Over the past decade, multiple clinical reports have demonstrated that the use of propofol sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy by gastroenterologists and trained endoscopy nurses is safe and effective in appropriately selected patients. Proposed benefits of propofol sedation include rapid onset of action, improved patient comfort and rapid clearance, as well as prompt recovery and discharge from the endoscopy unit. As a result of medical evidence, a number of international professional societies have endorsed the use of propofol in gastrointestinal endoscopy. In Canada, no formal guidelines currently exist. In the present article, the Clinical Affairs Committee of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology presents a position statement, incorporating updated information on the use of propofol sedation for endoscopy in adult patients.
Conscious sedation; Endoscopy; Gastrointestinal endoscopy; General anesthesia; Propofol; Sedation
Diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopy can successfully be performed by applying moderate (conscious) sedation. Moderate sedation, using midazolam and an opioid, is the standard method of sedation, although propofol is increasingly being used in many countries because the satisfaction of endoscopists with propofol sedation is greater compared with their satisfaction with conventional sedation. Moreover, the use of propofol is currently preferred for the endoscopic sedation of patients with advanced liver disease due to its short biologic half-life and, consequently, its low risk of inducing hepatic encephalopathy. In the future, propofol could become the preferred sedation agent, especially for routine colonoscopy. Midazolam is the benzodiazepine of choice because of its shorter duration of action and better pharmacokinetic profile compared with diazepam. Among opioids, pethidine and fentanyl are the most popular. A number of other substances have been tested in several clinical trials with promising results. Among them, newer opioids, such as remifentanil, enable a faster recovery. The controversy regarding the administration of sedation by an endoscopist or an experienced nurse, as well as the optimal staffing of endoscopy units, continues to be a matter of discussion. Safe sedation in special clinical circumstances, such as in the cases of obese, pregnant, and elderly individuals, as well as patients with chronic lung, renal or liver disease, requires modification of the dose of the drugs used for sedation. In the great majority of patients, sedation under the supervision of a properly trained endoscopist remains the standard practice worldwide. In this review, an overview of the current knowledge concerning sedation during digestive endoscopy will be provided based on the data in the current literature.
Gastrointestinal endoscopy; Endoscopy; Sedation; Analgesia; Digestive system
Objectives. To review our sedation practice and to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of an anesthesiologist-administered intravenous sedation outside of the main operating room for pediatric upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (UGIE) in Thailand. Subjects and Methods. We undertook a retrospective review of the sedation service records of pediatric patients who underwent UGIE. All endoscopies were performed by a pediatric gastroenterologist. All sedation was administered by staff anesthesiologist or anesthetic personnel. Results. A total of 168 patients (94 boys and 74 girls), with age from 4 months to 12 years, underwent 176 UGIE procedures. Of these, 142 UGIE procedures were performed with intravenous sedation (IVS). The mean sedation time was 23.2 ± 10.0 minutes. Propofol was the most common sedative drugs used. Mean dose of propofol, midazolam and fentanyl was 10.0 ± 7.5 mg/kg/hr, 0.2 ± 0.2 mg/kg/hr, and 2.5 ± 1.2 mcg/kg/hr, respectively. Complications relatively occurred frequently. All sedations were successful. However, two patients became more deeply than intended and required unplanned endotracheal intubation. Conclusion. The study shows the clinical effectiveness of an anesthesiologist-administered IVS outside of the main operating room for pediatric UGIE in Thailand. All complications are relatively high. We recommend the use of more sensitive equipments such as end tidal CO2 and carefully select more appropriate patients.
Practice audit is an important component of continuing professional development that may more readily be undertaken if it were less complex. This qualitative study assessed the use of personal digital assistants to facilitate data collection and review.
Personal digital assistants programmed with standard questionnaires related to upper gastrointestinal endoscopies (Practice Audit in Gastroenterology-Endoscopy [‘PAGE-Endo’]) and colonoscopies (PAGE-Colonoscopy [‘PAGE-Colo’]) were provided to Canadian gastroenterologists, surgeons and internists. Over a three-week audit period, participants recorded indications, and the expected (E) and reported (R) findings for each procedure. Thereafter, participants recorded compliance with reporting, the ease of use and value of the PAGE program, and their willingness to perform another audit.
