Endoscopy 2023; 55(07): 611-619
DOI: 10.1055/a-2022-6530
Original article

Intravenous paracetamol for persistent pain after endoscopic mucosal resection discriminates patients at risk of adverse events and those who can be safely discharged

Lobke Desomer‡   ‡
1   Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
2   Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, AZ Delta Hospital, Roeselare, Belgium
3   Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Hospital of Ghent, Ghent, Belgium
,
David J. Tate  ‡   ‡
1   Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
3   Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Hospital of Ghent, Ghent, Belgium
4   Westmead Clinical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
,
Leshni Pillay
1   Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
,
Halim Awadie 
1   Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
,
Mayenaaz Sidhu
1   Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
,
Golo Ahlenstiel 
1   Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
,
Michael J. Bourke
1   Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
4   Westmead Clinical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
› Author AffiliationsThe Cancer Institute New South Wales, Australia

Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Registration number (trial ID): NCT03471156 Type of study: Prospective
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints


Abstract

Introduction The frequency and severity of abdominal pain after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of colonic laterally spreading lesions (LSLs) of ≥ 20 mm is unknown, as are the risk factors to predict its occurrence. We aimed to prospectively characterize pain after colonic EMR , determine the rapidity and frequency of its resolution after analgesia, and estimate the frequency of needing further intervention.

Methods Procedural and lesion data on consecutive patients with LSLs who underwent EMR at a single tertiary referral center were prospectively collected. If pain after colonic EMR, graded using a visual analogue scale (VAS), lasted > 5 minutes, 1 g of paracetamol was administered. Pain lasting > 30 minutes lead to clinical review and upgrade to opiate analgesics. Investigations and interventions for pain were recorded.

Results 67/336 patients (19.9 %, 95 %CI 16.0 %–24.5 %) experienced pain after colonic EMR (median VAS 5, interquartile range 3–7). Multivariable predictors of pain were: lesion size ≥ 40 mm, odds ratio [OR] 2.15 (95 %CI 1.22–3.80); female sex, OR 1.99 (95 %CI 1.14–3.48); and intraprocedural bleeding requiring endoscopic control, OR 1.77 (95 %CI 0.99–3.16). Of 67 patients with pain, 51 (76.1 %, 95 %CI 64.7 %–84.7 %) had resolution of their “mild pain” after paracetamol and were discharged without sequelae. The remaining 16 (23.9 %) required opiate analgesia (fentanyl), after which 11/16 patients (68.8 %; “moderate pain”) could be discharged. The 5/67 patients (7.5 %) with “severe pain” had no resolution despite fentanyl; all settled during hospital admission (median duration 2 days), intravenous analgesia, and antibiotics.

Conclusion Pain after colonic EMR occurs in approximately 20 % of patients and resolves rapidly and completely in the majority with administration of intravenous paracetamol. Pain despite opiates heralds a more serious scenario and further investigation should be considered.

‡ Joint first authors


Table 1 s



Publication History

Received: 18 August 2020

Accepted after revision: 30 January 2023

Accepted Manuscript online:
30 January 2023

Article published online:
17 April 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Lee EY, Bourke MJ. EMR should be the first-line treatment for large laterally spreading colorectal lesions. Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 84: 326-328
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Bahin FF, Heitman SJ, Bourke MJ. et al. Wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection versus endoscopic submucosal dissection for laterally spreading colorectal lesions: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Gut 2018; 67: 1965-1973
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 3 Bourke MJ, Neuhaus H, Bergman JJ. Endoscopic submucosal dissection: indications and application in Western endoscopy practice. Gastroenterology 2018; 154: 1887-1900.e5
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Jideh B, Bourke MJ. How to perform wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection and follow-up examinations. Gastrointest Endosc Clin 2019; 29: 629-646
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Gustafsson UO, Scott MJ, Hubner M. et al. Guidelines for perioperative care in elective colorectal surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS(R)) Society Recommendations: 2018. World J Surg 2019; 43: 659-695
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Hirasawa K, Sato C, Makazu M. et al. Coagulation syndrome: delayed perforation after colorectal endoscopic treatments. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 7: 1055-1061
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Bassan MS, Holt B, Moss A. et al. Carbon dioxide insufflation reduces number of postprocedure admissions after endoscopic resection of large colonic lesions: a prospective cohort study. Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 77: 90-95
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Dellon ES, Hawk JS, Grimm IS. et al. The use of carbon dioxide for insufflation during GI endoscopy: a systematic review. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69: 843-849
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Holt BA, Bassan MS, Bourke MJ. Endoscopic management of colonoscopic perforations. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 75: 1291-1292
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Burgess NG, Bassan MS, McLeod D. et al. Deep mural injury and perforation after colonic endoscopic mucosal resection: a new classification and analysis of risk factors. Gut 2017; 66: 1779-1789
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 11 McNicol ED, Ferguson MC, Haroutounian S. et al. Single dose intravenous paracetamol or intravenous propacetamol for postoperative pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016;
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Moss A, Bourke MJ, Williams SJ. et al. Endoscopic mucosal resection outcomes and prediction of submucosal cancer from advanced colonic mucosal neoplasia. Gastroenterology 2011; 140: 1909-1918
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Klein A, Bourke MJ. How to perform high-quality endoscopic mucosal resection during colonoscopy. Gastroenterology 2017; 152: 466-471
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Hawker GA, Mian S, Kendzerska T. et al. Measures of adult pain: Visual Analog Scale for Pain (VAS Pain), Numeric Rating Scale for Pain (NRS Pain), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), Chronic Pain Grade Scale (CPGS), Short Form-36 Bodily Pain Scale (SF-36 BPS), and Measure of Intermittent and Constant Osteoarthritis Pain (ICOAP). Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2011; 63 (Suppl. 01) S240-S252
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 15 Gallagher EJ, Bijur PE, Latimer C. et al. Reliability and validity of a visual analog scale for acute abdominal pain in the ED. Am J Emerg Med 2002; 20: 287-290
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Jung JH, Jang HJ, Bang CS. et al. Efficacy of submucosal bupivacaine injection for pain relief after endoscopic submucosal dissection: A multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled, and double-blind trial. Medicine (Baltimore) 2019; 98: e15360
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Jung DH, Youn YH, Kim J-H. et al. Factors influencing development of pain after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection: a randomized controlled trial. Endoscopy 2015; 47: 1119-1123
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Klein A, Tate DJ, Jayasekeran V. et al. Thermal ablation of mucosal defect margins reduces adenoma recurrence after colonic endoscopic mucosal resection. Gastroenterology 2019; 156: 604-613.e3
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Lee SP, Sung I-K, Kim JH. et al. A randomized controlled trial of prophylactic antibiotics in the prevention of electrocoagulation syndrome after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 86: 349-357.e2
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Jung D, Youn YH, Jahng J. et al. Risk of electrocoagulation syndrome after endoscopic submucosal dissection in the colon and rectum. Endoscopy 2013; 45: 714-717
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Lee S-YSP, Kim JH, Sung I-K. et al. Effect of submucosal fibrosis on endoscopic submucosal dissection of colorectal tumors: pathologic review of 173 cases. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2015; 30: 872-878
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Rex DK, Lahr RE, Peterson MM. et al. Impact of including epinephrine in the submucosal injectate for colorectal EMR on postprocedural pain: a randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2022; 95: 535-539.e1
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar