Factors Influencing the Fasting Time in Adult Patients After the Endoscopic Management of Sharp Esophageal Foreign Bodies

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q1 Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management Pub Date : 2024-02-05 DOI:10.2147/tcrm.s451517
Da-Quan Wu, Shu-Yang Chen, Ke-Guang Chen, Tan Wang, Guang-Yao Li, Xin-Sheng Huang
{"title":"Factors Influencing the Fasting Time in Adult Patients After the Endoscopic Management of Sharp Esophageal Foreign Bodies","authors":"Da-Quan Wu, Shu-Yang Chen, Ke-Guang Chen, Tan Wang, Guang-Yao Li, Xin-Sheng Huang","doi":"10.2147/tcrm.s451517","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<strong>Background:</strong> Sharp esophageal foreign body (SEFB) impaction can cause varying degrees of damage to the esophagus. There are few studies analyzing the postoperative fasting time in SEFB patients.<br/><strong>Methods:</strong> We retrospectively collected 835 SEFB patients. According to the fasting time after the endoscopic removal (ER) of SEFBs, the patients were divided into two groups: short fasting time (SFT, fasted ≤ 24 h) and long fasting time (LFT, fasted &gt; 24 h).<br/><strong>Results:</strong> There were 216 and 619 patients in the SFT and LFT group, respectively. The average age of the SFT group (52.97 years) was younger than that of the LFT group (55.96 years) (p = 0.025). The LFT group had lower proportion of duration of impaction (DOI) within 12 hours (14.2% vs 22.2%, p = 0.006) and erosion rates (89.0% vs 94.0%, p = 0.034) as well as higher proportion of esophageal perforation (19.5 vs 6.5%, p = 0.010) and patients who got intravenous anesthesia (63.78% vs 31.9%, p = 0.000) than the SFT group. The longest diameter of the foreign body (Lmax) in the LFT group (2.60 ± 1.01 cm) was greater than that in the SFT group (2.41 ± 0.83 cm; p = 0.01). Multivariate regression analysis found that age (OR = 1.726[1.208– 2.465], p = 0.003), DOI (OR = 1.793[1.175– 2.737], p = 0.007), Lmax (OR = 1.477[1.033– 2.111], p = 0.032), perforation (OR = 3.698[2.038– 6.710]; p &lt; 0.01) and intravenous anesthesia (OR = 3.734[2.642– 5.278]; p &lt; 0.01) were the independent factors that prolonged fasting time in patients with SEFBs, while esophageal mucosal erosion (OR = 0.433[0.229– 0.820]; p = 0.01) was the influencing factor leading to shortened fasting time.<br/><strong>Conclusion:</strong> For the first time, we analyzed factors influencing the fasting time after ER in SEFB patients. Age, DOI, Lmax, perforation and intravenous anesthesia were risk factors for a prolonged postoperative fasting time.<br/><br/>","PeriodicalId":22977,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/tcrm.s451517","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Sharp esophageal foreign body (SEFB) impaction can cause varying degrees of damage to the esophagus. There are few studies analyzing the postoperative fasting time in SEFB patients.
Methods: We retrospectively collected 835 SEFB patients. According to the fasting time after the endoscopic removal (ER) of SEFBs, the patients were divided into two groups: short fasting time (SFT, fasted ≤ 24 h) and long fasting time (LFT, fasted > 24 h).
Results: There were 216 and 619 patients in the SFT and LFT group, respectively. The average age of the SFT group (52.97 years) was younger than that of the LFT group (55.96 years) (p = 0.025). The LFT group had lower proportion of duration of impaction (DOI) within 12 hours (14.2% vs 22.2%, p = 0.006) and erosion rates (89.0% vs 94.0%, p = 0.034) as well as higher proportion of esophageal perforation (19.5 vs 6.5%, p = 0.010) and patients who got intravenous anesthesia (63.78% vs 31.9%, p = 0.000) than the SFT group. The longest diameter of the foreign body (Lmax) in the LFT group (2.60 ± 1.01 cm) was greater than that in the SFT group (2.41 ± 0.83 cm; p = 0.01). Multivariate regression analysis found that age (OR = 1.726[1.208– 2.465], p = 0.003), DOI (OR = 1.793[1.175– 2.737], p = 0.007), Lmax (OR = 1.477[1.033– 2.111], p = 0.032), perforation (OR = 3.698[2.038– 6.710]; p < 0.01) and intravenous anesthesia (OR = 3.734[2.642– 5.278]; p < 0.01) were the independent factors that prolonged fasting time in patients with SEFBs, while esophageal mucosal erosion (OR = 0.433[0.229– 0.820]; p = 0.01) was the influencing factor leading to shortened fasting time.
