• Till Wehrmann and Andrea Riphaus.
• Department of Internal Medicine I, Academic Hospital Siloah, Hannover, Germany. twehrmann@hotmail.com
• Scand. J. Gastroenterol. 2008 Mar 1;43(3):368-74.

ObjectivePropofol sedation for mainly diagnostic endoscopic procedures has proved safe in recent trials, with no need for endotracheal intubation. However, there is evidence that cardiorespiratory side effects occur more frequently and that assisted ventilation may be necessary if propofol sedation is performed for interventional endoscopic procedures.Material And MethodsOver a 6-year period, all adverse events (defined as premature termination of the procedure due to sedation-related events or either the need for assisted ventilation or admission to ICU) occurring during 9547 endoscopic interventions (UGI, n = 5.374, ERCP, n = 3.937, EUS, n=236) under propofol sedation were assessed.ResultsA total of 135 adverse events (1.4%) were documented. Assisted ventilation was necessary in 40 patients (0.4%); 9 patients required endotracheal intubation (0.09%); 28 needed further monitoring on the ICU (0.3%); and 4 patients died, 3 potentially due to sedation-related side effects (mortality, 0.03%). Independent risk factors for sedation-related side effects were emergency endoscopic examinations and a total propofol dose >100 mg.ConclusionsInterventional endoscopy under propofol sedation is not risk-free. Increased attention must be focused on close monitoring of vital parameters, particularly when undertaking long-lasting interventions and emergency procedures.

34 keywords...

hide…