Over 15 to 18 months, 173 participants completed PAGE-Endo (6168 procedures) and 111 completed PAGE-Colo (4776 procedures). Most respondents noted that PAGE was easy to use (99%), beneficial (88% to 95%), and that they were willing undertake another audit (92% to 95%). In PAGE-Endo, alarm features were prevalent (55%), but major reported findings were less common than expected: esophagitis (E 29.9%, R 14.8%), esophageal stricture (E 8.3%, R 3.6%), gastric ulcer (E 17.0%, R 4.7%), gastric cancer (E 4.3%, R 1.0%) and duodenal ulcer (E 11.5%, R 5.7%). In PAGE-Colo, more colonoscopies were performed for symptom investigation (55%) than for screening (25%) or surveillance (20%). There were marked interprovincial variations with respect to sedation, biopsies and technical aspects of colonoscopy.
Secure, real-time data entry with review of aggregate and individual data in the PAGE program provided an acceptable, straightforward methodology for accredited practice audit activities. PAGE has considerable potential for continuing professional development in gastroenterology and other specialties.
Colonoscopy; Continuing medical education; Continuing professional development; Endoscopy; Gastroenterology; Maintenance of certification; Personal digital assistant; Practice audit
There is concern that the Canadian pediatric gastroenterology workforce is inadequate to meet health care demands of the pediatric population. The Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Pediatric Committee performed a survey to determine characteristics and future plans of the Canadian pediatric gastroenterology workforce and trainees.
Estimates of total and pediatric populations were obtained from the 2001 Census of Population, Statistics Canada (with estimates to July 1, 2005). Data on Canadian pediatric gastroenterologists, including clinical full-time equivalents, sex, work interests, opinions on workforce adequacy, retirement plans, fellowship training programs and future employment plans of fellows, were gathered through e-mail surveys and telephone correspondence in 2005 and 2006.
Canada had an estimated population of 32,270,507 in 2005 (6,967,853 people aged zero to 17 years). The pediatric gastroenterology workforce was estimated at 9.2 specialists per million children. Women accounted for 50% of the workforce. Physician to pediatric population ratios varied, with Alberta demonstrating the highest and Saskatchewan the lowest ratios (1:69,404 versus 1:240,950, respectively). Between 1998 and 2005, Canadian pediatric gastroenterology fellowship programs trained 65 fellows (65% international trainees). Twenty-two fellows (34%) entered the Canadian workforce.
The survey highlights the variable and overall low numbers of pediatric gastroenterologists across Canada, an increasingly female workforce, a greater percentage of part-time physicians and a small cohort of Canadian trainees. In conjunction with high projected retirement rates, greater demands on the work-force and desires to partake in nonclinical activities, there is concern for an increasing shortage of pediatric gastroenterologists in Canada in future years.
Canada; Gastroenterology; Manpower; Pediatrics
Point-of-care practice audits allow documentation of procedural outcomes to support quality improvement in endoscopic practice.
To evaluate a colonoscopists’ practice audit tool that provides point-of-care data collection and peer-comparator feedback.
A prospective, observational colonoscopy practice audit was conducted in academic and community endoscopy units for unselected patients undergoing colonoscopy. Anonymized colonoscopist, patient and practice data were collected using touchscreen smart-phones with automated data upload for data analysis and review by participants. The main outcome measures were the following colonoscopy quality indicators: colonoscope insertion and withdrawal times, bowel preparation quality, sedation, immediate complications and polypectomy, and biopsy rates.
Over a span of 16 months, 62 endoscopists reported on 1279 colonoscopy procedures. The mean cecal intubation rate was 94.9% (10th centile 84.2%). The mean withdrawal time was 8.8 min and, for nonpolypectomy colonoscopies, 41.9% of colonoscopists reported a mean withdrawal time of less than 6 min. Polypectomy was performed in 37% of colonoscopies. Independent predictors of polypectomy included the following: endoscopy unit type, patient age, interval since previous colonoscopy, bowel preparation quality, stable inflammatory bowel disease, previous colon polyps and withdrawal time. Withdrawal times of less than 6 min were associated with lower polyp removal rates (mean difference −11.3% [95% CI −2.8% to −19.9%]; P=0.01).
Cecal intubation rates exceeded 90% and polypectomy rates exceeded 30%, but withdrawal times were frequently shorter than recommended. There are marked practice variations consistent with previous observations.
Real-time, point-of-care practice audits with prompt, confidential access to outcome data provide a basis for targeted educational programs to improve quality in colonoscopy practice.
Colonoscopy; Health care; Practice audit; Quality assurance; Quality indicators
This study attempted to determine if sevoflurane in oxygen inhaled via a nasal hood as a sole sedative agent would provide an appropriate level of deep sedation for outpatient third molar surgery. Twenty-four patients scheduled for third molar removal were randomly assigned to receive either nasal hood inhalation sevoflurane or an intravenous deep sedation using midazolam and fentanyl followed by a propofol infusion. In addition to measuring patient, surgeon, and dentist anesthesiologist subjective satisfaction with the technique, physiological parameters, amnesia, and psychomotor recovery were also assessed. No statistically significant difference was found between the sevoflurane and midazolam-fentanyl-propofol sedative groups in physiological parameters, degree of amnesia, reported quality of sedation, or patient willingness to again undergo a similar deep sedation. A trend toward earlier recovery in the sevoflurane group was identified. Sevoflurane can be successfully employed as a deep sedative rather than a general anesthetic for extraction of third molars in healthy subjects.
Data are scarce on endoscopic sedation practices outside the United States and Western Europe, particularly from developing nations. An Internet survey was used to assess endoscopic sedation practices in developing and developed countries.
Responses to a Web-based survey of sedation practices from 165 expert endoscopists from 81 countries were analyzed. The most common sedation method was defined as that used for >50% of endoscopies within a country.
Responses were received from 84 endoscopists practicing in 46 countries (51% response rate; 32 responses from 22 developing countries and 52 responses from 24 developed countries). A combination of benzodiazepine and opioid was the most common method for esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in 40% of the countries and for colonoscopy in 56% of the countries. For propofol and unsedated endoscopy, the corresponding figures were 8% and 19% for EGD and 18% and 10% for colonoscopy. No single sedation method accounted for >50% of EGD and colonoscopy cases in 32% and 17% of the countries, respectively. There were no significant differences in the proportions of developing and developed countries using combined benzodiazepine and opioid, propofol, or unsedated endoscopy.
Sedation is used for most endoscopic procedures worldwide, with sedation practice not differing significantly between developing and developed countries.
Endoscopy; Sedation; Survey
Sedation and analgesia are provided by using different agents and techniques in different countries. The goal is to achieve early spontaneous breathing and to obtain an awake and cooperative pain-free patient. It was the aim of this study to conduct a survey of the agents and techniques used for analgesia and sedation in intensive care units in Germany.
A survey was sent by mail to 261 hospitals in Germany. The anesthesiologists running the intensive care unit were asked to fill in the structured questionnaire about their use of sedation and analgesia.
A total of 220 (84%) questionnaires were completed and returned. The RAMSAY sedation scale was used in 8% of the hospitals. A written policy was available in 21% of hospitals. For short-term sedation in most hospitals, propofol was used in combination with sufentanil or fentanyl. For long-term sedation, midazolam/fentanyl was preferred. Clonidine was a common part of up to two-thirds of the regimens. Epidural analgesia was used in up to 68%. Neuromuscular blocking agents were no longer used.
In contrast to the US 'Clinical practice guidelines for the sustained use of sedatives and analgesics in the critically ill adult', our survey showed that in Germany different agents, and frequently neuroaxial techniques, were used.
A survey of all gastroenterologists in the Trent region showed that the number of upper GI endoscopies had doubled to 7.6 per 1000 of the population from 1981 to 1986, equalling the number of barium meals. Colonoscopies had increased from 0.39 to 0.94 per 1000 of the population. There had been a large increase in the proportion of endoscopies done by surgeons. There were 0.37 ERCP examinations per 1000 of the population done in six of the 12 districts, and 0.17 variceal sclerotherapy procedures per 1000 of the population done in five districts. There was widespread dissatisfaction with the provision of facilities and staff for endoscopy. From 1981 to 1986 the number of consultants with an interest in gastroenterology had increased from 20 to 25, but none of these appointments had been anticipated in 1981. All eight senior registrars in gastroenterology in 1981 had achieved consultant status - three in the region, four in the NHS outside the region, and one abroad.
