedation for colonoscopy and EGD in the United States: 2009 to 2015. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010;72:580–586.
    1. Singh H, Poluha W, Cheung M, et al. Propofol for sedation during colonoscopy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008;4:CD006268.
    1. Wernli KJ, Inadomi JM. Anesthesia for colonoscopy: too much of a good thing? JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173:556–558.
    1. Cooper GS, Kou TD, Rex DK. Complications following colonoscopy with anesthesia assistance: a population-based analysis. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173:551–556.
    1. Dominitz JA, Baldwin LM, Green P, et al. Regional variation in anesthesia assistance during outpatient colonoscopy is not associated with differences in polyp detection or complication rates. Gastroenterology. 2013;144:298–306.
    1. Klabunde CN, Potosky AL, Legler JM, et al. Development of a comorbidity index using physician claims data. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53:1258–1267.
    1. Levin TR, Zhao W, Conell C, et al. Complications of colonoscopy in an integrated health care delivery system. Ann Intern Med. 2006;145:880–886.
    1. Rutter CM, Johnson E, Miglioretti DL, et al. Adverse events after screening and follow-up colonoscopy. Cancer Causes Control. 2012;23:289–296.
    1. StataCorp. Stata Statistical Software: Release 12. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP; 2011.
    1. Seeff LC, Richards TB, Shapiro JA, et al. How many endoscopies are performed for colorectal cancer screening? Results from CDC’s survey of endoscopic capacity. Gastroenterology. 2004;127:1670–1677.
    1. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for colorectal cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149:627–637.
    1. Richardson LC, Tai E, Rim SH, et al. Vital signs: colorectal cancer screening, incidence, and mortality - United States, 2002–2010. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2011;60:884–889.
    1. Cohen LB, Wecsler JS, Gaetano JN, et al. Endoscopic sedation in the United States: results from a nationwide survey. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;101:967–974.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores e Colaboradores

Condições médicas

Intervenções de drogas

3
Se inscrever