Serkan Yaras

Effectiveness of Sedoanalgesia in Percutaneous Liver Biopsy Premedication

Aim: Percutaneous needle liver biopsy (PLB) is frequently associated with pain and anxiety. This may discourage the patients for biopsy, and rebiopsies, if needed. We planned a study to investigate the efficacy of additional analgesia or sedation for PLB. Materials and methods: The study has been designed as a single-center, prospective study. The PLB was planned for 18- to 65-year-old consecutive patients who were included in the study. The patients were divided into three premedication groups as control, Meperidine, and Midazolam. Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) was used to measure each subject’s anxiety level. Fifteen minutes before the biopsy, 1 mL 0.9% NaCl subcutaneously (sc), 1 mg/kg (max 100 mg) Meperidine sc, or 0.1 mg/kg (max 5 mg) Midazolam intravenously was administered to patients respectively. Then PLB was done with 16 G Menghini needle. The day after, the patients were asked about feelings regarding biopsy. Results: Groups were similar by gender and age. The HADS scores prior to PLB and on visual analog scale (VAS, 1-10 points) score during PLB were similar. In the three groups, 7, 12, and 7 patients, respectively, experienced no pain. Other patients explained pain as mild or moderate or severe. The number of patients who agreed for possible rebiopsy was higher in Meperidine and Midazolam groups than in the control group. Conclusion: Premedication with Meperidine or Midazolam in PLB would improve patients’ tolerance, comfort, and attitude against a possible repeat PLB. How to cite this article: Sezgin O, Yaras S, Ates F, Altintas E, Saritas B. Effectiveness of Sedoanalgesia in Percutaneous Liver Biopsy Premedication. Euroasian J Hepato-Gastroenterol 2017;7(2):146-149.

P648 What is the risk of malignancy at normal appearing mucosa in left-side ulcerative colitis patients?

gangrenosum). During the 2-year follow-up period, there were 22 new diagnostics of other IMID in 21 patients (cumulative incidence: 6.5%, 95%CI: 3.7 9.2; incidence rate: 26 cases per 10,000 patients-year, 95%CI: 16 39). The incidence of each specific IMID is shown in Table 1. The incidence was similar in patients with Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis (Table 2, p =NS). In the multivariate analysis, the incidence of new IMID was associated with the presence of family history of IBD (OR: 3.6, 95%CI: 1.4 9.4) and of extra-intestinal manifestations of IBD (OR: 1.8, 95%CI: 0.7 5.2).