Abstract
Background Emergency upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a common condition with high mortality. Most patients undergo oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (OGD), but no universally agreed approach exists to the type of airway management required during the procedure. We aimed to compare anaesthesia care with tracheal intubation (TI group) and without airway instrumentation (monitored anaesthesia care, MAC group) during emergency OGD.
Methods This was a prospective, nationwide, population-based cohort study during 2006–13. Emergency OGDs performed under anaesthesia care were included. End points were 90 day mortality (primary) and length of stay in hospital (secondary). Associations between exposure and outcomes were assessed in logistic and linear regression models, adjusted for the following potential confounders: shock at admission, level of anaesthetic expertise present, ASA score, Charlson comorbidity index score, BMI, age, sex, alcohol use, referral origin (home or in-hospital), Forrest classification, ulcer localization, and postoperative care.
Results The study group comprised 3580 patients under anaesthesia care: 2101 (59%) for the TI group and 1479 (41%) for the MAC group. During the first 90 days after OGD, 18.9% in the TI group and 18.4% in the MAC group died, crude odds ratio=1.03 [95% confidence interval (CI)=0.87–1.23, P=0.701], adjusted odds ratio=0.95 (95% CI=0.79–1.15, P=0.590). Patients in the TI group stayed slightly longer in hospital [mean 8.16 (95% CI=7.63–8.60) vs 7.63 days (95%=CI 6.92–8.33), P=0.108 in adjusted analysis].
Conclusions In this large population-based cohort study, anaesthesia care with TI was not different from anaesthesia care without airway instrumentation in patients undergoing emergency OGD in terms of 90 day mortality and length of hospital stay.
Methods This was a prospective, nationwide, population-based cohort study during 2006–13. Emergency OGDs performed under anaesthesia care were included. End points were 90 day mortality (primary) and length of stay in hospital (secondary). Associations between exposure and outcomes were assessed in logistic and linear regression models, adjusted for the following potential confounders: shock at admission, level of anaesthetic expertise present, ASA score, Charlson comorbidity index score, BMI, age, sex, alcohol use, referral origin (home or in-hospital), Forrest classification, ulcer localization, and postoperative care.
Results The study group comprised 3580 patients under anaesthesia care: 2101 (59%) for the TI group and 1479 (41%) for the MAC group. During the first 90 days after OGD, 18.9% in the TI group and 18.4% in the MAC group died, crude odds ratio=1.03 [95% confidence interval (CI)=0.87–1.23, P=0.701], adjusted odds ratio=0.95 (95% CI=0.79–1.15, P=0.590). Patients in the TI group stayed slightly longer in hospital [mean 8.16 (95% CI=7.63–8.60) vs 7.63 days (95%=CI 6.92–8.33), P=0.108 in adjusted analysis].
Conclusions In this large population-based cohort study, anaesthesia care with TI was not different from anaesthesia care without airway instrumentation in patients undergoing emergency OGD in terms of 90 day mortality and length of hospital stay.
| Originalsprog | Engelsk |
|---|---|
| Tidsskrift | British Journal of Anaesthesia |
| Vol/bind | 114 |
| Udgave nummer | 6 |
| Sider (fra-til) | 901-8 |
| Antal sider | 8 |
| ISSN | 0007-0912 |
| DOI | |
| Status | Udgivet - jun. 2015 |
FN’s Verdensmål
Dette resultat bidrager til følgende verdensmål
