Risk of adverse events associated with upper and lower endoscopic ultrasound: a population-based cohort study

 

 Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background and study aim Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) enables diagnostic evaluation and therapeutic interventions but is associated with adverse events. We conducted a population-based cohort study to determine the risk of adverse events for upper and lower EUS with and without fine-needle aspiration (FNA).

Patients and methods All adults who underwent EUS and resided in Calgary in 2007–2013 were included. Endoscopy and provincial databases were used to identify EUS procedures, unplanned emergency department visits, and hospital admissions within 30 days of the procedures, which were then characterized through formal chart review. Adverse events were defined a priori and classified as definitely, possibly, or not related to EUS. The primary outcome was 30-day risk of adverse events classified as definitely or possibly related to EUS. Univariable and multivariable analyses were conducted with risk factors known to be associated with EUS adverse events.

Results 2895 patients underwent 3552 EUS procedures: 3034 (85 %) upper EUS, of which 710 (23 %) included FNA, and 518 (15 %) lower EUS, of which 23 (4 %) involved FNA. Overall, 69 procedures (2 %) involved an adverse event that was either definitely or possibly related to EUS, with 33 (1 %) requiring hospitalization. None of the adverse events required intensive care or resulted in death. On multivariable analysis, only FNA was associated with increased risk of adverse events (odds ratio 6.43, 95 % confidence interval 3.92–10.55; P < 0.001).

Conclusion Upper and lower EUS were generally safe but FNA substantially increased the risk of adverse events. EUS-related complications requiring hospitalization were rare.

Publication History

Received: 17 December 2020

Accepted: 05 May 2021

Article published online:
23 August 2021

© 2021. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

• References

• 1 Wang K-X, Ben Q-W, Jin Z-D. et al. Assessment of morbidity and mortality associated with EUS-guided FNA: a systematic review. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 283-290
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Early DS, Acosta RD, Chandrasekhara V. et al. Adverse events associated with EUS and EUS with FNA. Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 77: 839-843
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Eloubeidi M, Tamhane A, Lopes T. et al. Cervical esophageal perforations at the time of endoscopic ultrasound: a prospective evaluation of frequency, outcomes, and patient management. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69: S240
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Varadarajulu S, Eloubeidi MA. Frequency and significance of acute intracystic hemorrhage during EUS-FNA of cystic lesions of the pancreas. Gastrointest Endosc 2004; 60: 631-635
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 O’Toole D, Palazzo L, Arotçarena R. et al. Assessment of complications of EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration. Gastrointest Endosc 2001; 53: 470-474
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Eloubeidi MA, Gress FG, Savides TJ. et al. Acute pancreatitis after EUS-guided FNA of solid pancreatic masses: a pooled analysis from EUS centers in the United States. Gastrointest Endosc 2004; 60: 385-389
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Cotton PB, Eisen G, Romagnuolo J. et al. Grading the complexity of endoscopic procedures: results of an ASGE working party. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 868-874
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Zhu H, Jiang F, Zhu J. et al. Assessment of morbidity and mortality associated with endoscopic ultrasound‐guided fine‐needle aspiration for pancreatic cystic lesions: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Dig Endosc 2017; 29: 667-675
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Eloubeidi MA, Tamhane A. EUS-guided FNA of solid pancreatic masses: a learning curve with 300 consecutive procedures. Gastrointest Endosc 2005; 61: 700-708
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Eloubeidi MA, Chen VK, Eltoum IA. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy of patients with suspected pancreatic cancer: diagnostic accuracy and acute and 30-day complications. Am J Gastroenterol 2003; 98: 2663-2668
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Levy MJ, Abu Dayyeh BK, Fujii LL. et al. Prospective evaluation of adverse events following lower gastrointestinal tract EUS FNA. Am J Gastroenterol 2014; 109: 676-685
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Brown L, Clark N, Conway J. et al. Rectal ultrasound with fine needle aspiration: an underutilized modality for delineating and diagnosing perirectal, presacral, and pelvic lesions. Endosc Int Open 2019; 7: E171-E177
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Khan U, Abunassar M, Chatterjee A. et al. Advanced endoscopy trainee involvement early in EUS training may be associated with an increased risk of adverse events. J Can Assoc Gastroenterol 2020; 3: 83-90
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Cotton PB, Eisen GM, Aabakken L. et al. A lexicon for endoscopic adverse events: report of an ASGE workshop. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 446-454
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Hilsden RJ, Dube C, Heitman SJ. et al. The association of colonoscopy quality indicators with the detection of screen-relevant lesions, adverse events, and postcolonoscopy cancers in an asymptomatic Canadian colorectal cancer screening population. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 82: 887-894
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Causada-Calo N, Bishay K, Albashir S. et al. Association between age and complications after outpatient colonoscopy. JAMA Netw Open 2020; 3: e208958-e208958
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 Warren JL, Klabunde CN, Mariotto AB. et al. Adverse events after outpatient colonoscopy in the Medicare population. Ann Intern Med 2009; 150: 849-857
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Day LW, Kwon A, Inadomi JM. et al. Adverse events in older patients undergoing colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 74: 885-896
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Dumonceau J-M, Kapral C, Aabakken L. et al. ERCP-related adverse events: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline. Endoscopy 2020; 52: 127-149
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Katanuma A, Maguchi H, Yane K. et al. Factors predictive of adverse events associated with endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of pancreatic solid lesions. Dig Dis Sci 2013; 58: 2093-2099
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 Jenssen C, Hocke M, Fusaroli P. et al. EFSUMB Guidelines on Interventional Ultrasound (INVUS), Part IV – EUS-guided interventions: general aspects and EUS-guided sampling (long version). Eur J Ultrasound 2016; 37: E33-E76
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 Polkowski M, Jenssen C, Kaye P. et al. Technical aspects of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided sampling in gastroenterology: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Technical Guideline – March 2017. Endoscopy 2017; 49: 989-1006
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Alvarez-Sánchez MV, Jenssen C, Faiss S. et al. Interventional endoscopic ultrasonography: an overview of safety and complications. Surg Endosc 2014; 28: 712-734
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 24 Sasaki Y, Niwa Y, Hirooka Y. et al. The use of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for investigation of submucosal and extrinsic masses of the colon and rectum. Endoscopy 2005; 37: 154-160
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 25 Hassan GM, Paquin SC, Albadine R. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided FNA of pelvic lesions: a large single-center experience: EUS-FNA of pelvic lesions. Cancer Cytopathol 2016; 124: 836-841
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar