British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines on sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Over 2.5 million gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures are carried out in the United Kingdom (UK) every year. Procedures are carried out with local anaesthetic r with sedation. Sedation is commonly used for gastrointestinal endoscopy, but the type and amount of sedation administered is influenced by the complexity and nature of the procedure and patient factors. The elective and emergency nature of endoscopy procedures and local resources also have a significant impact on the delivery of sedation. In the UK, the vast majority of sedated procedures are carried out using benzodiazepines, with or without opiates, whereas deeper sedation using propofol or general anaesthetic requires the involvement of an anaesthetic team. Patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy need to have good understanding of the options for sedation, including the option for no sedation and alternatives, balancing the intended aims of the procedure and reducing the risk of complications. These guidelines were commissioned by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) Endoscopy Committee with input from major stakeholders, to provide a detailed update, incorporating recent advances in sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy.This guideline covers aspects from pre-assessment of the elective 'well' patient to patients with significant comorbidity requiring emergency procedures. Types of sedation are discussed, procedure and room requirements and the recovery period, providing guidance to enhance safety and minimise complications. These guidelines are intended to inform practising clinicians and all staff involved in the delivery of gastrointestinal endoscopy with an expectation that this guideline will be revised in 5-years' time.

Dexmedetomidine or Propofol for Sedation in Mechanically Ventilated Adults with Sepsis.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines currently recommend targeting light sedation with dexmedetomidine or propofol for adults receiving mechanical ventilation. Differences exist between these sedatives in arousability, immunity, and inflammation. Whether they affect outcomes differentially in mechanically ventilated adults with sepsis undergoing light sedation is unknown. METHODS: In a multicenter, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned mechanically ventilated adults with sepsis to receive dexmedetomidine (0.2 to 1.5 µg per kilogram of body weight per hour) or propofol (5 to 50 µg per kilogram per minute), with doses adjusted by bedside nurses to achieve target sedation goals set by clinicians according to the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS, on which scores range from -5 [unresponsive] to +4 [combative]). The primary end point was days alive without delirium or coma during the 14-day intervention period. Secondary end points were ventilator-free days at 28 days, death at 90 days, and age-adjusted total score on the Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status questionnaire (TICS-T; scores range from 0 to 100, with a mean of 50±10 and lower scores indicating worse cognition) at 6 months. RESULTS: Of 432 patients who underwent randomization, 422 were assigned to receive a trial drug and were included in the analyses - 214 patients received dexmedetomidine at a median dose of 0.27 µg per kilogram per hour, and 208 received propofol at a median dose of 10.21 µg per kilogram per minute. The median duration of receipt of the trial drugs was 3.0 days (interquartile range, 2.0 to 6.0), and the median RASS score was -2.0 (interquartile range, -3.0 to -1.0). We found no difference between dexmedetomidine and propofol in the number of days alive without delirium or coma (adjusted median, 10.7 vs. 10.8 days; odds ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74 to 1.26), ventilator-free days (adjusted median, 23.7 vs. 24.0 days; odds ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.51), death at 90 days (38% vs. 39%; hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.52), or TICS-T score at 6 months (adjusted median score, 40.9 vs. 41.4; odds ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.33). Safety end points were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among mechanically ventilated adults with sepsis who were being treated with recommended light-sedation approaches, outcomes in patients who received dexmedetomidine did not differ from outcomes in those who received propofol. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01739933.).

Lesion metrics and 12-month outcomes of very-high power short duration radiofrequency ablation (90W/4 s) under mild conscious sedation.