Intravenous sedation has been used in dentistry for many years because of its perceived advantages over general anesthesia, including shorter recovery times. However, there is limited literature available on recovery from intravenous dental sedation, particularly in the private general practice setting. The aim of this study was to describe the recovery times when sedation was conducted in private dental practice and to consider this in relation to age, weight, procedure type, and procedure time. The data were extracted from the intravenous sedation records available with 1 general anesthesia-trained dental practitioner who provides ambulatory sedation services to a number of private general dental practices in the Perth, Western Australia Metropolitan Area. Standardized intravenous sedation techniques as well as clear standardized discharge criteria were utilized. The sedatives used were fentanyl, midazolam, and propofol. Results from 85 patients produced an average recovery time of 19 minutes. Recovery time was not associated with the type or length of dental procedures performed.
We made a survey among Finnish anesthesiologists concerning the current perioperative anesthetic practice of hip fracture patients for further development in patient care.
All members of the Finnish Society of Anesthesiologists with a known e-mail address (786) were invited to participate in an internet-based survey.
The overall response rate was 55% (423 responses); 298 respondents participated in the care of hip fracture patients. Preoperative analgesia was mostly managed with oxycodone and paracetamol; every fifth respondent applied an epidural infusion. Most respondents (98%) employed a spinal block with or without an epidural catheter for intraoperative anesthesia. Midazolam, propofol and/or fentanyl were used for additional sedation. General anesthesia was used rarely. Postoperatively, paracetamol and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and occasionally peroral oxycodone, were prescribed in addition to epidural analgesia.
The survey suggests that the impact of more individualised analgesia regimens, both preoperatively and postoperatively, should be investigated in further studies.
Hip fracture; Perioperative management; Anesthetic practice
Current gastroenterological opinion is that colonoscopy provides the most accurate technique for diagnosing structural colonic disease, especially neoplasia. A strong case has been made for continuing colonoscopic surveillance of patients with neoplastic polyps, chronic ulcerative colitis, and after resection of carcinomas. The incidence of these diseases is known, and calculations can be made of the desirable frequency of colonoscopy. These indicate that about 160 colonoscopies per 100,000 population per year are required. At present facilities in the United Kingdom fall well below that figure.
Achieving the target of 95% colonoscopy completion rate at centres conducting colorectal screening programs is an important issue. Large centres and teaching hospitals employing endoscopists with different levels of training and expertise risk achieving worse results. Deep sedation with propofol in routine colonoscopy could maximize the results of cecal intubation.
The present study on the experience of a single centre focused on estimating the overall completion rate of colonoscopies performed under routine propofol sedation at a large teaching hospital with many operators involved, and on assessing the factors that influence the success rate of the procedure and how to improve this performance, analyzing the aspects relating to using of deep sedation. Twenty-one endoscopists, classified by their level of specialization in colonoscopic practice, performed 1381 colonoscopies under deep sedation. All actions needed for the anaesthesiologist to restore adequate oxygenation or hemodynamics, even for transient changes, were recorded.
The "crude" overall completion rate was 93.3%. This finding shows that with routine deep sedation, the colonoscopy completion rate nears, but still does not reach, the target performance for colonoscopic screening programs, at centers where colonoscopists of difference experience are employed in such programs.
Factors interfering with cecal intubation were: inadequate colon cleansing, endoscopists' expertise in colonoscopic practice, patients' body weight under 60 kg or age over 71 years, and the need for active intervention by the anaesthesiologist. The most favourable situation - a patient less than 71 years old with a body weight over 60 kg, an adequate bowel preparation, a "highly experienced specialist" performing the test, and no need for active anaesthesiological intervention during the procedure - coincided with a 98.8% probability of the colonoscopy being completed.