Conclusion: For the first time, we analyzed factors influencing the fasting time after ER in SEFB patients. Age, DOI, Lmax, perforation and intravenous anesthesia were risk factors for a prolonged postoperative fasting time.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
影响成人患者在内镜下处理尖锐食管异物后禁食时间的因素
背景:尖锐食管异物(SEFB)嵌顿会对食管造成不同程度的损伤。分析 SEFB 患者术后禁食时间的研究很少:我们回顾性地收集了 835 例 SEFB 患者。方法:我们回顾性收集了 835 例 SEFB 患者,根据内镜下切除 SEFB(ER)后的禁食时间将患者分为两组:禁食时间短(SFT,禁食 ≤ 24 小时)和禁食时间长(LFT,禁食 > 24 小时):结果:短空腹时间组和长空腹时间组分别有 216 名和 619 名患者。SFT 组的平均年龄(52.97 岁)比 LFT 组(55.96 岁)年轻(P = 0.025)。与 SFT 组相比,LFT 组异物嵌顿时间(DOI)在 12 小时内的比例(14.2% vs 22.2%,p = 0.006)和侵蚀率(89.0% vs 94.0%,p = 0.034)较低,食管穿孔比例(19.5 vs 6.5%,p = 0.010)和接受静脉麻醉的患者比例(63.78% vs 31.9%,p = 0.000)较高。LFT 组异物的最长直径(Lmax)(2.60 ± 1.01 厘米)大于 SFT 组(2.41 ± 0.83 厘米;P = 0.01)。多变量回归分析发现,年龄(OR = 1.726[1.208- 2.465],p = 0.003)、DOI(OR = 1.793[1.175- 2.737],p = 0.007)、Lmax(OR = 1.477[1.033- 2.111],p = 0.032)、穿孔(OR = 3.698[2.038- 6.710];p <;0.01)和静脉麻醉(OR = 3.734[2.642- 5.278]; p <0.01)是延长SEFBs患者禁食时间的独立因素,而食管黏膜糜烂(OR = 0.433[0.229- 0.820]; p = 0.01)是导致禁食时间缩短的影响因素:我们首次分析了影响 SEFB 患者 ER 后禁食时间的因素。年龄、DOI、Lmax、穿孔和静脉麻醉是导致术后禁食时间延长的风险因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
3.60%
发文量
139
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management is an international, peer-reviewed journal of clinical therapeutics and risk management, focusing on concise rapid reporting of clinical studies in all therapeutic areas, outcomes, safety, and programs for the effective, safe, and sustained use of medicines, therapeutic and surgical interventions in all clinical areas. The journal welcomes submissions covering original research, clinical and epidemiological studies, reviews, guidelines, expert opinion and commentary. The journal will consider case reports but only if they make a valuable and original contribution to the literature. As of 18th March 2019, Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management will no longer consider meta-analyses for publication. The journal does not accept study protocols, animal-based or cell line-based studies.
期刊最新文献
Experts’ Opinion in Fabry Disease Management and the Unmet Medical Need: The Saudi Perspective Thromboelastography in Long-Term Antiplatelet Therapy for Patients Diagnosed with Benign Prostate Hyperplasia Undergoing Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate: A Retrospective Study Drug Therapy Problems Identified by Clinical Pharmacists at a General Surgery Ward of an Academic Referral Hospital in Jordan Time in Therapeutic Range of Unfractionated Heparin-Based Therapy in Critically Ill Patients with COVID-19 Pneumonia Umbilical Vascular Thromboembolism: High-Risk Factors, Diagnosis, Management, and Pregnancy Outcomes: A Scoping Review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1