INTRODUCTION: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is often performed under general anaesthesia (GA) or deep sedation. Anaesthetic availability is limited in many centers, and deep sedation is prohibited in some countries without anaesthetic support. Very high-power short duration (vHPSD-90W/4 s) PVI using the Q-Dot catheter is generally well tolerated under mild conscious sedation (MCS) though an understanding of catheter stability and long-term effectiveness is lacking. We analyzed lesion metrics and 12-month freedom from atrial arrythmia with this approach. METHODS: Our approach to radiofrequency (RF) PVI under MCS is standardized and includes a single catheter approach with a steerable sheath. We identified patients undergoing Q-Dot RF PVI between March 2021 and December 2022 in our center, comparing those undergoing vHPSD ablation under MCS (90W/MCS) against those undergoing 50 W ablation under GA (50 W/GA) up to 12 months of follow-up. Data were extracted from clinical records and the CARTO system. RESULTS: Eighty-three patients met our inclusion criteria (51 90W/MCS; 32 50 W/GA). Despite shorter ablation times (353 vs. 886 s; p < .001), the 90 W/MCS group received more lesions (median 87 vs. 58, p < .001), resulting in similar procedure times (149.3 vs. 149.1 min; p = .981). PVI was achieved in all cases, and first pass isolation rates were similar (left wide antral circumferential ablation [WACA] 82.4% vs. 87.5%, p = .758; right WACA 74.5% vs. 78.1%, p = .796; 90 W/MCS vs. 50 W/GA respectively). Analysis of 6647 ablation lesions found similar mean impedance drops (10.0 ± 1.9 Ω vs. 10.0 ± 2.2 Ω; p = .989) and mean contact force (14.6 ± 2.0 g vs. 15.1 ± 1.6 g; p = .248). Only median 2.5% of lesions in the 90 W/MCS cohort failed to achieve ≥ 5 Ω drop. In the 90 W/MCS group, there were no procedural related complications, and 12-month freedom from atrial arrhythmia was observed in 78.4%. CONCLUSION: vHPSD PVI is feasible under MCS, with encouraging acute and long-term procedural outcomes. This provides a compelling option for centers with limited anaesthetic support.

Bilevel positive airway pressure ventilation in patients susceptible to hypoxemia during procedural sedation for colonoscopy: a prospective randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Hypoxemia is one of the most common adverse events during colonoscopy, particularly among patients who are diagnosed with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) or are overweight. Consequently, the objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of bilevel positive airway pressure (BPAP) ventilation for patients with high-risk hypoxemia during colonoscopy with sedation. METHODS: In this trial, 127 patients who met the eligibility criteria were randomly assigned to the BPAP oxygen group and nasal cannula (NC) group. The primary endpoint was the incidence of hypoxemia. RESULTS: Compared with the use of NC, BPAP ventilation exhibited a significant reduction in the incidence of hypoxemia, decreasing it from 23.8% to 6.3% (absolute risk difference, 17.5%; 95% confidence interval, 5.4-29.6; P = .006). Importantly, BPAP ventilation prevented the occurrence of severe hypoxemia (9.5% vs 0%; absolute risk difference, 9.5%; 95% confidence interval, 2.3-16.7; P = .035). In addition, the BPAP group required fewer airway interventions (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: In individuals with OSA or overweight status, the use of BPAP ventilation during colonoscopy significantly reduced the incidence of hypoxemia. (Clinical trial registration number: ChiCTR2300073193.).

Outcomes of patients undergoing edge-to-edge mitral valve repair with the Edwards PASCAL transcatheter valve repair system under conscious sedation.

BACKGROUND: The development of the PASCAL transcatheter valve repair system for treating mitral regurgitation (MR) greatly extends therapeutic options. AIMS: To assess the safety, efficacy, and time efficiency of the PASCAL system in transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) under conscious sedation (CS). METHODS: This is a retrospective, two-center, German registry study consisting of 211 patients who underwent TEER using the PASCAL system under CS. The endpoints were to assess (1) technical, device, and procedural success as per Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium (MVARC), (2) conversion rate to general anesthesia (GA), (3) hospital length of stay (LoS), (4) New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, and (5) MR compared to baseline at 30-day. RESULTS: A total of 211 patients with a mean age of 78.4 ± 8.9 years, with 51.4% being female and 86.7% belonging to NYHA functional class III/IV and EuroSCORE II 6.3 ± 4.9%, were enrolled. Procedural success attained was 96.9%, and six patients (2.8%) required conversion from CS to GA. At 30 days follow-up, a significant improvement in MR was found in 96 patients (54.2%) patients with 0/1 grade MR and 45 patients (29.5%) were in NYHA functional class III + IV. Moreover, TEER under CS has a short hospital LoS (6.71 ± 5.29 days) and intensive care unit LoS (1.34 ± 3.49 days) with a 2.8% mortality rate. CONCLUSIONS: Performing TEER with the PASCAL system under CS resulted in appreciable (96.9%) procedural success with low mortality and is a safe and promising alternative to GA with positive clinical outcomes.

Marijuana and endoscopy: the effects of marijuana on sedation.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Marijuana usage has increased significantly as it has become more readily available and legal, either recreationally or medicinally, in many states. It has been postulated that marijuana usage increases the amount of sedation required for procedures. However, there are minimal data defining this relationship. We aimed to establish the relationship between marijuana usage and the amount of sedation used during endoscopy. METHODS: This was a single-institution prospective study of patients undergoing outpatient endoscopy (both monitored anesthesia care [MAC] and moderate sedation) at the Oklahoma City Veterans Affairs Medical Center. Marijuana usage was assessed by a voluntary de-identified pre-endoscopy survey. Information regarding sedation used, endoscopy outcomes, demographics, comorbidities, medical history, and medications used was extracted from the medical record. A univariate and stratified analysis of alcohol usage was performed. A P value of <.05 was considered to be significant. RESULTS: A total of 976 patients were analyzed; 21.5% of them endorsed marijuana usage (210/976). Marijuana users were found to be younger (P = .0002), leaner (P < .0001), and less likely to have diabetes (P = .002), obstructive sleep apnea (P = .0002), and hypertension (P = .04). They were also more likely to smoke (P < .0001) and vape (P < .0001). Marijuana usage was associated with a higher requirement of sedation (fentanyl [P = .003], midazolam [P = .05], propofol [P = .02]) and higher use of adjunct sedation (diphenhydramine in moderate sedation [P = .0003]). Further multivariate analyses were performed to control for possible confounders. Marijuana usage was still deemed to be an independent predictor for high propofol use among MAC cases (odds ratio [OR], 1.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-3.12). Likewise, marijuana usage was found to be an independent predictor for high midazolam use (OR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.02-2.42) and high fentanyl use (OR, 1.54; 95% CI, 0.98-2.38), but failed to reach statistical significance in the fentanyl group. CONCLUSIONS: Marijuana use is associated with a significantly higher amount of sedation along with a significantly higher usage of other adjunct sedatives. A patient's marijuana history should be considered when determining the methods of sedation to be used for endoscopy.

Association between Colonoscopy Sedation Type and Polyp Detection: A Registry-based Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer is a leading cause of cancer-related death. Adenomas and serrated polyps are precursors of colorectal cancer, with serrated polyps being more difficult to detect during colonoscopy. The relationship between propofol use and polyp detection remains unclear. The authors investigated the association of propofol-based versus mild-moderate sedation on adenoma and serrated polyp detection during colonoscopy. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used observational data from the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry. Patients aged greater than 50 yr with screening or surveillance colonoscopies between January 1, 2015, and February 28, 2020, were included. Exclusions were diagnostic examinations, no sedation, missing pathology data, and poor bowel preparation. Multivariate logistic regression was used to evaluate differences in polyp detection between propofol and moderate sedation in the full sample while adjusting for covariates. Propensity score adjustment and clustering at the endoscopist level were used in a restricted sample analysis that included endoscopists and facilities with between 5% and 95% propofol sedation use. RESULTS: A total of 54,063 colonoscopies were analyzed in the full sample and 18,998 in the restricted sample. Serrated polyp prevalence was significantly higher using propofol (9,957 of 29,312; 34.0% [95% CI, 33.4 to 34.5%]) versus moderate sedation (6,066 of 24,751; 24.5% [95% CI, 24.0 to 25.1%]) in the full sample and restricted samples (1,410 of 4,661; 30.3% [95% CI, 28.9 to 31.6%] vs. 3,690 of 14,337; 25.7% [95% CI, 25.0 to 26.5%]). In the full sample multivariate logistic regression, propofol was associated with higher neoplasm (adjusted odds ratio, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.21 to 1.29]), adenoma (odds ratio, 1.07 [95% CI, 1.03 to 1.11]), and serrated polyp detection (odds ratio, 1.51 [95% CI, 1.46 to 1.57]). In the restricted sample using inverse probability of treatment weighted propensity score adjustment and clustering at the endoscopist level, an attenuated but statistically significant effect size was observed for serrated polyps (odds ratio, 1.13 [95% CI, 1.07 to 1.19]), but not for adenomas (odds ratio, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.95 to 1.05]) or any neoplastic lesion (odds ratio, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.98 to 1.08]). CONCLUSIONS: Propofol sedation during colonoscopy may be associated with improved detection of serrated polyps, but not adenomas.

