The GLP-1 receptor-based agonists (GLP-1RAs) and SGLT2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) are major twenty first century breakthroughs in diabetes and obesity medicine but there are important safety considerations regarding the perioperative and periprocedural management of individuals who are treated with these agents. GLP-1RAs have been linked to an increased risk of retained gastric contents and pulmonary aspiration while SGLT2i can be associated with diabetic ketoacidosis. This manuscript provides a narrative review of the available evidence for perioperative and periprocedural risks in people prescribed GLP-1RAs and SGLT2i. The authors provide expert opinion-driven recommendations and algorithms on how to safely manage GLP-1RAs and SGLT2i under perioperative/periprocedural settings.

This randomized, controlled trial aimed to assess the sedative effects of esketamine and sufentanil combined with propofol during EUS.

Three hundred and forty patients undergone EUS were randomly divided into two groups to receive esketamine 0.25 mg/kg combined with propofol (esketamine group) or sufentanil 0.1 μg/kg combined with propofol (sufentanil group). The primary outcome measure was respiratory depression incidence. The secondary outcomes included the incidence of body movements, propofol dosage, lowest SPO2 during the operation, and management of airway obstruction. In addition, other procedures and anesthesia-related outcomes, and postoperative complications were recorded.

A total of 340 patients underwent randomization. Of these, 172 were assigned to the esketamine group and 168 were assigned to the sufentanil group. 1 patient in the esketamine group was lost in the follow-up. During the EUS, 9 patients (5.3%) in the esketamine group and 26 (15.5%) in the sufentanil group developed respiratory depression; this difference was statistically significant (P = 0.002). Regarding secondary outcomes, the incidence of body movements, induction dosage, supplemental times, and total dosage of propofol were much higher in the sufentanil group than in the esketamine group (P < 0.05). In addition, the lowest SPO2 during the operation, occurrence rate of airway intervention, and management of airway obstruction were significantly different (P < 0.05). Compared to the sufentanil group, the induction time of sedation in the esketamine group was shorter, and the hemodynamics were more stable (P < 0.05). In addition, there were significant differences in the PACU incidence rates of nausea or vomiting between the two groups (P < 0.05), whereas the following day's complications showed no statistical difference.

Esketamine combined with propofol for sedation during EUS can decrease respiratory depression, reduce the dosage of propofol and PONV, and provide a more stable hemodynamic state. Consequently, esketamine could be considered as a potential alternative to sufentanil for sedation during EUS.

The current point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) assessment of gastric fluid volume primarily relies on the traditional linear approach, which often suffers from moderate accuracy. This study aimed to develop an advanced machine learning (ML) model to estimate gastric fluid volume more accurately.

We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data and POCUS data (D1: craniocaudal diameter, D2: anteroposterior diameter) of 1386 patients undergoing elective sedated gastrointestinal endoscopy (GIE) at Nanjing First Hospital to predict gastric fluid volume using ML techniques, including six different ML models and a stacking model. We evaluated the models using the adjusted Coefficient of Determination (R2), mean absolute error (MAE) and root mean square error (RMSE). The SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) method was used to interpret the importance of the variables. Finally, a web calculator was constructed to facilitate its clinical application.

The stacking model (Linear regression + Multilayer perceptron) performed best, with the highest adjusted R2 of 0.718 (0.632 to 0.804). The mean prediction bias was 4 ml (MAE: 4.008 (3.68 to 4.336)), which is better than that of the linear model. D1 and D2 ranked high in the SHAP plot and performed better in the right lateral decubitus (RLD) than in the supine position. The web calculator can be accessed at https://cheason.shinyapps.io/Stacking_regressor/.

The stacking model and its web calculator can serve as practical tools for accurately estimating gastric fluid volume in patients undergoing elective sedated GIE. It is recommended that anesthesiologists measure D1 and D2 in the patient's RLD position.

