RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Polyps histology and diameter up to 1 cm determine whether a patient needs a colonoscopy after 3 years or less, or far ahead. Endoscopists' and pathologists' size estimations can be imprecise. Our aim was to assess endoscopist ability to correctly recommend surveillance colonoscopies for patients with polyps around the 10 mm threshold, based on its endoscopic sizing and optical diagnosis by NBI. METHODS: NBI-assisted diagnosis and endoscopist estimation of polyp size were compared with reference standard, considering this as the post resection polyp measurements by the nurse assistant and the pathologic results, in a prospective, multicenter, real life study, that recruited adults undergoing colonoscopy in five hospitals. By comparing the endoscopic and pathologist size estimation, with polyps' measurement after resection, and optical and histological diagnoses in patients with polyps between 5 and 15 mm, sensitivity was assessed at the patient level by means of two characteristics: the presence of adenoma, and the surveillance interval. Surveillance intervals were established by the endoscopist, based on optical diagnosis, and by another gastroenterologist, grounded on the pathologic report. Determinants of accuracy were explored at the polyp level. RESULTS: 532 polyps were resected in 451 patients. Size estimation was more precise for the endoscopist. Endoscopist sensitivity for the presence of adenoma or carcinoma was 98.7%. Considering the presence of high-grade dysplasia or cancer, sensitivity was 82.6% for the endoscopic optical diagnosis. Sensitivity for a correct 3-year surveillance interval was 91.5%, specificity 82.3%, with a PPV of 93.2% and NPV of 78.5% for the endoscopist. 6.51% of patients would have had their follow-up colonoscopy delayed, whereas 22 (4.8%) would have it been performed earlier, had endoscopist recommendations been followed. CONCLUSION: Our study observes that NBI optical diagnosis can be recommended in routine practice to establish surveillance intervals for polyps between 5 and 15 mm. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04232176.
Assuntos
Adenoma , Pólipos do Colo , Neoplasias Colorretais , Adenoma/diagnóstico por imagem , Adenoma/patologia , Adulto , Pólipos do Colo/diagnóstico por imagem , Pólipos do Colo/patologia , Colonoscopia/métodos , Neoplasias Colorretais/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias Colorretais/patologia , Humanos , Imagem de Banda Estreita/métodos , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Estudos ProspectivosRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Outcomes in old patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) have been scarcely studied. Our aim was to compare very old individuals (>80 years old) with younger patients with UGIB, and to identify risk factors for the main outcomes. METHODS: A single-centre prospectively collected database was analysed. Descriptive, inferential and multivariate logistic regression models were performed. Main clinical outcomes were in-hospital and delayed 6-month mortality. RESULTS: 698 patients were included, 143 very old and 555 aged <80. Old patients differed from younger ones in comorbidities (85.9% vs. 62%, P < .0001), oral anticoagulants (32.3% vs. 12.7%; P < .0001), and antiplatelets intake (32.3% vs. 21.2%; P < .007). No differences were found in the need for endoscopic interventions, blood unit transfusions, hospital stay, in-hospital rebleeding and mortality. Among very old patients, creatinine levels were higher in those who died compared with the ones who survived (1.92 ± 1.46 vs. 1.25 ± 0.59 mg/dL; P = .002), they had lower haemoglobin levels (8.1 ± 1.4 vs. 9.1 ± 2.4 g/dL; P = .04) and longer hospital stays (17.75 ± 15.5 vs. 8.1 ± 8.4 days; P < .0001). Logistic regression showed creatinine levels (OR: 2.42; 95% CI: 1.24-4.74; P = .01), cirrhosis (OR: 2.88, 95% CI: 1.88-17.34; P = .04) and being an impatient (OR: 3.90; 95% CI: 1.11-20; P = .035) were independent risk factors for mortality in older patients. They had an increased delayed 6-month mortality compared with younger patients (17.5% vs. 8%, P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: Creatinine levels, cirrhosis or the onset of UGIB while being an inpatient were independent risk factors for mortality in very old patients. Delayed mortality was higher among them, mostly caused by cardiovascular events and neoplasms, but not in-hospital mortality.