With routine deep sedation, the colonoscopy completion rate nears the target performance for colonoscopic screening programs, at centers where colonoscopists of difference experience are employed in such programs. Organizing the daily workload to prevent negative factors affecting the success rate from occurring in combination may enable up to 85% of incomplete procedures to be converted into successful colonoscopies.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate sedation practice in UK intensive care units (ICUs), particularly the implementation of daily sedation holding, written sedation guidelines, sedation scoring tools and choice of agents.
A national postal survey was conducted in all UK ICUs.
A total of 192 responses out of 302 addressed units were received (63.5%). Of the responding ICUs, 88% used a sedation scoring tool, most frequently the Ramsey Sedation Scale score (66.4%). The majority of units have a written sedation guideline (80%), and 78% state that daily sedation holding is practiced. A wide variety of sedating agents is used, with the choice of agent largely determined by the duration of action rather than cost. The most frequently used agents were propofol and alfentanil for short-term sedation; propofol, midazolam and morphine for longer sedation; and propofol for weaning purposes.
Most UK ICUs use a sedation guideline and sedation scoring tool. The concept of sedation holding has been implemented in the majority of units, and most ICUs have a written sedation guideline.
Nutrition education is a required part of gastrointestinal training programs. The involvement of gastroenterologists in clinical nutrition once their training has been completed is unknown. The aim of the present study was to determine the practice pattern of gastroenterologists in clinical nutrition and their perceived adequacy of nutrition training during their gastroenterology (GI) fellowship.
The Canadian Association of Gastroenterology mailed a survey to all of its 463 Canadian clinician members and 88 trainee members. Components of the survey included knowledge of nutritional assessment and total parenteral nutrition, involvement in a nutrition support service, physician involvement in nutritional assessment and nutrition support teams, obesity management, insertion of gastrostomy (G) tubes and management of tube-related complications, and adequacy of training in clinical nutrition.
Sixty per cent (n=279) of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology clinicians and 38% (n=33) of the fellows responded. Of the clinicians, 80% were practicing adult gastroenterologists with the following demographics: those practicing full time in academic centres (42%), community practice (45%), completed training in the last 10 years (32%) and those that completed training in the United States (14%). Although only 6% had a primary focus of nutrition in their GI practices, 65% were involved in nutrition support (including total parenteral nutrition), 74% placed G tubes and 68% managed at least one of the major complications of G tube insertion. Respondents felt a gastroenterologist should be the physician’s consultant on nutrition support services (89%). Areas of potential inadequate training included nutritional assessment, indications for nutrition support, management of obesity and management of G tube-related complications. The majority of clinicians (67%) and trainees (73%) felt that nutrition training in their GI fellowship was underemphasized.
The majority of Canadian gastroenterologists are involved in nutrition support. However, this survey demonstrated that nutritional training is underemphasized in most training programs. It is important for GI fellowship programs to develop standardized nutrition training that prepares trainees for their practice.
Gastroenterology; Nutrition training
The increased demand for colonoscopy, coupled with the introduction of new bowel cleansing preparations and recent caution advisories in Canada, has prompted a review of bowel preparations by the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology.
The present review was conducted by the Clinical Affairs group of committees including the endoscopy, hepatobiliary/transplant, liaison, pediatrics, practice affairs and regional representation committees, along with the assistance of Canadian experts in the field. An effort was made to systematically assess randomized prospective trials evaluating commonly used bowel cleansing preparations in Canada.
Polyethylene glycol (PEG)-; sodium phosphate (NaP)-; magnesium citrate (Mg-citrate)-; and sodium picosulphate, citric acid and magnesium oxide (PSMC)-containing preparations were reviewed. Regimens of PEG 2 L with bisacodyl (10 mg to 20 mg) or Mg-citrate (296 mL) are as effective as standard PEG 4 L regimens, but are better tolerated. NaP preparations appear more effective and better tolerated than standard PEG solutions. PSMC has good efficacy and tolerability but head-to-head trials with NaP solutions remain few, and conclusions equivocal. Adequate hydration during preparation and up to the time of colonoscopy is critical in minimizing side effects and improving bowel cleansing in patients receiving NaP and PSMC preparations. All preparations may cause adverse events, including rare, serious outcomes. NaP should not be used in patients with cardiac or renal dysfunction (PEG solution is preferable in these patients), bowel obstruction or ascites, and caution should be exercised when used in patients with pre-existing electrolyte disturbances, those taking medications that may affect electrolyte levels and elderly or debilitated patients. Health Canada’s recommended NaP dosing for most patients is two 45 mL doses 24 h apart. However, both safety and efficacy data on this dosing schedule are lacking. Many members of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology expert panel administer both doses within 24 h, as studied in clinical trials, after careful one-on-one discussion of risks and benefits in carefully selected patients. Safety data on PSMC and combination preparations in North America are limited and clinicians are encouraged to keep abreast of developments in this area.