The incidence of 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (PPC) of gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures (GIEP) are not well characterized in the literature. The primary aim of this study was to identify the incidence of 30-day PPC after GIEP within a large healthcare system. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 5377 patients presenting for GIEP between January 2013 and January 2022. Our primary outcome was the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality PPC composite (AHRQ-PPC). Secondary outcomes were sub-composites derived from the AHRQ-PPC; including pneumonia (AHRQ-PNA), respiratory failure (AHRQ-RF), aspiration pneumonia/ pneumonitis (AHRQ-ASP) and pulmonary emboli (AHRQ-PE). We performed propensity score matching (PSM) followed by multivariable logistic regression to analyze primary and secondary outcomes. Inpatients had higher 30-day AHRQ-PPC (6.0 vs. 1.2%, p<0.001), as well as sub-composite AHRQ-PNA (3.2 vs. 0.7%, p<0.001), AHRQ-RF (2.4 vs. 0.5%, p<0.001), and AHRQ-ASP (1.9 vs. 0.4%, p<0.001). After PSM adjustment, pre-procedural comorbidities of electrolyte disorder [57.9 vs. 31.1%, ORadj: 2.26, 95%CI (1.48, 3.45), p<0.001], alcohol abuse disorder [16.7 vs. 6.8%, ORadj: 2.66 95%CI (1.29, 5.49), p = 0.01], congestive heart failure (CHF) [22.3 vs. 8.7%, ORadj: 2.2 95%CI (1.17, 4.15), p = 0.02] and pulmonary circulatory disorders [21 vs. 16.9%, ORadj: 2.95, 95%CI (1.36, 6.39), p = 0.01] were associated with 30-day AHRQ-PPC. After covariate adjustment, AHRQ-PPC was associated with upper endoscopy more than lower endoscopy [5.9 vs. 1.0%, ORadj: 3.76, 95%CI (1.85, 7.66), p<0.001]. When compared to gastroenterologist-guided conscious sedation, anesthesia care team presence was protective against AHRQ-PPC [3.7 vs. 8.4%, ORadj: 0.032, 95%CI (0.01, 0.22), p<0.001] and AHRQ-ASP [1.0 vs. 3.37%, ORadj: 0.002, 95%CI (0.00, 0.55), p<0.001]. In conclusion, we report estimates of 30-day PPC after GIEP across inpatient and outpatient settings. Upper endoscopic procedures confer a higher risk, while the presence of an anesthesia care team may be protective against 30-day PPC.

Gastric contents may contribute to patients' aspiration during anesthesia. Ultrasound can accurately assess the risk of gastric contents in patients undergoing sedative gastrointestinal endoscopy (GIE) procedures, but its efficiency is limited. Therefore, developing an accurate and efficient model to predict gastric contents in outpatients undergoing elective sedative GIE procedures is greatly desirable.

This study retrospectively analyzed 1501 patients undergoing sedative GIE procedures. Gastric contents were observed under direct gastroscopic vision and suctioned through the endoscope. High-risk gastric contents were defined as having solid content or liquid volume > 25 ml and pH < 2.5; otherwise, they were considered low-risk gastric contents. Univariate analysis and multivariate analysis were used to select the independent risk factors to predict high-risk gastric contents. Based on the selected independent risk factors, we assigned values to each independent risk factor and established a novel nomogram. The performance of the nomogram was verified in the testing cohort by the metrics of discrimination, calibration, and clinical usefulness. In addition, an online accessible web calculator was constructed.

We found BMI, cerebral infarction, cirrhosis, male, age, diabetes, and gastroesophageal reflux disease were risk factors for gastric contents. The AUROCs were 0.911 and 0.864 in the development and testing cohort, respectively. Moreover, the nomogram showed good calibration ability. Decision curve analysis and Clinical impact curve demonstrated that the predictive nomogram was clinically useful. The website of the nomogram was https://medication.shinyapps.io/dynnomapp/.

This study demonstrates that clinical variables can be combined with algorithmic techniques to predict gastric contents in outpatients. Nomogram was constructed from routine variables, and the web calculator had excellent clinical applicability to assess the risk of gastric contents accurately and efficiently in outpatients, assist anesthesiologists in assessment and identify the most appropriate patients for ultrasound.

Aerosol-generating procedures such as oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (OGD) result in infectious particles being exhaled by patients. This substantially increases the medical staff's risk of occupational exposure to pathogenic particles via airway inhalation and facial mucosal deposition. Infectious particles are regarded as a key route of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and, thus, represents a major risk factor for medical staff during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. There is a need for quantitative evidence on medical staff's risk of multiroute exposure to infectious particles exhaled by patients during OGD to enable the development of practical, feasible and economical methods of risk-reduction for use in OGD and related procedures. This randomised controlled trial (RCT)-Personal protective EquiPment intervention TrIal for oesophagogastroDuodEnoscopy (PEPTIDE)-aims to establish a state-of-the-art protocol for quantifying the multiroute exposure of medical staff to infectious particles exhaled by patients during real OGD procedures.