Assuntos
Hemorragia Gastrointestinal , Cirrose Hepática , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Hospitais , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de RiscoRESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The Endoscopic Resection Group of the Spanish Society of Endoscopy (GSEED-RE) model and the Australian Colonic Endoscopic Resection (ACER) model were proposed to predict delayed bleeding (DB) after EMR of large superficial colorectal lesions, but neither has been validated. We validated and updated these models. METHODS: A multicenter cohort study was performed in patients with nonpedunculated lesions ≥20 mm removed by EMR. We assessed the discrimination and calibration of the GSEED-RE and ACER models. Difficulty performing EMR was subjectively categorized as low, medium, or high. We created a new model, including factors associated with DB in 3 cohort studies. RESULTS: DB occurred in 45 of 1034 EMRs (4.5%); it was associated with proximal location (odds ratio [OR], 2.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.31-6.16), antiplatelet agents (OR, 2.51; 95% CI, .99-6.34) or anticoagulants (OR, 4.54; 95% CI, 2.14-9.63), difficulty of EMR (OR, 3.23; 95% CI, 1.41-7.40), and comorbidity (OR, 2.11; 95% CI, .99-4.47). The GSEED-RE and ACER models did not accurately predict DB. Re-estimation and recalibration yielded acceptable results (GSEED-RE area under the curve [AUC], .64 [95% CI, .54-.74]; ACER AUC, .65 [95% CI, .57-.73]). We used lesion size, proximal location, comorbidity, and antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy to generate a new model, the GSEED-RE2, which achieved higher AUC values (.69-.73; 95% CI, .59-.80) and exhibited lower susceptibility to changes among datasets. CONCLUSIONS: The updated GSEED-RE and ACER models achieved acceptable prediction levels of DB. The GSEED-RE2 model may achieve better prediction results and could be used to guide the management of patients after validation by other external groups. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03050333.).
Assuntos
Ressecção Endoscópica de Mucosa , Austrália , Estudos de Coortes , Colonoscopia , Neoplasias Colorretais/cirurgia , Humanos , Fatores de RiscoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is one of the main causes of hospital admission in gastroenterology departments and is associated with a significant morbidity and mortality. Rebleeding after initial endoscopic therapy occurs in 10-20% of cases and therefore, there is a need to define predictive factors for rebleeding. AIM: the aim of our study was to analyze risk factors and outcomes in a population of patients who suffered a rebleed. METHODS: five hundred and seven patients with gastrointestinal bleeding were included. Clinical and biochemical data, as well as procedures and outcome six months after admission, were all collected. Documented clinical outcome included in-hospital and six-month delayed mortality, rebleeding and six-month delayed hemorrhagic and cardiovascular events. RESULTS: according to a logistic regression analysis, high creatinine levels were independent risk factors for rebleeding of non-variceal and variceal UGIB. In non-variceal UGIB, tachycardia was an independent risk factor, whereas albumin levels were an independent protective factor. Rebleeding was associated with in-hospital mortality (29.5% vs 5.5%; p < 0.0001). In contrast, rebleeding was not related to six-month delayed mortality or delayed cardiovascular and hemorrhagic events. CONCLUSIONS: tachycardia and high creatinine and albumin levels were independent factors associated with rebleeding, suggestive of a potential predictive role of these parameters. The incorporation of these variables into predictive scores may provide improved results for patients with UGIB. Further validation in prospective studies is required.
Assuntos
Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/etiologia , Idoso , Análise de Variância , Biomarcadores/sangue , Pressão Sanguínea , Creatinina/sangue , Endoscopia Gastrointestinal , Varizes Esofágicas e Gástricas/complicações , Feminino , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/mortalidade , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/terapia , Hematemese/etiologia , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Humanos , Cirrose Hepática/complicações , Masculino , Melena/etiologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos , Recidiva , Análise de Regressão , Fatores de Risco , Albumina Sérica/análise , Taquicardia/complicações , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Detailed analyses of mortality after upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding are lacking. Follow-up rarely extends beyond 30 days. AIMS: Our aim was to analyze in-hospital and delayed 6-months mortality, identifying risk factors. METHODS: This was a prospective study on patients with upper GI bleeding over 36 months. Clinical outcomes were in-hospital and delayed-6 month-mortality. RESULTS: Four hundred and forty-none patients were included. Overall inpatient mortality was 9.8% but mortality directly related to bleeding was 5.1%. Patients who died presented lower systolic blood pressures, platelet recounts, prothrombin times and lower levels of hemoglobin, calcium, albumin, urea, creatinine and total proteins. Cirrhosis and neoplasms determined a higher in-hospital mortality. Albumin levels were protective, whereas creatinine and an active bleeding were risk factors for in-hospital death in multivariate analysis. Up to 12.6% of patients discharged died in the first 6 months. Neoplasms, chronic kidney disease, coronary disease and esophageal varices were related to delayed mortality. Coronary disease and neoplasms were independent risk factors for mortality, but albumin levels were protective in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: Comorbidities were risk factors for delayed mortality, whereas albumin levels were a protective factor for in-hospital and delayed deaths. Six months mortality is proportionately as important as in-hospital mortality. Half of the delayed deaths might be preventable.
Assuntos
Varizes Esofágicas e Gástricas/complicações , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/mortalidade , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Cirrose Hepática/complicações , Neoplasias/complicações , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Feminino , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/etiologia , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Análise Multivariada , Estudos Prospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Espanha/epidemiologia , Fatores de Tempo , Adulto JovemRESUMO
This document summarizes the contents of the Clinical Guidelines for the Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Non-Pedunculated Colorectal Lesions that was developed by the working group of the Spanish Society of Digestive Endoscopy (GSEED of Endoscopic Resection). This document presents recommendations for the endoscopic management of superficial colorectal neoplastic lesions.
Assuntos
Neoplasias Colorretais/cirurgia , Cirurgia Colorretal/métodos , Ressecção Endoscópica de Mucosa/métodos , Endoscopia Gastrointestinal/métodos , Mucosa Intestinal/cirurgia , Doenças do Colo/cirurgia , Cirurgia Colorretal/normas , Ressecção Endoscópica de Mucosa/normas , Endoscopia Gastrointestinal/normas , Humanos , Doenças Retais/cirurgiaRESUMO
This document summarizes the contents of the Clinical Guidelines for the Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Non-Pedunculated Colorectal Lesions that was developed by the working group of the Spanish Society of Digestive Endoscopy (GSEED of Endoscopic Resection). This document presents recommendations for the endoscopic management of superficial colorectal neoplastic lesions.
Assuntos
Neoplasias Colorretais/cirurgia , Ressecção Endoscópica de Mucosa/normas , HumanosRESUMO
BACKGROUND & AIMS: After endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of colorectal lesions, delayed bleeding is the most common serious complication, but there are no guidelines for its prevention. We aimed to identify risk factors associated with delayed bleeding that required medical attention after discharge until day 15 and develop a scoring system to identify patients at risk. METHODS: We performed a prospective study of 1214 consecutive patients with nonpedunculated colorectal lesions 20 mm or larger treated by EMR (n = 1255) at 23 hospitals in Spain, from February 2013 through February 2015. Patients were examined 15 days after the procedure, and medical data were collected. We used the data to create a delayed bleeding scoring system, and assigned a weight to each risk factor based on the ß parameter from multivariate logistic regression analysis. Patients were classified as being at low, average, or high risk for delayed bleeding. RESULTS: Delayed bleeding occurred in 46 cases (3.7%, 95% confidence interval, 2.7%-4.9%). In multivariate analysis, factors associated with delayed bleeding included age ≥75 years (odds ratio [OR], 2.36; P < .01), American Society of Anesthesiologist classification scores of III or IV (OR, 1.90; P ≤ .05), aspirin use during EMR (OR, 3.16; P < .05), right-sided lesions (OR, 4.86; P < .01), lesion size ≥40 mm (OR, 1.91; P ≤ .05), and a mucosal gap not closed by hemoclips (OR, 3.63; P ≤ .01). We developed a risk scoring system based on these 6 variables that assigned patients to the low-risk (score, 0-3), average-risk (score, 4-7), or high-risk (score, 8-10) categories with a receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.77 (95% confidence interval, 0.70-0.83). In these groups, the probabilities of delayed bleeding were 0.6%, 5.5%, and 40%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of delayed bleeding after EMR of large colorectal lesions is 3.7%. We developed a risk scoring system based on 6 factors that determined the risk for delayed bleeding (receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.77). The factors most strongly associated with delayed bleeding were right-sided lesions, aspirin use, and mucosal defects not closed by hemoclips. Patients considered to be high risk (score, 8-10) had a 40% probability of delayed bleeding.
