Safety and efficacy of endoscopist-directed balanced propofol sedation during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

Sedation reversal trends at outpatient ambulatory endoscopic center vs in-hospital ambulatory procedure center using a triage protocol

BACKGROUND

Routine outpatient endoscopy is performed across a variety of outpatient settings. A known risk of performing endoscopy under moderate sedation is the potential for over-sedation, requiring the use of reversal agents. More needs to be reported on rates of reversal across different outpatient settings. Our academic tertiary care center utilizes a triage tool that directs higher-risk patients to the in-hospital ambulatory procedure center (APC) for their procedure. Here, we report data on outpatient sedation reversal rates for endoscopy performed at an in-hospital APC vs at a free-standing ambulatory endoscopy digestive health center (AEC-DHC) following risk stratification with a triage tool.

AIM

To observe the effect of risk stratification using a triage tool on patient outcomes, primarily sedation reversal events.

METHODS

We observed all outpatient endoscopy procedures performed at AEC-DHC and APC from April 2013 to September 2019. Procedures were stratified to their respective sites using a triage tool. We evaluated each procedure for which sedation reversal with flumazenil and naloxone was recorded. Demographics and characteristics recorded include patient age, gender, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, procedure type, and reason for sedation reversal.

RESULTS

There were 97366 endoscopic procedures performed at AEC-DHC and 22494 at the APC during the study period. Of these, 17 patients at AEC-DHC and 9 at the APC underwent sedation reversals (0.017% vs 0.04%; P = 0.06). Demographics recorded for those requiring reversal at AEC-DHC vs APC included mean age (53.5 ± 21 vs 60.4 ± 17.42 years; P = 0.23), ASA class (1.66 ± 0.48 vs 2.22 ± 0.83; P = 0.20), BMI (27.7 ± 6.7 kg/m²vs 23.7 ± 4.03 kg/m²; P = 0.06), and female gender (64.7% vs 22%; P = 0.04). The mean doses of sedative agents and reversal drugs used at AEC-DHC vs APC were midazolam (5.9 ± 1.7 mg vs 8.9 ± 3.5 mg; P = 0.01), fentanyl (147.1 ± 49.9 μg vs 188.9 ± 74.1 μg; P = 0.10), flumazenil (0.3 ± 0.18 μg vs 0.17 ± 0.17 μg; P = 0.13) and naloxone (0.32 ± 0.10 mg vs 0.28 ± 0.12 mg; P = 0.35). Procedures at AEC-DHC requiring sedation reversal included colonoscopies (n = 6), esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) (n = 9) and EGD/colonoscopies (n = 2), whereas APC procedures included EGDs (n = 2), EGD with gastrostomy tube placement (n = 1), endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (n = 2) and endoscopic ultrasound's (n = 4). The indications for sedation reversal at AEC-DHC included hypoxia (n = 13; 76%), excessive somnolence (n = 3; 18%), and hypotension (n = 1; 6%), whereas, at APC, these included hypoxia (n = 7; 78%) and hypotension (n = 2; 22%). No sedation-related deaths or long-term post-sedation reversal adverse outcomes occurred at either site.

CONCLUSION

Our study highlights the effectiveness of a triage tool used at our tertiary care hospital for risk stratification in minimizing sedation reversal events during outpatient endoscopy procedures. Using a triage tool for risk stratification, low rates of sedation reversal can be achieved in the ambulatory settings for EGD and colonoscopy.

Effectiveness of supraglottic ventilation by transtracheal catheter for painless ERCP

PURPOSE

This study aimed to investigate the effect of supraglottic ventilation via transtracheal catheter in painless endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP).

METHODS

Sixty patients with painless ERCP who were treated in our hospital were enrolled as the study subjects and divided into a study group (n=30) and a control group (n=30) according to the method of ventilation during the operation. The control group received ventilation via modified laryngeal mask, while the study group received supraglottic ventilation through a transtracheal tube. The mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), oxygen saturation (SpO₂), and End-tidal CO₂ (EtCO₂) at multiple time points after admission (T0), after induction of anesthesia (T1), immediately after catheter placement (T2), immediately after operation (T3), and at the time of resuscitation (T4) were compared between the two groups. The incidence of various adverse events in the perioperative period was also compared.