All four preparations reviewed provided effective bowel cleansing for colonoscopy in the majority of patients, with varying tolerability. Adequate hydration is essential in patients receiving the preparations.
Colon preparation; Colonoscopy; Polyethylene glycol; Sodium phosphate
This study aimed to compare continuous intravenous infusion combinations of propofol-remifentanil and propofol-ketamine for deep sedation for surgical extraction of all 4 third molars. In a prospective, randomized, double-blinded controlled study, participants received 1 of 2 sedative combinations for deep sedation for the surgery. Both groups initially received midazolam 0.03 mg/kg for baseline sedation. The control group then received a combination of propofol-remifentanil in a ratio of 10 mg propofol to 5 μg of remifentanil per milliliter, and the experimental group received a combination of propofol-ketamine in a ratio of 10 mg of propofol to 2.5 mg of ketamine per milliliter; both were given at an initial propofol infusion rate of 100 μg/kg/min. Each group received an induction loading bolus of 500 μg/kg of the assigned propofol combination along with the appropriate continuous infusion combination . Measured outcomes included emergence and recovery times, various sedation parameters, hemodynamic and respiratory stability, patient and surgeon satisfaction, postoperative course, and associated drug costs. Thirty-seven participants were enrolled in the study. Both groups demonstrated similar sedation parameters and hemodynamic and respiratory stability; however, the ketamine group had prolonged emergence (13.6 ± 6.6 versus 7.1 ± 3.7 minutes, P = .0009) and recovery (42.9 ± 18.7 versus 24.7 ± 7.6 minutes, P = .0004) times. The prolonged recovery profile of continuously infused propofol-ketamine may limit its effectiveness as an alternative to propofol-remifentanil for deep sedation for third molar extraction and perhaps other short oral surgical procedures, especially in the ambulatory dental setting.
Propofol; Ketamine; Remifentanil; Deep sedation; TIVA
(1) The number of endoscopic examinations performed is rising. Epidemiological data and the workload of well developed units show that annual requirements per head of population are approaching: Upper gastrointestinal 1 in 100 Flexible sigmoidoscopy 1 in 500 Colonoscopy 1 in 500 ERCP 1 in 2000 (2) Open access endoscopy to general practitioners is desirable and increasingly sought. For a district general hospital serving a population of 250,000, this workload entails about 3500 procedures annually, performed during 10 half day routine sessions plus emergency work. (3) High standards of training and experience are needed by all staff, who must work in purpose built accommodation designed to promote efficient and safe practice. (4) The endoscopy unit should be adjacent to day care facilities and near the x ray department. There should be easy access to wards. (5) An endoscopy unit needs at least two endoscopy rooms; a fully ventilated cleaning/disinfection area; rooms for patient reception, preparation, and recovery; and accommodation for administration, storage, and staff amenities. (6) The service should be consultant based. At least 10 clinical sessions are required, made up of six or more consultant sessions and two to four clinical assistant, hospital practitioner, or staff specialist sessions. Each consultant should be expected to commit at least two sessions weekly to endoscopy. Extra consultant sessions may be needed to provide an efficient service. (7) A specially trained nursing sister (grade G or H) and five other endoscopy nurses are needed to care for the patients; their work may be supplemented by care assistants. (8) A new post of endoscopy department assistant (analogous to an operating department assistant) is proposed to maintain and prepare instruments, and to give technical assistance during procedures. (9) A full time secretary should be employed. Records, appointments, and audit should be computer based. (10) ERCP needs the collaboration of an interventional radiologist working with high quality x ray equipment in a specially prepared radiology screening room. This facility may need to serve more than one hospital. (11) A gastrointestinal measurement laboratory can conveniently be combined with the endoscopy unit. In some hospitals one or more gastrointestinal measurement technicians may staff this laboratory. (12) An endoscopy unit is a service department analogous to a radiology department. It needs an annual budget.