Assuntos
Técnicas de Apoio para a Decisão , Ressecção Endoscópica de Mucosa/efeitos adversos , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/diagnóstico , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/patologia , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos , Medição de Risco , Espanha , Adulto JovemRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Massive gastrointestinal bleeding is a life-threatening condition without a well-established definition. We aimed to analyze the characteristics, risk factors, and outcomes of patients with massive upper gastrointestinal bleeding. METHODS: Our study analyzed a prospective registry of patients admitted between 2013 and 2020 with variceal and non-variceal causes. Severe bleeding was defined as ongoing bleeding requiring transfusion of more than 2 units of packed red blood cells within 24 hours, accompanied by signs of shock. The main outcomes were 30-day and 6-month mortality, rebleeding within 7 days, persistent bleeding, and severe complications during admission. RESULTS: Out of 1213 patients, 171 had massive gastrointestinal bleeding, with a predominance of males. The massive bleeding group had higher rates of chronic kidney disease, cirrhosis, in-patient status, disseminated malignancy, alcoholism, and ASA score ≥3. All major outcomes, including 30-day mortality, 6-month mortality, rebleeding, persistent bleeding, and severe complications, were more common in the massive bleeding group. Multivariate logistic regression identified inpatient status, systemic diseases, malignancy, active bleeding in endoscopy, and severe complications as risk factors for massive bleeding and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Inpatient status and comorbidities, especially systemic diseases, and malignancies, were associated with a higher risk of massive bleeding. Mortality was linked to chronic kidney disease, cirrhosis, severe comorbidities, and alcohol consumption. We observed increased 6-months mortality, probably related to a health status in which gastrointestinal bleeding heralded poor outcomes, some of them potentially preventable. Innovative healthcare interventions, such as Emergency Department-based intermediate care areas or Intensive Care Units, and multidisciplinary follow-up, could potentially improve survival.
Assuntos
Varizes Esofágicas e Gástricas , Neoplasias , Insuficiência Renal Crônica , Masculino , Humanos , Feminino , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/epidemiologia , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/etiologia , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/diagnóstico , Fatores de Risco , Cirrose Hepática/complicações , Endoscopia Gastrointestinal , Insuficiência Renal Crônica/complicaçõesRESUMO
Background/Objectives: Early identification of patients at risk of developing severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) is still an issue. Dynamic assessment of clinical and laboratory parameters within the first 48 h of admission may offer valuable insights into the prediction of unfavorable outcomes such as SAP and death. Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted on a cohort of patients admitted for AP at a tertiary referral hospital. Clinical and laboratory data were collected on admission and at 48 h. Patients were classified based on the Revised Atlanta classification. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent risk factors for SAP. Likelihood ratios and post-test probabilities were calculated to assess the clinical usefulness of predictive markers. Results: 227 patients were included, with biliary etiology being the most common and a prevalence of SAP and death of 10.7% and 5.7%, respectively. BISAP ≥ 2 on admission, presence of SIRS after 48 h, rise in heart rate over 20 bpm, and any increase in BUN after 48 h were independent risk factors for SAP. The combination of these factors increased the post-test probability of SAP and death, with BISAP ≥ 2 combined with the presence of SIRS after 48 h showing the highest probability (82% and 73%, respectively). Conclusions: Dynamic assessment of BUN, heart rate, and SIRS within the first 48 h of admission can aid in predicting the development of SAP and death in patients with AP. These findings underscore the importance of continuous monitoring, although multicenter studies are warranted to refine predictive models for SAP.
RESUMO
Background & Aims: Several risk scores have been proposed for risk-stratification of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding. ABC score was found more accurate predicting mortality than AIMS65. MAP(ASH) is a simple, pre-endoscopy score with a great ability to predict intervention and mortality. The aim of this study was to compare ABC and MAP(ASH) discriminative ability for the prediction of mortality and intervention in UGIB. As a secondary aim we compared both scores with Glasgow-Blatchford score and AIMS65. Methods: Our study included patients admitted to the emergency room of Virgen de las Nieves University Hospital with UGIB (2017-2020). Information regarding clinical, biochemical tests and procedures was collected. Main outcomes were in-hospital mortality and a composite endpoint for intervention. Results: MAP(ASH) and ABC had similar AUROCs for mortality (0.79 vs. 0.80). For intervention, MAP(ASH) (AUROC = 0.75) and ABC (AUROC = 0.72) were also similar. Regarding rebleeding, AUROCs of MAP(ASH) and ABC were 0.67 and 0.61 respectively. No statistically differences were found in these outcomes. With a low threshold for MAP(ASH) ≤ 2, ABC and MAP(ASH) classified a similar proportion of patients as being at low risk of death (42% vs. 45.2%), with virtually no mortality under these thresholds. Conclusions: MAP(ASH) and ABC were similar for the prediction of relevant outcomes for UGIB, such as intervention, rebleeding and in-hospital mortality, with an accurate selection of low-risk patients. MAP(ASH) has the advantage of being easier to calculate even without the aid of electronic tools.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The objective of our study was to investigate whether Endoscopic Ultrasonography (EUS) and Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography (PET-CT) restaging can predict survival in upper gastrointestinal tract adenocarcinomas and to assess their accuracy when compared to pathology. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study on all patients who underwent EUS for staging of gastric or esophago-gastric junction adenocarcinoma between 2010 and 2021. EUS and PET-CT were performed, and preoperative TNM restaging was conducted using both procedures within 21 days prior to surgery. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 185 patients (74.7% male) were included in the study. The accuracy of EUS for distinguishing between T1-T2 and T3-T4 tumors after neoadjuvant therapy was 66.7% (95% CI: 50.3-77.8%), and for N staging, the accuracy was 70.8% (95% CI: 51.8-81.8%). Regarding PET-CT, the accuracy for N positivity was 60.4% (95% CI: 46.3-73%). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed a significant correlation between positive lymph nodes on restaging EUS and PET-CT with DFS. Multivariate COX regression analysis identified N restaging with EUS and PET-CT, as well as the Charlson comorbidity index, as correlated factors with DFS. Positive lymph nodes on EUS and PET-CT were predictors of OS. In multivariate Cox regression analysis, the independent risk factors for OS were found to be the Charlson comorbidity index, T response by EUS, and male sex. CONCLUSION: Both EUS and PET-CT are valuable tools for determining the preoperative stage of esophago-gastric cancer. Both techniques can predict survival, with preoperative N staging and response to neoadjuvant therapy assessed by EUS being the main predictors.
RESUMO
Acute pancreatitis is nowadays one of the most common diseases among gastroenterology disorders, being gallstones and alcohol the main etiologies. Diagnostic criteria and indications of different imaging techniques are well defined, so that abdominal ultrasound is useful for etiological diagnosis whereas computarized tomography is better for risk stratification and local complications assessment. Goal directed fludtherapy, early starting of oral feeding and pain management are the mainstay of early treatment in acute pancreatitis. Antibiotics are useful when infected necrosis or extra pancreatic infections are documented or suspected but no as prophylaxis in sterile necrotizing pancreatitis. Minimally invasive approaches have emerged in the last decade for walled off necrosis management, improving complication rates, quality of life and length of hospital stay when compared with open surgery.