PEPTIDE will be a prospective, two-arm, RCT using quantitative methods and will be conducted at a tertiary hospital in China. It will enrol 130 participants (65 per group) aged over 18. The intervention will be an anthropomorphic model with realistic respiratory-related morphology and respiratory function that simulates a medical staff member. This model will be used either without or with a surgical mask, depending on the group allocation of a participant, and will be placed beside the participants as they undergo an OGD procedure. The primary outcome will be the anthropomorphic model's airway dosage of the participants' exhaled infectious particles with or without a surgical mask, and the secondary outcome will be the anthropomorphic model's non-surgical mask-covered facial mucosa dosage of the participants' exhaled infectious particles. Analyses will be performed in accordance with the type of data collected (categorical or quantitative data) using SPSS (V.26.0) and RStudio (V.1.3.959).

Ethical approval for this RCT was obtained from the Ethics Committee of Peking Union Medical College Hospital (ZS-3377). All of the potential participants who agree to participate will provide their written informed consent before they are enrolled. The results will be disseminated through presentations at national and international conferences and publications in peer-reviewed journals.

NCT05321056.

Residual food (RF) during esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is thought, but not proven, to be a risk factor for gastric-to-pulmonary aspiration.

The aims of this study were to determine the prevalence of RF during EGD, to investigate whether RF was associated with an increased risk of aspiration, especially when monitored anesthesia care (MAC) or general anesthesia (GA) were administered, and to determine whether aspiration associated with RF led to a more severe clinical outcome.

Patients undergoing EGD between October 2012 and September 2018 were identified. Patient age, sex, aspiration events, RF, sedation type, structural foregut abnormalities, and diagnoses associated with impaired esophageal or gastric motility were noted. The clinical course after an aspiration event was evaluated.

RF was identified during 4% of 81,367 EGDs. Aspiration events occurred during 41 (5/10,000) procedures. Aspiration was more likely to occur in patients with RF (odds ratio [OR] 15.1) or those receiving MAC or GA (OR 9.6 and 16.8 relative to conscious sedation, respectively). RF and MAC/GA were synergistically associated with increased odds of aspiration. In a multivariate nominal logistic regression model, older age (OR 2.6), MAC (OR 3.8), GA (OR 4.4), vagotomy (OR 5.2), achalasia (OR 3.8), and RF (OR 10.0) were risk factors for aspiration. Aspiration events in the presence or absence of RF led to similar clinical outcomes.

While aspiration events are rare in patients undergoing EGD, RF and the use of MAC or GA were associated with substantially increased odds of aspiration.

There are few studies assessed the efficacy and mortality of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for the removal of common bile duct (CBD) stones in the elderly aged ≥90 years. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of endoscopic removal of CBD stones in nonagenarians.

We retrospectively reviewed ERCP reports for CBD stone removal. The endoscopic and therapeutic outcomes were collected. The length of stay (LOS), the total number of adverse events, and mortality rate were compared between groups.

A total of 125 nonagenarians were compared with 1,370 controls (65-89 years old individuals). The mean LOS for nonagenarians was significantly higher than in controls (13.6 days vs. 6.5 days). Completed intended treatment was similar in the nonagenarians and controls (89.8% and 89.5%, respectively). The overall complication rate did not differ between the groups. However, nonagenarians had a higher incidence of post-ERCP pneumonia (3.9%). None of the nonagenarians were readmitted to the hospital within 7 days. Four nonagenarians (3.2%) and 25 (1.8%) controls died within 30 days.

Advanced age alone did not affect the decision to perform the procedure. However, prompt diagnosis and treatment of post-ERCP pneumonia in nonagenarians could improve the outcomes and reduce mortality.

To determine the excess of acute medical contacts following a day-case diagnostic gastroscopy.

Cohort study using English linked primary, secondary care and death registry electronic health data. We included 277,535 diagnostic day-case gastroscopies in 225,304 people between 1998 and 2016 and followed up for 30 days. 1,383,535 30-day periods without a gastroscopy within 991,249 people frequency matched on year, gender and decade of birth. Non-cancer deaths, emergency non-cancer admissions and cardio, vascular or respiratory (CVR) primary care consultations were identified and adjusted for each other as competing risks. Outcomes related to possible indications for gastroscopy were censored.

