ArticleEndoscopy international open2026
Non-anesthesiologist-administered propofol sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy in ASA III patients: Eight-year experience.
Article in Endoscopy international open, 2026. 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and study aims: Sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy is widely recognized for improving patient comfort, procedure quality, and endoscopist satisfaction. Although non-anesthesiologist-administered sedation (NAS) with propofol is well established for low-risk patients (i.e. American Society of Anesthesiologist [ASA] I-II), evidence for its safety in higher-risk populations remains limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate safety of NAS with propofol in ASA III patients undergoing diagnostic gastrointestinal endoscopy. Patients and methods: This observational study included ASA III patients who underwent elective gastroscopy or colonoscopy under NAS with propofol, with or without adjunctive midazolam and/or fentanyl, between 2017 and 2024. Sedation was administered by trained endoscopy personnel according to European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy/European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates guidelines. Anesthesia-related adverse events (ARAEs) were categorized as minor, moderate, or severe based on World Society of Intravenous Anesthesia definitions. Secondary outcomes included identification of potential risk factors for ARAEs. Results: Among 1423 procedures (43.4% gastroscopies, 56.6% colonoscopies), overall incidence of ARAEs was 5.2% (3.9% minor, 0.9% moderate, 0.4% severe), with no tracheal intubations or deaths. Hypotension (3.6%) was the most frequent and all such events were transient and reversible. Severe ARAEs were all bradycardia, successfully treated with atropine administration. The ARAE rate was higher with propofol + midazolam (8.6%) than with propofol + fentanyl (3.7%, Conclusions: NAS with propofol appears safe and feasible in ASA III patients when performed by trained staff following standardized protocols and monitoring. These findings support expanding NAS with propofol to higher-risk populations, optimizing resources and access to endoscopic care.
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.