Assuntos
Pancreatite Necrosante Aguda , Qualidade de Vida , Doença Aguda , Humanos , Necrose , Pancreatite Necrosante Aguda/diagnóstico , Pancreatite Necrosante Aguda/etiologia , Pancreatite Necrosante Aguda/terapiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is useful in the diagnostic workup of idiopathic acute pancreatitis but its role as a predictor of recurrence has not been thoroughly assessed. Our aim was to study the performance of EUS in idiopathic acute pancreatitis, its impact on the natural history of the disease, and the factors related to recurrence. METHODS: Patients with idiopathic acute pancreatitis referred to our endoscopy unit were enrolled and followed, with assessment of the performance of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), cholecystectomy, and the incidence of recurrence. EUS findings and recurrence rates were compared between patients with a first episode or recurrent attacks and in patients with previous cholecystectomy versus those with gallbladder in situ. RESULTS: One hundred six patients were included (mean follow up: 53.59±27.79 months). Biliary disease related to stones was the most common finding on EUS (49.1%), and patients referred for recurrent attacks showed the highest recurrence rate during follow up (57.1%). ERCP or cholecystectomy reduced recurrences to 14.3% in patients with biliary disease. Age under 65 (odds ratio [OR] 3.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.21-10.44; P=0.02), previous cholecystectomy (OR 3.19, 95%CI 1.11-9.17; P=0.03), and no lithiasis on EUS (OR 2.87, 95%CI 1.04-7.87; P=0.04) were independent risks factors for recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-directed ERCP/cholecystectomy was associated with lower relapse rates in idiopathic acute pancreatitis. Along with age and gallbladder status, it provides predictive information about recurrence likelihood.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Treatment of gastric cancer is based on accurate staging. Emerging methods, such as PET-CT, are increasingly being used for this purpose. Our aim was to analyze the results of EUS and PET-CT in staging and restaging our patients with gastric cancer, comparing both of them with the histological results. METHODS: Patients with confirmed gastric cancer were prospectively enrolled. Inclusion criteria for the final analysis included only patients who finally received a surgical resection. All patients underwent preoperative TNM staging by means of EUS and PET-CT within 21 days prior to the surgical treatment. RESULTS: A total of 256 patients were included. The overall EUS accuracy for T staging was 78% and 80.2% in restaging. EUS showed its best accuracy when distinguishing T1-T2 tumors vs. T3-T4, with an increased accuracy in restaging. Regarding N staging, the overall accuracy of EUS was 76.2%, and 72.5% for PET-CT (p = 0.02). With regards to restaging, accuracy of EUS and PET-CT for N staging was 88.5% and 69%, respectively, with significant differences (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: EUS performed better than PET-CT in gastric cancer N staging and restaging. EUS accuracy in this setting is still suboptimal and probably more than one single diagnostic procedure should be used.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Only a few reports have addressed non-anesthesiologist-administered propofol for endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), but none specifically in high-risk patients. Our aim was to study the application of a propofol sedation protocol for EUS in average-risk and high-risk patients. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study including 446 patients referred for EUS. We analyzed the induction time, procedure duration, recovery times, and patients' comfort and safety. Sedation was administered by a trained nurse, under the guidance of the endoscopist. We continuously monitored vital signs as well as patient cooperation and tolerance. Complications, patient, and endoscopist satisfaction were analyzed. RESULTS: No major complications occurred. The rate of minor complications was 9%, the most frequent being hypoxemia (8%). One hundred and thirty-eight high-risk patients were included [American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) III-IV]. Average-risk patients received higher propofol doses (202.9 ± 84.8 vs. 164.8 ± 84.3; P=0.003). No differences were found in the rate of complications or procedure-related variables. Overall patient and endoscopist satisfaction was excellent. The logistic regression model identified propofol doses (P=0.02) as a risk factor and ASA-I classification (P=0.03) as a protective factor for the appearance of complications. CONCLUSION: Non-anesthesiologist-administered propofol for upper EUS in high-risk and average-risk patients is safe and could be routinely offered to high-risk and elderly patients.