Propofol-alone sedative efficacy in observational biliopancreatic endoscopic ultrasound
- PMID: 39420874
- PMCID: PMC11483557
- DOI: 10.1002/deo2.70025
Propofol-alone sedative efficacy in observational biliopancreatic endoscopic ultrasound
Abstract
Objectives: Appropriate sedative and analgesic selection is essential to reduce patient discomfort and body movement to safely conduct endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS). However, few cases have examined sedation with propofol in EUS, and few studies the need for combined analgesia. In this study, we retrospectively evaluated the usefulness and safety of propofol without analgesics for sedation in biliopancreatic observational EUS.
Methods: This single-center retrospective study included 516 observational biliopancreatic EUS procedures using propofol alone performed between April 2021 and March 2023. The primary and secondary endpoints were the observational biliopancreatic EUS results obtained with propofol alone and adverse event occurrence, respectively.
Results: The median examination time and total propofol dose were 22 (range: 10-67) min and 186.5 (range: 50-501) mg, respectively. The median starting Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale and Visual Analog Scale scores were -5 (range: -5-1) and 0 (range: 0-10), respectively. The median recovery time was 22 (range: 5-80) min. Adverse events occurred in 60 (11.6%) patients. Trainee-performed examination (odds ratio [OR] 3.52, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.63-7.60, p = 0.0014) and examination length (>22 min; OR 1.67, 95% CI: 0.95-2.92, p = 0.07) were risk factors for adverse events.High body mass index (OR 1.87, 95% CI: 1.10-3.16, p = 0.02) and extended examination time (OR 4.23, 95% CI: 2.08-8. 57, p < 0.001) were risk factors for delayed recovery.
Conclusions: During observational biliopancreatic EUS, propofol is useful as a single sedative and offers high patient satisfaction and relative safety.
Keywords: analgesics; endoscopic ultrasonography; propofol; sedative; sedative efficacy.
© 2024 The Author(s). DEN Open published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society.
Conflict of interest statement
Haruhiro Inoue, who received grants from the Olympus Corporation and Takeda Pharmaceutical Company, is an advisor for Olympus Corporation and Top Corporation. The other authors declare no conflict of interest.
Figures
References
-
- Cohen LB, Ladas SD, Vargo JJ et al. Sedation in digestive endoscopy: The Athens international position statements. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2010; 32: 425–442. - PubMed
-
- Cohen LB, Delegge MH, Aisenberg J et al. AGA Institute review of endoscopic sedation. Gastroenterology 2007; 133: 675–701. - PubMed
-
- Dietrich CF. Endosonography as theme of this issue–Update of endoscopic ultrasound techniques. Z Gastroenterol 2008; 46: 553–554 - PubMed
-
- Dumonceau JM, Riphaus A, Schreiber F et al. Non‐anesthesiologist administration of propofol for gastrointestinal endoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates Guideline―Updated June 2015. Endoscopy 2015; 47: 1175–1189. - PubMed
-
- Uksel O, Parlak E, Koklu S et al. Conscious sedation during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: Midazolam or midazolam plus meperidine? Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2007; 19: 1002–1006. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources