Associations of anxiety with discomfort and tolerance in Chinese patients undergoing esophagogastroduodenoscopy.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the associations of pre-endoscopy anxiety with discomfort and tolerance in patients undergoing unsedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). METHODS: This is a hospital-based cohort study of 348 patients undergoing routine, non-advanced EGD without sedation. The primary outcomes were discomfort and tolerance. The anxiety before endoscopy was evaluated with a 10-point visual analogue scale (VAS). The associations of pre-endoscopy anxiety with the outcomes were evaluated with logistic regression adjusting for potential confounders like age, sex, and body mass index. RESULTS: Seventy patients reported severe discomfort and 56 patients reported poor tolerance after endoscopy. The risk of severe discomfort increased with pre-endoscopy anxiety and reached a platform around 7-10 points. Compared with the participants with low pre-endoscopy anxiety, those with moderate (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 2.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.17 to 6.22) and high level of anxiety (adjusted OR 6.87, 95% CI 2.16 to 21.79) were associated with a gradual increase in the risk of severe discomfort (P-trend < 0.001). The association between pre-endoscopy anxiety and tolerance was linear, with an adjusted OR of 1.67(95% CI 1.33 to 2.08) for a 1-score increase in pre-endoscopy anxiety VAS. The associations were not modified by age, sex, pharyngitis, duration of endoscopy, and diameter of the endoscope. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-endoscopy anxiety was an independent predictor of severe discomfort and poor tolerance in Chinese patients undergoing unsedated EGD. Our findings suggested the importance of the management of anxiety to reduce adverse endoscopic experience and taking high level of anxiety as an indication for sedation.

Proton pump inhibitors for preventing non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug induced gastrointestinal toxicity: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are recommended for preventing gastrointestinal lesions induced by non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). We performed this study: (1) to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of PPIs, (2) to explore the association between effectiveness and potential influential factors, and (3) to investigate the comparative effect of different PPIs. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify randomized controlled trials comparing different classes of PPIs, or comparing PPIs with placebo, H2 receptor antagonists or misoprostol in NSAIDs users. Both pairwise meta-analysis and Bayesian network meta-analysis were performed. RESULTS: Analyses were based on 12,532 participants from 31 trials. PPIs were significantly more effective than placebo in reducing ulcer complications (relative risk [RR] = 0.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.20 to 0.42) and endoscopic peptic ulcers (RR = 0.27; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.33), with no subgroup differences according to class of NSAIDs, ulcer risk, history of previous ulcer disease, Helicobacter pylori infection, or age. To prevent one ulcer complication, 10 high risk patients and 268 moderate risk patients need PPI therapy. Network meta-analysis indicated that the effectiveness of different PPIs in reducing ulcer complications and endoscopic peptic ulcers is generally similar. PPIs significantly reduced gastrointestinal adverse events and the related withdrawals compared to placebo; there is no difference in safety between different PPIs. CONCLUSIONS: PPIs are effective and safe in preventing peptic ulcers and complications in a wide spectrum of patients requiring NSAID therapy. There is no major difference in the comparative effectiveness and safety between different PPIs.