Topical pharyngeal anesthesia with articaine for gastroscopy: a double-blinded, randomized cross-over study in healthy volunteers.

OBJECTIVES: The benefits of topical pharyngeal anesthesia for gastroscopy remain under debate. Articaine, a local anesthetic with fast onset and offset of action as well as low systemic toxicity, could be a promising choice for topical anesthesia. The objective of this study was to assess whether topical pharyngeal anesthesia with articaine is beneficial in sedated gastroscopy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This randomized double-blinded cross-over study included nine volunteers who underwent two gastroscopies under conscious sedation. One was performed with topical pharyngeal anesthesia with articaine and the other with placebo. Hemodynamic parameters including autonomic nervous system state were recorded prior to and during the endoscopic procedure. The endoscopist and the volunteer assessed the endoscopy after the examination. RESULTS: Topical pharyngeal anesthesia with articaine resulted in less discomfort during esophageal intubation and higher patient satisfaction with the procedure. Topical pharyngeal anesthesia with articaine did not increase satisfaction or facilitate the procedure as rated by the endoscopist. There were no clinically relevant differences in hemodynamic parameters. CONCLUSION: The use of articaine for topical pharyngeal anesthesia results in less intubation-related discomfort and better satisfaction.

Safety and efficacy of a low-dose combination of midazolam, alfentanil, and propofol for deep sedation of elderly patients undergoing ERCP.

BACKGROUND: Proper sedation of patients, particularly elderly individuals, who are more susceptible to sedation-related complications, is of significant importance in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). This study aims to assess the safety and efficacy of a low-dose combination of midazolam, alfentanil, and propofol for deep sedation in elderly patients undergoing ERCP, compared to a group of middle-aged patients. METHODS: The medical records of 610 patients with common bile duct stones who underwent elective ERCP under deep sedation with a three-drug regimen, including midazolam, alfentanil, and propofol at Shandong Provincial Third Hospital from January 2023 to September 2023 were retrospectively reviewed in this study. Patients were categorized into three groups: middle-aged (50-64 years, n = 202), elderly (65-79 years, n = 216), and very elderly (≥ 80 years, n = 192). Intraoperative vital signs and complications were compared among these groups. RESULTS: The three groups showed no significant difference in terms of intraoperative variation of systolic blood pressure (P = 0.291), diastolic blood pressure (P = 0.737), heart rate (P = 0.107), peripheral oxygen saturation (P = 0.188), bispectral index (P = 0.158), and the occurrence of sedation-related adverse events including hypotension (P = 0.170) and hypoxemia (P = 0.423). CONCLUSION: The results suggest that a low-dose three-drug regimen consisting of midazolam, alfentanil, and propofol seems safe and effective for deep sedation of elderly and very elderly patients undergoing ERCP procedures. However, further studies are required to verify these findings and clarify the benefits and risks of this method.

Implications of sedation during the use of noninvasive ventilation in children with acute respiratory failure (SEDANIV Study).

