+1 Recommend
0 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Considerable Variability of Procedural Sedation and Analgesia Practices for Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Procedures in Europe


      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.



          The use of moderate to deep sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures has increased in Europe considerably. Because this level of sedation is a risky medical procedure, a number of international guidelines have been developed. This survey aims to review if, and if so which, quality aspects have been included in new sedation practices when compared to traditional uncontrolled sedation practices.


          A questionnaire was sent to the National Associations of Nurse Anesthetists in Europe and the National Delegates of the European Section and Board of Anaesthesiology from January 2012 to August 2012.


          Huge variation in practices for moderate to deep sedation were identified between and within European countries in terms of safety, type of practitioners, responsibilities, monitoring, informed consent, patient satisfaction, complication registration, and training requirements. Seventy-five percent of respondents were not familiar with international sedation guidelines. Safe sedation practices (mainly propofol-based moderate to deep sedation) are rapidly gaining popularity.


          The risky medical procedure of moderate to deep sedation has become common practice for gastrointestinal endoscopy. Safe sedation practices requiring adequate selection of patients, adequate monitoring, training of sedation practitioners, and adequate after-care, are gaining attention in a field that is in transition from uncontrolled sedation care to controlled sedation care.

          Related collections

          Most cited references33

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Practice guidelines for sedation and analgesia by non-anesthesiologists.

            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A national study of cardiopulmonary unplanned events after GI endoscopy.

            Cardiopulmonary unplanned events (CUE) related to conscious sedation constitute a major proportion of GI endoscopy-associated complications. Our purpose was to study the incidence of CUE during GI endoscopy and to determine factors that may predict CUE. Retrospective CORI (Clinical Outcomes Research Initiative) database review. Undergoing GI endoscopy under conscious sedation. CUE associated with GI endoscopy. Data on 324,737 unique procedures (EGD, 140,692; colonoscopy, 174,255; ERCP, 6092; and EUS, 3698) performed with the patient under conscious sedation were analyzed. Unplanned events were reported in 1.4% of procedures; 0.9% were associated with CUE. Rates of CUE with EGD, colonoscopy, ERCP, and EUS were 0.6%, 1.1%, 2.1%, and 0.9%, respectively. Multiple logistic regression revealed patient age (odds ratio [OR] 1.02, 95% CI 1.01-1.02) and ASA class were significant predictors of CUE (OR compared with ASA I: ASA II 1.05, 95% CI 0.95-1.16; ASA III 1.8, 95% CI 1.6-2.0, ASA IV 3.2, 95% CI 2.5-4.1, ASA V 7.5; 95% CI 3.2-17.6). Inpatient procedures were associated with higher CUE (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.3-1.7). Compared with universities, nonuniversity sites (OR 1.2, 95% CI 1.1-1.4) and Veterans Administration Medical Centers (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.2-1.5) had significantly higher CUE. Use of supplemental oxygen during a procedure was associated with significantly more CUE (OR 1.2, 95% CI 1.1-1.3). Involvement of a trainee with a procedure was also associated with higher CUE (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.1-1.4). Retrospective review of data entered voluntarily by endoscopists not trained on CORI data entry. During GI endoscopy with conscious sedation, patient's age, higher ASA grade, inpatient status, trainee participation, and routine use of oxygen are associated with a higher incidence of CUE.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Endoscopist-directed administration of propofol: a worldwide safety experience.

              Endoscopist-directed propofol sedation (EDP) remains controversial. We sought to update the safety experience of EDP and estimate the cost of using anesthesia specialists for endoscopic sedation. We reviewed all published work using EDP. We contacted all endoscopists performing EDP for endoscopy that we were aware of to obtain their safety experience. These complications were available in all patients: endotracheal intubations, permanent neurologic injuries, and death. A total of 646,080 (223,656 published and 422,424 unpublished) EDP cases were identified. Endotracheal intubations, permanent neurologic injuries, and deaths were 11, 0, and 4, respectively. Deaths occurred in 2 patients with pancreatic cancer, a severely handicapped patient with mental retardation, and a patient with severe cardiomyopathy. The overall number of cases requiring mask ventilation was 489 (0.1%) of 569,220 cases with data available. For sites specifying mask ventilation risk by procedure type, 185 (0.1%) of 185,245 patients and 20 (0.01%) of 142,863 patients required mask ventilation during their esophagogastroduodenoscopy or colonoscopy, respectively (P < .001). The estimated cost per life-year saved to substitute anesthesia specialists in these cases, assuming they would have prevented all deaths, was $5.3 million. EDP thus far has a lower mortality rate than that in published data on endoscopist-delivered benzodiazepines and opioids and a comparable rate to that in published data on general anesthesia by anesthesiologists. In the cases described here, use of anesthesia specialists to deliver propofol would have had high costs relative to any potential benefit.

                Author and article information

                Clin Endosc
                Clin Endosc
                Clinical Endoscopy
                The Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
                January 2016
                28 January 2016
                : 49
                : 1
                : 47-55
                Division of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Hermanus H. B. Vaessen Division of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, Huispostnr. F02.811, 3584 CX Utrecht, Netherlands Tel: +31-88-755-9619, Fax: +31-30-755-5442, E-mail: H.H.B.Vaessen@ 123456umcutrecht.nl
                Copyright © 2016 Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                : 6 March 2015
                : 24 July 2015
                : 16 August 2015
                Original Article

                Radiology & Imaging
                moderate to deep sedation,endoscopy, gastrointestinal,guideline,patient safety


                Comment on this article