AIM: To characterize the profiles of alveolar hypoventilation during colonoscopies performed under sedoanalgesia with a combination of alfentanil and either midazolam or propofol.
METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing routine colonoscopy were randomly assigned to sedation with either propofol or midazolam in an open-labeled design using a titration scheme. All patients received 4 μg/kg per body weight alfentanil for analgesia and 3 L of supplemental oxygen. Oxygen saturation (SpO2) was measured by pulse oximetry (POX), and capnography (PcCO2) was continuously measured using a combined dedicated sensor at the ear lobe. Instances of apnea resulting in measures such as stimulation of the patient, a chin lift, a mask maneuver, or withholding of sedation were recorded. PcCO2 values (as a parameter of sedation-induced hypoventilation) were compared between groups at the following distinct time points: baseline, maximal rise, termination of the procedure and 5 min after termination of the procedure. The number of patients in both study groups who regained baseline PcCO2 values (± 1.5 mmHg) five minutes after the procedure was determined.
RESULTS: A total of 97 patients entered this study. The data from 14 patients were subsequently excluded for clinical procedure-related reasons or for technical problems. Therefore, 83 patients (mean age 62 ± 13 years) were successfully randomized to receive propofol (n = 42) or midazolam (n = 41) for sedation. Most of the patients were classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) II [16 (38%) in the midazolam group and 15 (32%) in the propofol group] and ASA III [14 (33%) and 13 (32%) in the midazolam and propofol groups, respectively]. A mean dose of 5 (4-7) mg of IV midazolam and 131 (70-260) mg of IV propofol was used during the procedure in the corresponding study arms. The mean SpO2 at baseline (%) was 99 ± 1 for the midazolam group and 99 ± 1 for the propofol group. No cases of hypoxemia (SpO2 < 85%) or apnea were recorded. However, an increase in PcCO2 that indicated alveolar hypoventilation occurred in both groups after administration of the first drug and was not detected with pulse oximetry alone. The mean interval between the initiation of sedation and the time when the PcCO2 value increased to more than 2 mmHg was 2.8 ± 1.3 min for midazolam and 2.8 ± 1.1 min for propofol. The mean maximal rise was similar for both drugs: 8.6 ± 3.7 mmHg for midazolam and 7.4 ± 3.2 mmHg for propofol. Five minutes after the end of the procedure, the mean difference from the baseline values was significantly lower for the propofol treatment compared with midazolam (0.9 ± 3.0 mmHg vs 4.3 ± 3.7 mmHg, P = 0.0000169), and significantly more patients in the propofol group had regained their baseline value ± 1.5 mmHg (32 of 41 vs 12 of 42, P = 0.0004).
CONCLUSION: A significantly higher number of patients sedated with propofol had normalized PcCO2 values five minutes after sedation when compared with patients sedated with midazolam.
Colonoscopy; Deep sedation; Propofol; Hypoventilation; Blood gas monitoring; Transcutaneous
The subject of endoscopic sedation continues to generate controversy and debate. This article provides a critical analysis of several key issues related to sedation that have recently been the focus of intense interest. Monitored anesthesia care (MAC) is currently the dominant method of endoscopic sedation for approximately one third of all US gastroenterologists. The benefits and cost-effectiveness of this approach remain unclear, as outlined in this article. An alternative to MAC is the administration of propofol by a specially trained nurse or endoscopy assistant, working under the direction of an endoscopist. The scientific merits of the arguments presented by both those in favor of, and those opposed to, this practice are evaluated. In addition, the clinical experience with endoscopist-directed propofol and the challenges associated with its implementation are presented. Other options for endoscopic sedation may soon be available. One approach is computer-assisted delivery of propofol, which is performed by a physician/nurse team. The clinical studies related to this device, along with several other novel methods of sedation, are described.
