Safety and Efficacy of the Moderate Sedation During Flexible Bronchoscopic Procedure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Moderate sedatives have been increasingly used to improve patient comfort during flexible bronchoscopy (FB). However, routine use of moderate sedation during FB is controversial because its efficacy and safety are not well established.This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of moderate sedation during FB.A search was made of Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library to May 2014.Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs were included.The main analysis was designed to examine the efficacy of moderate sedation during FB in sedation than no-sedation.The willingness to repeat FB was significantly more in sedation than no-sedation (odds ratio [OR] 2.30; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11–4.73; P = 0.02; I² = 22.5). The duration of FB was shorter in sedation group than no-sedation group (standardized mean difference [SMD] −0.21; 95% CI −0.38 to −0.03; P = 0.02; I² = 78.3%). Event of hypoxia was not significantly different between sedation and no-sedation groups (OR 0.86; 95% CI 0.42–1.73; P = 0.67; I² = 0%). The SpO₂ during procedure was not different between sedation and no-sedation groups (SMD −0.14; 95% CI −0.37 to 0.08; P = 0.21; I² = 49.9%). However, in subgroup analysis without supplemental oxygen, the SpO₂ was significantly lower in sedation than no-sedation group (SMD −0.45; 95% CI −0.78 to −0.11; P = 0.01; I² = 0.0%).According to this meta-analysis, moderate sedation in FB would be useful in patients who will require repeated bronchoscopies as well as safe in respiratory depression. To our knowledge, although the various sedative drugs are already used in the real field, this analysis was the first attempt to quantify objective results. We anticipate more definite and studies designed to elucidate standardized outcomes for moderate sedation in FB.     

Direct insertion of an ultra‐slim upper endoscope for cholangioscopy in patients undergoing choledochoduodenostomy

Direct peroral cholangioscopy (POC) using an ultra‐slim upper endoscope is one modality of POC for intraductal endoscopic evaluation and treatment of the bile duct. Choledochoduodenostomy (CDS) is one modality of biliary bypass surgery that provides a new route to the bile duct. We carried out direct POC using an ultra‐slim upper endoscope without the use of accessories in 10 patients (four sump syndromes, three bile duct strictures and three intrahepatic duct stones) previously undergoing surgical CDS. Direct POC was successful in all patients. The use of an intraductal balloon catheter was required in one patient for advancement of the endoscope into the bile duct. Distal bile ducts with sump syndromes were cleared using baskets and water irrigation under direct POC. Cholangiocarcinoma was diagnosed in one patient with hilar bile duct stricture after cholangioscopic evaluation and a targeting forceps biopsy under direct POC. Intrahepatic duct stones were successfully extracted after intraductal fragmentation under direct POC. Oozing bleeding occurred during intraductal lithotripsy but stopped spontaneously. Direct POC using an ultra‐slim upper endoscope without the assistance of accessories can easily be carried out in patients undergoing CDS.     

可弯曲胸腔镜和硬质胸腔镜诊断不明原因胸腔积液的对比临床研究

目的对比可弯曲胸腔镜和硬质胸腔镜在不明原因胸腔积液诊断中的准确性和安全性。方法采用前瞻性随机对照研究,连续筛选四川大学华西医院2012年3月至2014年3月期间不明原因胸腔积液住院患者,患者年龄18~75岁。经知情同意后,患者随机进入可弯曲胸腔镜组或硬质胸腔镜组进行检查。结果可弯曲胸腔镜组入组49例患者,硬质胸腔镜组入组48例患者。两组共有44例患者通过胸腔镜检查确诊为恶性疾病,48例确诊为良性疾病。两组诊断不明原因胸腔积液总体准确性分别为93.9%和95.8%,可弯曲胸腔镜组诊断肿瘤的敏感性为96.0%,硬质胸腔镜组诊断肿瘤的敏感性为95.2%,两组诊断肿瘤的特异性均为100.0%,两组之间差异无统计学意义。两种胸腔镜技术并发症多数轻微,患者均耐受良好。结论对于不明原因胸腔积液,可弯曲胸腔镜诊断的准确性与硬质胸腔镜相当。尽管可弯曲胸腔镜取材组织小,但是通过多点多次取材,所获得的组织标本能满足病理科医生进行包括免疫组织化学检测在内的疾病诊断。     

Comparative outcomes of vascular access in patients older than 70 years with end-stage renal disease

Objective

The advantage of arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) in older patients requiring dialysis is controversial. We reviewed our vascular access experience in patients ≥70 years of age (older group) compared with younger patients.