Patients’ comorbidities reduce the clinical value of emergency colonoscopy: results of a retrospective cohort study

• Main Authors: Cristiano Cremone, Anouk Esch, Charlotte Gagniere, Alessandro Fugazza, Faria Mesli, Michael Levy, Aurelien Amiot, Alexis Laurent, Yann LeBaleur, Francois Hemery, Nicolas De’Angelis, Francesco Brunetti, Iradj Sobhani
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2017-11-01
• Series: Endoscopy International Open
• Online Access: http://www.thieme-connect.de/DOI/DOI?10.1055/s-0043-118001

Background and study aims Urgent endoscopy is often used to diagnose and sometimes treat acute upper gastrointestinal syndromes (hemorrhage, toxic ingestion, and occlusion). However, its suitability concerning the management of lower gastrointestinal conditions in emergency circumstances is controversial. Patients and methods We studied the role of emergency colonoscopy in diagnosis and treatment of all consecutive patients presenting with acute lower gastrointestinal symptoms referred to our hospital on an emergency basis. All patients were first managed by physicians from the emergency room and/or the intensive care unit (ICU); the treatments included fluid resuscitation, blood transfusion, and antibiotic or cardiotonic as needed. Bowel cleansing was performed to purge the colon of clots, stool, and blood when clinically possible; alternatively, a bowel enema was used. Patients only underwent a computed tomography (CT) scan prior to the colonoscopy in clinically relevant situations. Colonoscopy was performed within 6 – 36 hours after hospitalization or the beginning of the clinical symptoms (hemorrhage, sepsis, colon distension) or occlusion, as assessed by abdominal CT scan. Results From 2010 to 2015, 603 patients underwent urgent colonoscopy; among them, 214 (36 %) presented with lower GI bleeding, while 264 (44 %) had symptoms suggestive of intestinal ischemia; almost half (49 %, n = 295) of the patients were hospitalized in the ICU. Patients received therapies, such as clips (15 %), epinephrine injections (5 %), bipolar coagulation (7 %), or devolvulation (3 %) using colonoscopy or antibiotic therapy when needed. No perforation was observed after colonoscopy and only three cases of hemorrhage recurrence were documented as complications after the procedure. Overall, 192 patients died within 1 month after colonoscopy due to four independent risk situations, as follows: septic shock, heart transplantation, multiorgan failure, and ischemic colitis. Only 67 (35 %) underwent urgent intestinal surgery when ischemic colitis was identified, and this did not have a significant effect on the mortality rate. Conclusions Urgent bedside colonoscopy is feasible and safe for routine use. The highest advantage was observed in patients with red blood hemorrhage, diarrhea, and colon distension when symptoms were not associated with multiorgane failure, heart transplantation, or septic shock. As revealed by colonoscopy and pathological features, ischemic colitis is associated with a bad prognosis, and patients experience a higher rate of early mortality regardless of whether they undergo urgent colon surgery.