Adverse events, success, and tolerability of biliary endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with conscious sedation vs anaesthesia: a multi-centre prospective study.

Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Pub Date : 2025-01-23 eCollection Date: 2025-04-01 DOI:10.1093/jcag/gwae061
Zachary L Smith, Ahmed Kayal, Yibing Ruan, Brendan Cord Lethebe, Peter D Siersema, Alejandra Tepox Padrón, Yousef Alshammari, Sunil Samnani, Hannah F Koury, Millie Chau, Megan Howarth, Shane Cartwright, Darren R Brenner, Anna Tavakkoli, Rajesh N Keswani, Badih Joseph Elmunzer, Sachin Wani, Nauzer Forbes
{"title":"Adverse events, success, and tolerability of biliary endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with conscious sedation vs anaesthesia: a multi-centre prospective study.","authors":"Zachary L Smith, Ahmed Kayal, Yibing Ruan, Brendan Cord Lethebe, Peter D Siersema, Alejandra Tepox Padrón, Yousef Alshammari, Sunil Samnani, Hannah F Koury, Millie Chau, Megan Howarth, Shane Cartwright, Darren R Brenner, Anna Tavakkoli, Rajesh N Keswani, Badih Joseph Elmunzer, Sachin Wani, Nauzer Forbes","doi":"10.1093/jcag/gwae061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is performed using anaesthesia or conscious sedation, though the effectiveness, adverse events (AEs), and tolerability of each approach remain unclear. Thus, we compared these approaches prospectively.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a multi-centre prospective cohort study including patients with native papillae undergoing ERCP for biliary indications between 2018 and 2023. The primary outcome was sedation-related AEs, defined as sustained hypoxaemia or hypotension, unplanned mask ventilation or intubation, vasopressor or reversal agent use, cardiorespiratory arrest, or death. Secondary outcomes included other AEs, technical success measures, and patient-reported tolerability using a validated scale. Multivariable logistic regression was performed in addition to propensity score-matched analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At 8 centres, a total of 3174 first-time biliary ERCPs were performed, 433 (13.6%) employing anaesthesia. Nine sedation-related AEs occurred with conscious sedation (0.3%), while 2 (0.5%) occurred with anaesthesia (odds ratio, OR, 0.35, 0.07-2.37). Only 25 (0.9%) conscious sedation-supported ERCPs were aborted due to the inability to appropriately sedate patients. There were no significant differences in other AE rates, cannulation success, time, or attempts, use of pre-cut or needle-knife access methods, or inadvertent pancreatic duct cannulation. Odds of significant patient-reported intra-procedural awareness and discomfort were both higher with conscious sedation (ORs 16.19, 4.81-54.53, and 21.25, 4.44-101.61, respectively). Propensity score-matched analyses yielded no differences in any outcome compared with primary analyses.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Routine biliary ERCP is equally safe and effective with conscious sedation (vs anaesthesia). Given regional resource limitations, conscious sedation is justified as a primary option for routine biliary ERCP.</p>","PeriodicalId":17263,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology","volume":"8 2","pages":"63-70"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11991873/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jcag/gwae061","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and aims: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is performed using anaesthesia or conscious sedation, though the effectiveness, adverse events (AEs), and tolerability of each approach remain unclear. Thus, we compared these approaches prospectively.

Methods: We performed a multi-centre prospective cohort study including patients with native papillae undergoing ERCP for biliary indications between 2018 and 2023. The primary outcome was sedation-related AEs, defined as sustained hypoxaemia or hypotension, unplanned mask ventilation or intubation, vasopressor or reversal agent use, cardiorespiratory arrest, or death. Secondary outcomes included other AEs, technical success measures, and patient-reported tolerability using a validated scale. Multivariable logistic regression was performed in addition to propensity score-matched analyses.

Results: At 8 centres, a total of 3174 first-time biliary ERCPs were performed, 433 (13.6%) employing anaesthesia. Nine sedation-related AEs occurred with conscious sedation (0.3%), while 2 (0.5%) occurred with anaesthesia (odds ratio, OR, 0.35, 0.07-2.37). Only 25 (0.9%) conscious sedation-supported ERCPs were aborted due to the inability to appropriately sedate patients. There were no significant differences in other AE rates, cannulation success, time, or attempts, use of pre-cut or needle-knife access methods, or inadvertent pancreatic duct cannulation. Odds of significant patient-reported intra-procedural awareness and discomfort were both higher with conscious sedation (ORs 16.19, 4.81-54.53, and 21.25, 4.44-101.61, respectively). Propensity score-matched analyses yielded no differences in any outcome compared with primary analyses.

Conclusions: Routine biliary ERCP is equally safe and effective with conscious sedation (vs anaesthesia). Given regional resource limitations, conscious sedation is justified as a primary option for routine biliary ERCP.

有意识镇静与麻醉的胆道内窥镜逆行胆管造影的不良事件、成功和耐受性:一项多中心前瞻性研究。
背景和目的:内镜逆行胆管造影(ERCP)是在麻醉或清醒镇静的情况下进行的,尽管每种方法的有效性、不良事件(ae)和耐受性尚不清楚。因此,我们前瞻性地比较了这些方法。方法:我们进行了一项多中心前瞻性队列研究,纳入了2018年至2023年间因胆道适应症接受ERCP治疗的先天性乳头状瘤患者。主要结局是镇静相关不良事件,定义为持续低氧血症或低血压、计划外面罩通气或插管、血管加压剂或逆转药物的使用、心肺骤停或死亡。次要结局包括其他ae、技术成功指标和患者报告的耐受性。除倾向评分匹配分析外,还进行了多变量逻辑回归。结果:8个中心共进行了3174例首次胆道ercp,其中433例(13.6%)采用麻醉。有意识镇静时发生9例镇静相关不良事件(0.3%),麻醉时发生2例(0.5%)(优势比,OR, 0.35, 0.07-2.37)。只有25例(0.9%)清醒镇静支持的ercp因无法适当镇静患者而流产。在其他AE发生率、插管成功率、时间或尝试、使用预切或针刀进入方法或无意胰管插管方面无显著差异。有意识镇静组患者报告术中意识和不适的几率均较高(分别为16.19,4.81-54.53和21.25,4.44-101.61)。倾向评分匹配分析与原始分析相比,没有发现任何结果的差异。结论:常规胆道ERCP与清醒镇静(与麻醉)同样安全有效。考虑到区域资源的限制,有意识镇静被证明是常规胆道ERCP的主要选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
296
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信