ArticleDEN open2027
Evaluating a Modified American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status-Based Sedation Management System for Pancreatobiliary Endoscopy: A Prospective Feasibility Study.
Article in DEN open, 2027. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To prospectively evaluate the feasibility of implementing a modified American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA-PS)-based sedation management system for endoscopist-managed sedation in pancreatobiliary endoscopy. Methods: This single-center, single-arm prospective feasibility study involved 2000 patients (2024-2025). Sedation risk was stratified using a modified ASA-PS classification system combined with predefined high-risk clinical factors (severe obesity, obstructive sleep apnea requiring continuous positive airway pressure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease requiring home oxygen therapy, reduced functional capacity, and difficult sedation history). Patients meeting high-risk criteria underwent pre-procedural anesthesiologist assessment to determine sedation providers. The primary outcome was sedation-related adverse event (SRAE) incidence during endoscopist-managed sedation. The secondary outcomes were the sedation success rate and SRAE-associated risk factors. Results: Among 2000 patients, 231 (11.6%) were classified as having high risk for sedation. Post-assessment, anesthesiologists and endoscopists managed sedation for 86 (4.3%) and 1914 (95.7%) patients, respectively. In the endoscopist-managed group, SRAEs occurred in 63 patients (3.3%), corresponding to a success rate of 96.7%. No patient required tracheal intubation or conversion to general anesthesia. In multivariable analysis, endoscopic ultrasonography-guided sampling was independently associated with reduced SRAEs (odds ratio 0.407, 95% confidence interval 0.184-0.899; Conclusions: The modified ASA-PS-based sedation management system may be a feasible approach in settings with limited anesthesiology resources, warranting further validation. Trial Registration: UMIN000053211.
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.