Table 6 Results of non-anesthesiologist administered sedation of previous studies and results of anesthesiologist-administered sedation of present study
Studies | Number of patients | Age, years | Gender, [m/f] | ASA | Procedure | Mean propofol [mg] |
Vargo et al. [11] | 38 | 52.9 ± 2.4 | 21 / 17 | ASA I: 14 (36.8%) ASA II: 16 (42.1%)ASA III: 8 (21.1%) ASA IV: - | EUS ERCP | 356.8 |
Riphaus et al. [9] | 77 | 83.7 ± 7.8 | 35 / 42 | ASA I: - ASA II: - ASA III: 32 (41.6%) ASA IV: 39 (50.6%) | ERCP | 322 |
Kongkam et al. [8] | 67 | 52.3 ± 11.9 | 40 / 27 | ASA I: 26 (38.8%) ASA II: 22 (32.8%) ASA III: 19 (28.4%) ASA IV: - | ERCP | 299.9 |
Schilling et al. [10] | 76 | 82.4 | 25 / 51 | ASA I: - ASA II: - ASA III: 34 (44.7%) ASA IV: 12 (15.8%) | ERCP EUS DBE | 376 |
Present study | 200 | 56.3 ± 15.2 | 128/72 | ASA I: 7 (3.5) ASA II: 73 (36.5) ASA III: 119 (59.5) ASA IV: 1 (0.5) | ERCP | 287 |
Studies | Number of patients with hypoxemia | Number of patients with hypotension | Number of patients with bradycardia | Failure to complete examination | ||
Vargo et al. [11] | 14 (37%) | 6 (15.8%) | NA | NA | ||
Riphaus et al. [9] | 8 (11%) | 6 (8%) | 3 (4%) | NA | ||
Kongkam et al. [8] | 15 (22.4%) | 6 (9%) | 2 (3%) | 3 | ||
Schilling et al. [10] | 9 (11.8%) | 4 (5.2%) | 5 (6.5%) | NA | ||
Present study | 18 (9%) | 18 (9%) | 0 (0%) | 2 (1%) | ||
Studies | Procedure time,[min] | Endoscopist-reported satisfaction | Patient-reported satisfaction | Time to recovery, [min] | ||
Vargo et al. [11] | 53.6 ± 3 | 8.17 ± 0.28 | 9.01 ± 0.3 | 18.6 ± 6.5 | ||
Riphaus et al. [9] | 29 ± 19 | 8.7 ± 1.7 | 8.4 ± 1.9 | 22 ± 7 | ||
Kongkam et al. [8] | 39.8 ± 32.5 | 7.4 | No significant difference | 17.24 ± 5.99 | ||
Schilling et al. [10] | 42 ± 18 | 7 ± 2 | NA | NA | ||
Present study | 25 ± 16 | 9.3 ± 1.3 | 9.6 ± 0.8 | 14 ± 10 | ||