Colonoscopy; endoscopic sedation; fospropofol; propofol; procedural sedation
Propofol sedation for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) procedures is a popular current technique that has generated controversy in the medical field. Worldwide, both anesthetic and nonanesthetic personnel administer this form of sedation. Although the American and Canadian societies of gastroenterologists have endorsed the administration of propofol by nonanesthesia personnel, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not licensed its use in this manner. There is some evidence for the safe use of propofol by nonanesthetic personnel in patients undergoing endoscopy procedures, but there are few randomized trials addressing the safety and efficacy of propofol in patients undergoing ERCP procedures. A serious possible consequence of propofol sedation in patients is that it may result in rapid and unpredictable progression from deep sedation to general anesthesia, and skilled airway support may be required as a rescue measure. Potential complications following deep propofol sedation include hypoxemia and hypotension. Propofol sedation for ERCP procedures is an area of clinical practice where discussion and mutual cooperation between anesthesia and nonanesthesia personnel may enhance patient safety.
A survey of all gastroenterologists in the Trent Region (population 4.7 million) showed that in 1992 the number of upper gastrointestinal endoscopies had continued to rise considerably. There were 8.6 per thousand of the population. Colonoscopies had also increased to 1.4 per thousand. There had been a large fall in barium meal examinations to 4.8 per thousand. Barium enema examinations had increased slightly to 5.3 per thousand. The number of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographies (ERCPs) and variceal sclerotherapies had also increased by 54% and 21% respectively since 1986 and were available in most of the 20 hospitals. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy had been introduced at most hospitals. Emergency endoscopy was readily available at night in only half the hospitals. Fourteen hospitals offered formal open access endoscopy. Intravenous sedation was used routinely in 12 hospitals. The rate for perforation at routine upper gastrointestinal endoscopy was 1 in 4500 and for death was 1 in 20,000. There were serious deficiencies in provision of facilities or staff, or both at 14 hospitals. The total number of gastroenterologists had only increased from 25 to 26 since 1986. Thus endoscopy workload continues to increase and diversify often without adequate staffing, facilities, and funding.
Sedation plays a central role in making colonoscopy tolerable for patients and feasible for the endoscopist to perform. The array of agents used for endoscopic sedation continues to evolve. Fospropofol (FP), a prodrug of propofol with a slower pharmacokinetic profile, is currently under evaluation for use during endoscopic procedures. Preliminary data suggests that FP dosed at 6.5 mg/kg is well tolerated by most patients with perineal paresthesias being the most commonly experienced adverse effect. This article will examine the current literature on the use of FP for the sedation of patients undergoing colonoscopy, highlighting the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, risks, and common adverse events associated with the novel sedative/hypnotic.
fospropofol; Aquavan; propofol; sedation; colonoscopy
Background: Specialist training in gastroenterology and hepatology is not standardised in different European countries.
Aim: The aim of this survey was to assess the different teaching and socioeconomic aspects of training programmes in Europe.
Methods: Seventy questionnaires were distributed to last year trainees or newly graduated gastroenterologists. Forty two respondents (60%) from 34 major training centres in 10 different European countries replied.
Results: Overall, the data revealed major diversity for all aspects analysed, between and within the different European countries. Both the duration of training (range 4–10.4 years) and workload (range 48.5–89.2 hours per week) differed markedly between countries. The average number of endoscopic procedures (gastroscopies, range 300–2600; colonoscopies, range 73–550; endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographies, range 1–385) differed also. One third of last year trainees reported that they felt uncertain in some endoscopic procedure. The European trainee was on call for 5–6 nights a month on average (range 1–8). Monthly wages differed considerably between countries, ranging from 767 to 2180 Euro.
Conclusion: We found major differences in the professional aspects and socioeconomic conditions of gastroenterologist/hepatologist training in 10 different European countries, probably leading to differences in quality of training. In several countries or centres the average number of procedures was below the threshold issued by the European Board of Gastroenterlogy or the American Gastroenterological Association. Issuing a European diploma for gastroenterology is a valuable effort towards meeting this problem. Further studies are needed to re-evaluate the training programmes in Europe and to define threshold numbers and technical end points for assessment of endoscopic skills.
training; endoscopy; teaching