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to analyze the effects of sedation administration on clinical parameters, comfort status, intubation requirements, and the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) length of stay (LOS) in children with acute respiratory failure (ARF) receiving noninvasive ventilation (NIV). METHODS: Thirteen PICUs in Spain participated in a prospective, multicenter, observational trial from January to December 2021. Children with ARF under the age of five who were receiving NIV were included. Clinical information and comfort levels were documented at the time of NIV initiation, as well as at 3, 6, 12, 24, and 48 h. The COMFORT-behavior (COMFORT-B) scale was used to assess the patients' level of comfort. NIV failure was considered to be a requirement for endotracheal intubation. RESULTS: A total of 457 patients were included, with a median age of 3.3 months (IQR 1.3-16.1). Two hundred and thirteen children (46.6%) received sedation (sedation group); these patients had a higher heart rate, higher COMFORT-B score, and lower SpO2/FiO2 ratio than did those who did not receive sedation (non-sedation group). A significantly greater improvement in the COMFORT-B score at 3, 6, 12, and 24 h, heart rate at 6 and 12 h, and SpO2/FiO2 ratio at 6 h was observed in the sedation group. Overall, the NIV success rate was 95.6%-intubation was required in 6.1% of the sedation group and in 2.9% of the other group (p = 0.092). Multivariate analysis revealed that the PRISM III score at NIV initiation (OR 1.408; 95% CI 1.230-1.611) and respiratory rate at 3 h (OR 1.043; 95% CI 1.009-1.079) were found to be independent predictors of NIV failure. The PICU LOS was correlated with weight, PRISM III score, respiratory rate at 12 h, SpO2 at 3 h, FiO2 at 12 h, NIV failure and NIV duration. Sedation use was not found to be independently related to NIV failure or to the PICU LOS. CONCLUSIONS: Sedation use may be useful in children with ARF treated with NIV, as it seems to improve clinical parameters and comfort status but may not increase the NIV failure rate or PICU LOS, even though sedated children were more severe at technique initiation in the present sample.

Semiautomated electronic medical record based system for monitoring delayed adverse events in pediatric endoscopy and sedation.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a semiautomated electronic medical record (EMR) system to track pediatric endoscopic procedural adverse event (AE) at a tertiary referral children's hospital. METHODS: We developed an automated EMR based query for postprocedure AEs. Main outcome measurements within 30 days of procedure: return to emergency department, return to surgery, unplanned admissions and admissions with longer than intended stays. Events were graded using a recently described classification system for postendoscopy events and tracked for a 36-month period, from January 2017 to December 2019. RESULTS: Development of a semi-automated system was successful in comprehensive identification of endoscopy and sedation related AE. A total of 193 AEs (2%) were identified in all three categories. Seventy cases (0.7%) were noted to be a direct result of an endoscopic procedure. Of these cases, 31 (44%) were noted to be Grade 3, 5 cases (7%) Grade 4, and no Grade 5 AE occured. Higher rates of AE were observed after therapeutic procedures versus diagnostic (2.6% vs. 0.3%, p = <0.00001). AEs related to sedation occurred in 0.5% of procedures with the majority (84%) reported in patients with American Society of Anesthesia classification of 3 or greater. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic endoscopy remains a safe procedure and risk of both endoscopy and sedation related AE are low. Therapeutic procedures carry a higher risk but are still overwhelmingly safe. Institutional investment in this EMR based system allowed for sustainability and comprehensive tracking of endoscopy related AE.

Transnasal endoscopy ease score "TNEase score" to evaluate patient tolerance of unsedated transnasal endoscopy.

Transnasal endoscopy (TNE) with virtual reality (VR) distraction allows for unsedated pediatric upper endoscopy. Understanding the pediatric population that is successful with TNE is imperative for patient selection and experience. We developed a "TNEase Score" to assess patient tolerance from the physician's assessment. The aim of this study was to identify factors that influence patient's acceptance and tolerability of sedation-free TNE in pediatric patients undergoing the procedure. From March 2020 to April 2021, 110 TNEs were performed on subjects 5-22 years of age. The overall completion rate was 98.1%. Of these subjects, 66 subjects (60%) were graded by the gastroenterologist as TNEase Score 1 (with ease); 27 subjects (25%) were graded as TNEase Score 2 (minimal complaints); nine subjects (8%) were graded as TNEase score 3 (moderate complaints, required frequent reassurance); six subjects were graded as TNEase Score 4 (significant complaints and resistance); two subjects (2%) were graded as TNEase Score 5 (procedure terminated). Feasibility of TNE was significantly related to age, height, and whether the patient had undergone previous TNE. Thus, young age, shorter height, and first time TNE were significant predictors of higher TNEase score or difficulty tolerating TNE. Factors examined that did not predict higher TNEase score included gender, junior versus senior endoscopist, past medical history of anxiety, autism, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), or history of using a nasal spray at home. "TNEase score" allowed grading of the subject's experience and the majority of patients tolerated TNE with minimal complaints.

