Cardiopulmonary risk of esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Role of endoscope diameter and systemic sedation

Abstract

The impact of endoscope diameter and the presence of systemic sedation on the cardiopulmonary risk of esophagogastroduodenoscopy was investigated. One hundred and forty-six patients undergoing elective esophagogastroduodenoscopy were randomly assigned to one of three groups which differed in either endoscope diameter or use of sedation: group 1 (8.5-mm endoscope with no sedation), group 2 (8.5-mm endoscope with diazepam), and group 3 (11.5-mm endoscope with diazepam). Esophagogastroduodenoscopy was tolerated best by group 2, and this group had the fewest electrocardiographic changes observed on a Holter recording during esophagogastroduodenoscopy. The incidence of electrocardiographic changes during esophagogastroduodenoscopy correlated with patient tolerance (p less than 0.001) and the use of the smaller endoscope (p less than 0.05). The most common arrhythmia was sinus tachycardia (49 patients), but more serious electrocardiographic changes were observed in 21 patients. Serious arrhythmias were more common in patients with a prior history of cardiovascular disease compared with patients with no such history (30% vs. 6%, p less than 0.001). Arterial oxygen desaturation (measured by ear oximetry) during intubation and esophagogastroduodenoscopy was usually modest (2%-5%). However, 16 patients receiving diazepam experienced high levels of desaturation exceeding 7%; this small group of patients also experienced more electrocardiographic changes than other patients. The use of diazepam sedation and an 8.5-mm endoscope may offer the safest and most comfortable combination for most patients undergoing esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Diazepam sedation, however, may represent a potential danger to a small number of patients with marginal baseline arterial saturation.