ArticleAnnals of gastroenterology
Risk factors for sedation-related adverse events during endoscopic ultrasound.
Article in Annals of gastroenterology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Complex endoscopic procedures such as endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) require higher doses of sedation, and thus carry a higher risk of adverse events compared to conventional endoscopy. This prospective cohort study assessed the safety of propofol sedation administered by non-anesthesiologists, and identified factors associated with sedation-related adverse events during EUS. Methods: A total of 2986 examinations were performed between January 2011 and May 2019. We collected data on patient characteristics (including age, body mass index and American Society of Anesthesiologists [ASA] class), procedural details, and sedation-related outcomes. Procedure characteristics and sedation-related adverse events were compared, firstly between interventional and diagnostic EUS, and then based on body mass index, ASA class and age. Logistic regression was performed to search for independent risk factors for sedation-related adverse events. Results: Sedation-related complications occurred in 4.8% of patients, hypoxemia being the most frequent (3.8%). Obese patients exhibited the highest rates of hypoxemia, early discontinuation and bag-mask ventilation (29.6%, 22.2% and 11.1%, respectively). Multivariate analysis revealed that obesity (odds ratio [OR] 8.57, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.62-20.28) and comorbidities (ASA III/IV) (OR 2.04, 95%CI 1.44-3.01) were independently associated with sedation-related adverse events, while age was not significant. Conclusions: Propofol sedation administered by non-anesthesiologists during EUS was safe, with low rates of adverse events, the vast majority of which were clinically insignificant. Comorbidities and obesity, but not age, were independent risk factors for sedation-related complications during EUS. Appropriate patient selection and adequate training of endoscopists are warranted to minimize the risks associated with sedation during EUS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.