11/26/2010 Safety of non-anesthesia provider administered propofol sedation in endoscopic procedures: A cautionary note Kılıç Y, - Saudi J Gastroenterol
Saudi Journal of Gastroenterology
Home About us Instructions Submission Subscribe Advertise Contact Login    Print this page  Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 
Users Online: 825 

Previous Article  Table of Contents Next Article  
LETTER TO EDITOR  
Year :   |  Volume :   |  Issue :   |  Page :
Safety of non-anesthesia provider administered propofol sedation in endoscopic procedures: A cautionary note


 Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Faculty of Medicine, Eskişehir Osmangazi University, Eskişehir, Turkey

Click here for correspondence address and email
Date of Web Publication05-Apr-2019
 


How to cite this URL:
Kılıç Y. Safety of non-anesthesia provider administered propofol sedation in endoscopic procedures: A cautionary note. Saudi J Gastroenterol [Epub ahead of print] [cited 2019 Apr 25]. Available from: http://www.saudijgastro.com/preprintarticle.asp?id=255550




Sir,

We have read with interest the meta-analysis by Gouda et al. dealing with the safety of non-anesthesia provider administered propofol sedation in non-advanced gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures.[1] Because gastroenterologists may read the mentioned meta-analysis and, in their daily practice, may routinely suggest sedation and anesthesia from non-anesthesiologist anesthesia providers for their patients, we would like to comment on some of the issues elucidated by this report.

First of all, major challenges regarding nonoperating room anesthesia (NORA) include those related to patient health status, procedure type, and equipment competence. Whether the procedures performed by NORA are simple or not, each patient should be prepared in accordance with general anesthetic rules since sedation can be converted to general anesthesia at any time during the procedure. In addition, consultations between anesthesiologist and proceduralist must include all potential emergent events and adverse outcomes. Physicians who are unfamiliar with NORA may underestimate the fact that patients undergoing procedures involving new and advanced technological equipment are at higher risk. Those patients include not only young and adult ones, bit also pediatric and geriatric patients, and medically challenging patients who are too weak for surgical management but are able to obtain some benefit from such procedures. Cooper et al. reported that inadequate experience or familiarity with equipment/monitoring, poor communication with the team, and carelessness and fatigue of the anesthesia practitioner may contribute to developing unwanted complications of NORA, ranging from mild problems to death.[2] In addition, Youn et al. assesed that all medical personnel, including anesthesiologists, require special training about the anesthesia practice outside the operating room, to improve patient outcomes and reduce adverse events.[3]

We think that another important point on NORA may be the potential legal problems. Abenstein and Warner reported that complication rates did not increase, but the rate of death and failure-to-rescue were greater when care was not directed by anesthesiologists, demonstrating that 30-day morbidity and mortality were lower when anesthesiologists directed anesthesia care.[4]

Since procedural sedation is almost always performed by using propofol that can be associated with serious side-effects, the routine use of this drug by non-anaesthesiologists was not approved by major anesthesia societies including the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) and many members of European Society of Anaesthesiology (ESA).[5]

As a result, NORA carries many challenges for patient safety and should be performed only by those trained in the administration of general anesthesia.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
   References Top

1.
Gouda B, Gouda G, Borle A, Singh A, Sinha A, Singh PM. Safety of nonanesthesia provider administered propofol sedation in nonadvanced gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures: A meta analysis. Saudi J Gastroenterol 2017;23:133-43.  Back to cited text no. 1
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  
2.
Cooper JB, Newbower RS, Long CD, McPeek B. Preventable anesthesia mishaps: A study of human factors. 1978. Qual Saf Health Care 2002;11:277-82.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Youn AM, Ko YW, Kim YH. Anesthesia and sedation outside of the operating room. Korean J Anesthesiol 2015;68:323-31.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Abenstein JP, Warner MA. Anesthesia providers, patient outcomes, and costs. Anesth Analg 1996;82:1273-83.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Perel, A. Nonanaesthesiologists should not be allowed to administer propofol for procedural sedation: A consensus statement of 21 European national societies of -anaesthesia. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2011;28:580-4.  Back to cited text no. 5
    

Top
Correspondence Address:
Yeliz Kılıç,
Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Faculty of Medicine, Osmangazi University, Büyükdere Mah., 26040, Odunpazari, Eskisehir
Turkey
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/sjg.SJG_107_19

PMID: 30971587





 

Top
Previous Article   Next Article
 
  Search
 
  Ahead Of Print
  
     Search Pubmed for
 
    -  Kılıç Y
        PDF Version


    References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed42    
    PDF Downloaded4    

Recommend this journal