Nontraditional approaches to sedation for anterior segment surgery: a narrative review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Surgical and anesthetic technological advancement have made both cataract and noncataract anterior segment surgery significantly less invasive and time-intensive, facilitating the transition of some of these procedures from the operating room under monitored anesthesia care (MAC) to the office-based setting without MAC. This transition has been aided by the popularization of nonintravenous approaches to achieving patient sedation for these procedures. In this review, we discuss the literature surrounding traditional and nontraditional methods of achieving patient sedation for anterior segment surgery. RECENT FINDINGS: Our survey of the literature suggests that nonintravenous (IV) approaches to sedation for these procedures may be just as safe, effective, and satisfactory to patients as traditional IV approaches. SUMMARY: As anterior segment surgery becomes less invasive and less time-intensive, providers considering transitioning their cataract and anterior segment surgery out of the operating room and into the office-based setting without MAC anesthesia should consider the non-IV sedation options outlined in this review to achieve adequate patient sedation and comfort.

Assessment of sedation by automated pupillometry in critically ill patients: a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Quantitative measurement of pupil change has not been assessed against the Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale (RASS) and spectral edge frequency (SEF) during sedation. The aim of this study was to evaluate pupillometry against these measures in sedated critically ill adult patients. METHODS: In ventilated and sedated patients, pupillary variables were measured by automated pupillometry at each RASS level from -5 to 0 after discontinuation of hypnotics, while processed electroencephalogram variables were displayed continuously and SEF was recorded at each RASS level. Correlations were made between percentage pupillary light reflex (%PLR) and RASS, and between %PLR and SEF. The ability of %PLR to differentiate light sedation (RASS ≥-2), moderate (RASS =-3), and deep sedation (RASS ≤-4) was assessed by areas under receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. RESULTS: A total of 163 paired measurements were recorded in 38 patients. With decreasing sedation depth, median %PLR increased progressively from 20% (interquartile range 17-25%) to 36% (interquartile range 33-40%) (P<0.001). Strong correlations were found between %PLR and RASS (Rho=0.635) and between %PLR and SEF (R=0.641). Area under the curve (AUC) of 0.87 with a %PLR threshold of 28% differentiated moderate/light sedation from deep sedation with sensitivity of 83% and specificity of 83%. An AUC of 0.82 with a threshold of 31% distinguished light sedation from moderate/deep sedation with a sensitivity of 81% and a specificity of 75%. CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative assessment of %PLR correlates with other indicators of sedation depth in critically ill patients.

Association of ketamine use during procedural sedation with oxygen desaturation and healthcare utilisation: a multicentre retrospective hospital registry study.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the effects of ketamine on desaturation and the risk of nursing home discharge in patients undergoing procedural sedation by anaesthetists. METHODS: We included adult patients who underwent procedures under monitored anaesthetic care between 2005 and 2021 at two academic healthcare networks in the USA. The primary outcome was intraprocedural oxygen desaturation, defined as oxygen saturation <90% for ≥2 consecutive minutes. The co-primary outcome was a nursing home discharge. RESULTS: Among 234,170 included patients undergoing procedural sedation, intraprocedural desaturation occurred in 5.6% of patients who received ketamine vs 5.2% of patients who did not receive ketamine (adjusted odds ratio [ORadj] 1.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.15-1.29, P<0.001; adjusted absolute risk difference [ARDadj] 1%, 95% CI 0.7-1.3%, P<0.001). The effect was magnified by age >65 yr, smoking, or preprocedural ICU admission (P-for-interaction <0.001, ORadj 1.35, 95% CI 1.25-1.45, P<0.001; ARDadj 2%, 95% CI 1.56-2.49%, P<0.001), procedural risk factors (upper endoscopy of longer than 2 h; P-for-interaction <0.001, ORadj 2.91, 95% CI 1.85-4.58, P<0.001; ARDadj 16.2%, 95% CI 9.8-22.5%, P<0.001), and high ketamine dose (P-for-trend <0.001, ORadj 1.61, 95% CI, 1.43-1.81 for ketamine >0.5 mg kg-1). Concomitant opioid administration mitigated the risk (P-for-interaction <0.001). Ketamine was associated with higher odds of nursing home discharge (ORadj 1.11, 95% CI 1.02-1.21, P=0.012; ARDadj 0.25%, 95% CI 0.05-0.46%, P=0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Ketamine use for procedural sedation was associated with an increased risk of oxygen desaturation and discharge to a nursing home. The effect was dose-dependent and magnified in subgroups of vulnerable patients.

