Tzuyung D. Kou

IMPORTANCE: Deep sedation for endoscopic procedures has become an increasingly used option but, because of impairment in patient response, this technique also has the potential for a greater likelihood of adverse events. The incidence of these complications has not been well studied at a population level. DESIGN: Population-based study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Using a 5% random sample of cancer-free Medicare beneficiaries who resided in one of the regions served by a SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results) registry, we identified all procedural claims for outpatient colonoscopy without polypectomy from January 1, 2000, through November 30, 2009. INTERVENTION: Colonoscopy without polypectomy, with or without the use of deep sedation (identified by a concurrent claim for anesthesia services). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The occurrence of hospitalizations for splenic rupture or trauma, colonic perforation, and aspiration pneumonia within 30 days of the colonoscopy. RESULTS: We identified a total of 165 527 procedures in 100 359 patients, including 35 128 procedures with anesthesia services (21.2%). Selected postprocedure complications were documented after 284 procedures (0.17%) and included aspiration (n = 173), perforation (n = 101), and splenic injury (n = 12). (Some patients had >1 complication.) Overall complications were more common in cases with anesthesia assistance (0.22% [95% CI, 0.18%-0.27%]) than in others (0.16% [0.14%-0.18%]) (P < .001), as was aspiration (0.14% [0.11%-0.18%] vs 0.10% [0.08%-0.12%], respectively; P = .02). Frequencies of perforation and splenic injury were statistically similar. Other predictors of complications included age greater than 70 years, increasing comorbidity, and performance of the procedure in a hospital setting. In multivariate analysis, use of anesthesia services was associated with an increased complication risk (odds ratio, 1.46 [95% CI, 1.09-1.94]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Although the absolute risk of complications is low, the use of anesthesia services for colonoscopy is associated with a somewhat higher frequency of complications, specifically, aspiration pneumonia. The differences may result in part from uncontrolled confounding, but they may also reflect the impairment of normal patient responses with the use of deep sedation.

AIM: The aetiology of acute pancreatitis (AP) is complex, and many risk factors for AP are shared by patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). However, few have assessed risk factors for AP specifically in T2DM patients. METHODS: Patients in the General Practice Research Database (2 984 755, 5.0% with T2DM) were used to estimate incidence of AP for T2DM relative to non-diabetes, adjusting for prior pancreatitis, gallbladder disease, obesity, smoking and alcohol use. Multivariate Cox regression analysis adjusting for risk factors and Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) was used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Between 2003 and 2007, 301 of 148 903 patients with T2DM and 2434 of almost 3 million patients without diabetes developed AP. Patients with T2DM had higher risk for AP compared with patients without diabetes (crude HR: 2.89, 95% CI: 2.56-3.27). Patients with T2DM had significantly higher rates of prior alcohol and tobacco exposure (44.2 and 61.9% vs. 34.1 and 35.9%, p < 0.001) and of comorbid conditions (14.7% with CCI > or =1 vs. 4.3%, p < 0.001). Histories of obesity, pancreatitis, gallbladder disease, smoking or alcohol use were significant predictors of AP. After adjusting for these factors, age, gender and comorbidities, the risk of developing AP remained elevated in patients with T2DM (adjusted HR: 1.49, 95% CI: 1.31-1.70). CONCLUSION: After adjusting for risk factors, patients with T2DM had an elevated risk of AP compared with patients without diabetes. Physicians should be aware of the increased risk in patients with T2DM, particularly in those with prior pancreatitis.

AIMS: Progressive decline in renal function has been well described in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus, but few studies have assessed the risk of acute renal failure in a large population of patients with Type 2 diabetes. This study quantified the risk of acute renal failure associated with Type 2 diabetes in the General Practice Research Database from the UK. METHODS: Patients with Type 2 diabetes (n = 119,966) and patients without diabetes (n = 1,794,516) were identified in the General Practice Research Database. Patients with end-stage renal disease were excluded. Crude incidence and multivariate-adjusted hazard ratios of acute renal failure were estimated for patients with diabetes relative to those without diabetes. Cox regression models were adjusted for a variety of comorbidities. Increase of acute renal failure risk resulting from additive effects of specific co-morbidities with Type 2 diabetes was also assessed. RESULTS: Between 2003 and 2007, acute renal failure incidence was 198 per 100,000 person-years in patients with Type 2 diabetes compared with 27 per 100,000 patients-years among patients without diabetes (crude hazard ratio 8.0, 95% CI 7.4-8.7). Risk of acute renal failure for patients with Type 2 diabetes remained significant, but was attenuated in multivariate analyses adjusting for various comorbidities (adjusted hazard ratio 2.5, 95% CI 2.2-2.7). Age and specific comorbidities (chronic kidney disease, hypertension and congestive heart failure) were also associated with increased risk of acute renal failure in Type 2 diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with Type 2 diabetes have increased risk for acute renal failure compared with patients without diabetes, even after adjustment for known risk factors, particularly in the elderly and those with other comorbidities such as chronic kidney disease, congestive heart failure and hypertension.

AIM: To examine the impact of diabetes duration, chronic pancreatitis and other factors on pancreatic cancer risk. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study using the UK General Practice Research Database compared pancreatic cancer incidence and risk in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) versus patients without diabetes. Multivariate Cox regression adjusting for age, sex, history of chronic pancreatitis, gallbladder disease, obesity, smoking and alcohol use and Charlson comorbidity index was used to estimate hazard ratio (HR) [95% confidence interval, CI]. Analyses were repeated using various time windows for diabetes duration. RESULTS: A total of 1903 incident pancreatic cancers were identified, 436 in patients with T2DM (78.76 per 100 000 person-years [95% CI: 71.54, 86.51]) and 1467 in patients without diabetes (11.46 per 100 000 person-years [10.88, 12.06]). Pancreatic cancer risk was significant for T2DM (adjusted HR 1.80 [1.52, 2.14]), increasing age, history of chronic pancreatitis and tobacco use. For patients with chronic pancreatitis and T2DM, the adjusted HR was 12.12 [6.02, 24.40]. Incidence was highest in patients with ≥5 year duration of T2DM. In patient populations with duration of T2DM ranging from ≥1 to ≥5 years, adjusted HRs remained significant but point estimates attenuated slightly with longer duration of T2DM. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with T2DM had an 80% increased risk of pancreatic cancer versus patients without diabetes. Patients with T2DM and chronic pancreatitis were 12 times more likely to develop pancreatic cancer.