Safety and risk factors for difficult endoscopist-directed ERCP sedation in daily practice: a hospital-based case-control study

Background: There are limited data concerning endoscopist-directed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography deep sedation. The aim of this study was to establish the safety and risk factors for difficult sedation in daily practice. Patients and methods: Hospital-based, frequency matched case-control study. All patients were identified from a database of 1,008 patients between 2014 and 2015. The cases were those with difficult sedations. This concept was defined based on the combination of the receipt of high-doses of midazolam or propofol, poor tolerance, use of reversal agents or sedation-related adverse events. The presence of different factors was evaluated to determine whether they predicted difficult sedation. Results: One-hundred and eighty-nine patients (63 cases, 126 controls) were included. Cases were classified in terms of high-dose requirements (n = 35, 55.56%), sedation-related adverse events (n = 14, 22.22%), the use of reversal agents (n = 13, 20.63%) and agitation/discomfort (n = 8, 12.7%). Concerning adverse events, the total rate was 1.39%, including clinically relevant hypoxemia (n = 11), severe hypotension (n = 2) and paradoxical reactions to midazolam (n = 1). The rate of hypoxemia was higher in patients under propofol combined with midazolam than in patients with propofol alone (2.56% vs. 0.8%, p < 0.001). Alcohol consumption (OR: 2.674 [CI 95%: 1.098-6.515], p = 0.030), opioid consumption (OR: 2.713 [CI 95%: 1.096-6.716], p = 0.031) and the consumption of other psychoactive drugs (OR: 2.015 [CI 95%: 1.017-3.991], p = 0.045) were confirmed to be independent risk factors for difficult sedation. Conclusions: Endoscopist-directed deep sedation during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is safe. The presence of certain factors should be assessed before the procedure to identify patients who are high-risk for difficult sedation.

Accuracy of ASGE criteria for the prediction of choledocholithiasis

Background/aims: Few studies have validated the performance of guidelines for the prediction of choledocholithiasis (CL). Our objective was to prospectively assess the accuracy of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines for the identification of CL. Methods: A two-year prospective evaluation of patients with suspected CL was performed. We evaluated the ASGE guidelines and its component variables in predicting CL. Results: A total of 256 patients with suspected CL were analyzed. Of the 208 patients with high-probability criteria for CL, 124 (59.6%) were found to have a stone/sludge at endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Among 48 patients with intermediate-probability criteria, 21 (43.8%) had a stone/sludge. The performance of ASGE high- and intermediate-probability criteria in our population had an accuracy of 59.0% (85.5% sensitivity, 24.3% specificity) and 41.0% (14.4% sensitivity, 75.6% specificity), respectively. The mean ERCP delay time was 6.1 days in the CL group and 6.4 days in the group without CL, p = 0.638. The presence of a common bile duct (CBD) > 6 mm (OR 2.21; 95% CI, 1.20-4.10), ascending cholangitis (OR 2.37; 95% CI, 1.01-5.55) and a CBD stone visualized on transabdominal US (OR 3.33; 95% CI, 1.48-7.52) were stronger predictors of CL. The occurrence of biliary pancreatitis was a strong protective factor for the presence of a retained CBD stone (OR 0.30; 95% CI, 0.17-0.55). Conclusions: Irrespective of a patient's ASGE probability for CL, the application of current guidelines in our population led to unnecessary performance of ERCPs in nearly half of cases.