Effect of moderate versus deep sedation on recovery following outpatient gastroscopy in older patients: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Although gastrointestinal endoscopy with sedation is increasingly performed in older patients, the optimal level of sedation remains open to debate. In this study, our objective was to compare the effects of moderate sedation (MS) and deep sedation (DS) on recovery following outpatient gastroscopy in elderly patients. METHODS: In this randomized, partially blinded, controlled trial, we randomly divided 270 patients older than 60 years who were scheduled for elective outpatient gastroscopy into the MS or DS group based on the Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (MOAA/S) scale. The primary outcome was the duration of stay in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU). Secondary outcomes included the duration of the total hospital stay, frequency of retching, bucking, and body movements during the examination, endoscopist and patient satisfaction, and sedation-associated adverse events during the procedure. RESULTS: A total of 264 patients completed the study, of whom 131 received MS and 133 received DS. MS was associated with a shorter PACU stay [16.15 ± 9.01 min vs. 20.02 ± 11.13 min, P < 0.01] and total hospital stay [27.32 ± 9.86 min vs. 30.82 ± 12.37 min, P < 0.05], lesser hypoxemia [2.3% (3/131) vs. 12.8% (17/133), P < 0.01], use of fewer vasoactive drugs (P < 0.001), and more retching (P < 0.001). There was no difference in the incidence of bucking and body movements or endoscopist and patient satisfaction between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Compared to deep sedation, moderate sedation may be a preferable choice for American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Grade I-III elderly patients undergoing outpatient gastroscopies, as demonstrated by shorter PACU stays and total hospital stays, lower sedation-associated adverse events, and similar levels of endoscopist and patient satisfaction.

The impact of sedation on the quality of initial skeletal surveys performed for suspected physical abuse in children: a comparative two-centre audit.

BACKGROUND: The impact of sedation on the quality of initial skeletal surveys performed for suspected physical abuse in children is not known. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether sedation influenced the number of, reason for and effective dose of repeat radiographs obtained as part of initial skeletal surveys, and their mean examination times. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred consecutive antemortem initial skeletal survey examinations performed for suspected physical abuse in children <2 years were retrieved from two tertiary paediatric hospitals: Centre 1, where sedation is not used for initial skeletal survey imaging; and Centre 2, where sedation is used routinely. RESULTS: In total, 4055 radiographic projections were performed, of which 93 (2.3%) were repeats. Comparing centres, there was a significant difference in the total number of repeats (P=0.001) and the number of repeats in children aged <12 months (P=0.008). Mean examination times were significantly shorter in unsedated children (P=0.005), even after outliers were excluded (P=0.002). There was no significant difference between the number of routine projections (P=0.587), incompletely imaged body parts (P=0.254), rotation/suboptimal positioning (P=0.527), repeats in children aged >12 months (P=0.089), routine projections in children aged <12 months (P=0.642) or >12 months (P=0.979) or the effective doses of repeats (P=0.286). CONCLUSION: There were fewer repeat projections in sedated children and those aged <12 months but examination times were significantly longer. There was no difference in the effective doses of repeated projections. The routine use of sedation is not supported when performing skeletal survey imaging if the primary considerations are reducing radiation dose and examination time.

Comparison emergence of sedation, using dexmedetomidine and remimazolam, in spinal anaesthesia - double blinded randomized controlled trial.

