Fasting vs. no fasting prior to catheterization laboratory procedures: the SCOFF trial
In patients undergoing cardiac catheterization and CIED-related procedures, no fasting was non-inferior and superior to fasting for the primary composite outcome of aspiration pneumonia, hypotension, hyperglycaemia, and hypoglycaemia. Patient satisfaction scores were significantly better with no fasting. This supports removing fasting requirements for patients undergoing cardiac catheterization laboratory procedures that require conscious sedation.
Authors
- Andrew Boyle (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3919-5269)
- Nicholas Collins (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4722-0214)
- Bradley Wilsmore (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8254-2705)
- Matthew French (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0006-7082-3688)
- William Meere
- Allan Davies (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5929-3472)
- Malcolm Barlow
- N. Whitehead (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7990-7438)
- Christopher Oldmeadow (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6104-1322)
- Nicholas Jackson (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4837-6624)
- Shanathan Sritharan
- Aaron L. Sverdlov (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2539-8038)
- Paul M. Healey
- John Attia (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9800-1308)
- David Ferreira (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3142-4503)
- Michael F. McGee (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9498-4252)
- Gwilym M. Morris (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9893-6648)
- Thomas J. Ford (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4009-6652)
- Lloyd Butel-Simoes
- Stuart Turner
- Jack Hardy
- Sarah Leask
- Simon O’Connor
- Max D. Ray
Institutions
- John Hunter Hospital (AU)
- Gosford Hospital (AU)
- Hunter Medical Research Institute (AU)
- Tamworth Hospital (AU)
- Calvary Mater Newcastle Hospital (AU)
- University of Newcastle Australia (AU)
Publication Details
- Journal
- European Heart Journal
- Published
- 2024-09-01
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae573
- Citations
- 23
- Primary Topic
- Hospital Admissions and Outcomes
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 15.89