RESULTS

The two groups showed significant fluctuations in intraoperative hemodynamic parameters. However, the changes in MAP, SpO₂ and ETCO₂ of the study group were more stable, and better than those of the control group at the T2 and T3 (P<0.05). The intubation time, operation time and recovery time of patients in the study group were significantly lower than those in the control group (P<0.05). The total incidence of adverse events in the study group was significantly lower than that in the control group (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

It is highly feasible to apply supraglottic ventilation with transvalvular catheter in painless ERCP, which can significantly stabilize the perioperative hemodynamic parameters, accelerate recovery and also help decrease the rate of postoperative complications.

Can Bispectral Index Monitoring (EEG) be an Early Predictor of Respiratory Depression under Deep Sedation during Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography?

Objectives:

The more often the endoscopy sedation is performed, the more the risk of adverse events, and therefore, advanced monitoring becomes more and more essential in endoscopy units. The present study aims to evaluate whether the Bispectral Index (BIS) monitoring is an early predictor of respiratory depression and to determine the compliance between commonly used clinical sedation score.

Methods:

This study was approved by the ethics committee. The sample consisted of 60 patients aged 18 to 50 years with an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status of I scheduled for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). All patients received propofol mediated sedation. Ramsay sedation score (RSS) was used as a clinical sedation score to assess the depth of sedation. Participants were attached to a BIS monitor. Perioperative hemodynamics, BIS values, the mean dose of propofol, procedure duration, apnea, frequency of oxygen desaturation and airway-related interventions, as well as demographic parameters, were recorded. BIS scores were blinded to RSS data.

Results:

The study sample consisted of 60 patients (36 females) aged 18 to 50 years (mean: 36.10±8.02). The mean procedure time and the dose of propofol were 32.70±1.79 min and 287.17±59.66 mg, respectively. The cut-off values for respiratory depression were as follows. At the 15th min of measurement, the BIS score of 60 had 96.2% sensitivity and 42.9% specificity. At the 20th min of measurement, the BIS score of 59.50 had 98.2% sensitivity and 100.0% specificity. At the 25th min of measurement, the BIS score of 59.00 had 98.3% sensitivity and 50.0% specificity. Regression analysis showed that the mean BIS score (p=0.000, 95%CI-0.110-0.043) increased by 0.076 with a unit increase in the RSS.

Conclusion:

BIS was highly correlated with RSS, and therefore, can be used to avoid respiratory depression during sedation.

Sedation-related complications during anesthesiologist-administered sedation for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a prospective study

Background

Patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) require adequate sedation or general anesthesia. To date, there is lack of consensus regarding who should administer sedation in these patients. Several studies have investigated the safety and efficacy of non-anesthesiologist-administered sedation for ERCP; however, data regarding anesthesiologist-administered sedation remain limited. This prospective single-center study investigated the safety and efficacy of anesthesiologist-administered sedation and the rate of successful performed ERCP procedures.

Methods

The study included 200 patients who underwent ERCP following anesthesiologist-administered sedation with propofol and remifentanil. Procedural data, oxygen saturation, systolic blood pressure (SBP), heart rate, recovery score, patient and endoscopist satisfaction, as well as 30-day mortality and morbidity data were analyzed.

Results

Sedation-related complications occurred in 36 of 200 patients (18%) and included hypotension (SBP < 90 mmHg) and hypoxemia (O₂ saturation < 90%) in 18 patients (9%) each. Most events were minor and did not necessitate discontinuation of the procedure. However, ERCP was terminated in 2 patients (1%) secondary to sedation-related complications. Successful cannulation was performed in all patients. The mean duration of the examination was 25 ± 16 min. Mean recovery time was 14 ± 10 min, and high post-procedural satisfaction was observed in both, patients (mean visual analogue scale [VAS] 9.6 ± 0.8) and endoscopists (mean VAS 9.3 ± 1.3).

Conclusion

This study suggests that anesthesiologist-administered sedation is safe in patients undergoing ERCP and is associated with a high rate of successful ERCP, shorter procedure time, and more rapid post-anesthesia recovery, with high patient and endoscopist satisfaction.