Background: Continuous intravenous infusion of remimazolam may be suitable for sedation in patients undergoing regional anaesthesia. However, there have been no studies comparing remimazolam and dexmedetomidine for this purpose. This study compared emergence from sedation between dexmedetomidine and remimazolam following continuous intravenous infusion in patients undergoing spinal anaesthesia. Methods: This double-blinded, randomised controlled trial assessed the sedative effects of dexmedetomidine and remimazolam. Following spinal anaesthesia, patients were sedated using continuous intravenous infusion of either dexmedetomidine (D group) or remimazolam (R group).The D group received dexmedetomidine administered at 6 mL/kg/h (6 µg/kg/h) for 10 minutes, followed by 1 mL/kg/h (1 µg/kg/h). The R group received remimazolam administered at 6 mL/kg/h (6 mg/kg/h) for 10 minutes, followed by 1 mL/kg/h (1 mg/kg/h). Sedation levels were evaluated using the Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (MOAA/S) scale. The time to reach MOAA/S ≤ 3 from the start of drug infusion and the time to reach MOAA/S = 5 from the end of infusion were recorded. Hemodynamic parameters and respiratory rate were also monitored. Results: The R group reached MOAA/S ≤ 3 significantly faster than the D group during induction of sedation (4 ± 1 minutes and 11 ± 3 minutes, respectively, p < 0.001). The R group also reached MOAA/S = 5 significantly faster than the D group during emergence from sedation (11 ± 3 minutes and 16 ± 5 minutes, respectively, p < 0.001). Both groups maintained stable hemodynamic parameters and respiratory rate without any significant differences, although the mean heart rate was significantly lower in the D group than in the R group after the start of infusion. Conclusion: Remimazolam demonstrated significantly faster induction of and emergence from sedation compared to dexmedetomidine, with no significant differences in haemodynamics or respiratory depression.

Patient-Reported Quality of Recovery after Sedation for Endoscopy in the Elderly.

INTRODUCTION: Although sedation is critical in minimizing discomforts in patients, conflicting data regarding the safety of sedation among the elderly population exist. This prospective study aimed to compare the quality of recovery (QoR) from gastrointestinal endoscopy performed under sedation between elderly and younger patients. METHODS: We included 177 patients aged 40-64 (group 1, n = 66), 65-79 (group 2, n = 76), and ≥80 (group 3, n = 35) years. QoR was assessed 1 day after the procedure using the quality of recovery 15 (QoR-15) questionnaire, which is a 15-item questionnaire with scores ranging from 0 to 150. Patient demographic, procedural, and sedation data were collected, and neurocognitive function was assessed before and a day after sedation. RESULTS: Groups 1 and 3 differed according to the Mini-Cog test and 3-word memory test performed before the procedure (p < 0.001). QoR-15 scores between groups were not different (139 ± 19 group 1, 141 ± 17 group 2, and 147 ± 26 group 3; p > 0.05). Patients in groups 3 and 2 were administered lower doses of propofol and midazolam than those in group 1. The incidence of oxygen desaturation (SaO2 <90% for >30 s) was lower in groups 1 and 2 than in group 3 (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: As indicated by the QoR-15 questionnaire, the QoR from sedation was not significantly different between the study groups.

Trans rectus sheath extra-peritoneal procedure (TREPP) for inguinal hernia repair under local anesthesia with sedation in the outpatient clinic: a feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: The Trans Rectus Sheath Extra-Peritoneal Procedure (TREPP) is an open procedure in which the mesh is placed in the preperitoneal space and is therefore associated with less chronic post-operative inguinal pain. TREPP is primarily performed under general or spinal anesthesia, however, it is also possible to perform under sedation and local anesthesia with potentially advantages. This retrospective feasibility pilot study investigates the safety and efficiency of TREPP under local anesthesia in the outpatient clinic in comparison with Lichtenstein. METHODS: Between 2019 and 2022, all patients who underwent an elective inguinal hernia repair under local anesthesia in the outpatient clinic operation theatre were assessed. 34 patients in the TREPP group and 213 patients in the Lichtenstein group were included. Outcomes were complications, operating time, theatre time, and early inguinal hernia recurrence within 8 weeks and 6 months post-operatively. RESULTS: No significant differences in complications such as wound infection, hematoma, seroma, urine retention and early recurrence between TREPP and Lichtenstein were found. Post-operative pain at 8 weeks was not significantly higher after Lichtenstein (8.8% vs. 18.8%, P = 0.22). Operating time (21.0 (IQR: 16.0-27.3) minutes vs. 39.0 (IQR: 31.5-45.0) minutes, P < 0.001) and theatre time (37.5 (IQR: 30.8-42.5) minutes vs. 54.0 (IQR: 46.0-62.0) minutes, P < 0.001) was significantly shorter for TREPP. CONCLUSION: This pilot study showed that TREPP appears to be feasible to perform safely under local anesthesia with comparable complication rates and substantially shorter operation time than Lichtenstein. These results justify further research with a larger study population and a longer period of follow up in order to provide firm conclusions.