5.1% of day-case diagnostic gastroscopies were followed by emergency hospital admission, 0.4% for a CVR diagnosis. Adjusted for age, sex, morbidity, time trends, indications and competing risks, there was a 0.1% excess of CVR-related hospital admissions compared to controls. This reduced to 0.05% (95% confidence interval 0.04-0.06%) in people under 40 years without morbidity and increased to 1.1% (0.6%-1.6%) in people over 90 years with high comorbidity. Similarly, by 30 days, 3.8% had a primary care consultation for a CVR problem, with an excess after adjustment ranging from 0.13% (0.11%-0.16%) to 0.31% (0.14%-0.50%). Overall numbers needed to harm ranged from 1 in 294 gastroscopies to 1 in 67 gastroscopies.

There was an excess of vascular and respiratory events associated with a diagnostic gastroscopy. In younger patients, this risk manifested as an increase in primary care consultations while in older patients there was an increase in emergency hospital admissions.

Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) under sedation may result in gastrointestinal (GI) and non-GI complications. However, no previous studies have reported 30-day GI and non-GI complications after diagnostic EGD under sedation.We conducted a retrospective, observational study of 30-day GI and non-GI complication rates after outpatient diagnostic EGD under sedation in subjects ≥18 years between January 2012 and December 2017 based on a common data model database. Thirty-day complication rates were compared with EGD under sedation or not, type of sedation drugs (midazolam only vs midazolam/propofol) and age groups (18-64 year vs ≥65 year) for GI (bleeding and perforation) and non-GI complications (pneumonia, acute myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure and cerebral stroke).In total, 39,910 were performed with sedation (midazolam only, n = 16,033 and midazolam/propofol, n = 23,864) and 22,894 were performed without sedation. Elderly patients significantly favored EGD without sedation (P < .01). GI and non-GI complication rates were similar between EGD under sedation and without sedation (all P > .1) except for acute myocardial infarction rate, which was significantly higher in EGD without sedation than EGD under sedation (1.7/10,000 vs 0.3/10,000 persons, P = .043). All GI and non-GI complications were also similar between the midazolam/propofol and midazolam only groups as well as between young and old patients (all P > .1).Outpatient diagnostic EGD under sedation has an excellent safety profile. In addition, it can be safely performed with midazolam only or midazolam/propofol and in young and old patients.

Food retention, which is a characteristic observed in patients with achalasia, can interfere with peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM). However, there is no established guideline for esophageal preparation for POEM. A previous study has shown that drinking warm water may reduce the lower esophageal sphincter pressure in patients with achalasia. This study aims to evaluate the possibility of proper preparation of POEM by instructing the patient to drink warm water.

The warm water preparation was performed in 29 patients with achalasia who underwent POEM. The patients drank 1 L of warm water (60oC) the night before POEM. We evaluated the esophageal clearness and determined the preparation quality. Twentynine patients were prospectively recruited and compared to control group. The control cohort comprised achalasia patients whose endoscopic image was available from the achalasia database of our institution. A 1:2 propensity score-matched control cohort was established from the database of achalasia subjects (n = 155) to compare the outcome of the preparation.

In the warm water preparation group, only 1 patient (3.4%) had some solid retention, but it did not interfere with the POEM procedure. The grade of clearness (P = 0.016) and quality of preparation (P < 0.001) were significantly better in the warm water preparation group than in the matched control group. There was no any adverse event at all related to warm water preparation protocol.

Drinking warm water dramatically reduces esophageal food retention and significantly improves the quality of esophageal preparation. This simple protocol is quite useful, safe, and cost-effective in the preparation of achalasia patients for POEM.

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tubes are removed and/or replaced for reasons such as tube malfunction, degradation, patient's device preference, and when stopping enteral feeding.

To identify the types and rate of complications associated with traction removal of a PEG tube and if this is associated with the size of the PEG or length of time it had been in situ prior to removal.

This retrospective study looked at the tube removal/replacement reports written by the Enteral Feeding Nursing Service over an 8-year period at a large teaching hospital trust in the north of England.

The PEG tube removal reports of 127 patients were reviewed. Five types of complication were identified, categorised as retained bumper (5.5%); intraperitoneal placement of new device (3.17%); misplacement of replacement device into colon (a consequence of the insertion procedure not the removal of the PEG) (0.78%): gastrocutaneous fistula (0.78%); and inability to remove the tube (1.57%). The complication of retained bumpers was associated with an average length of time in situ prior to removal of the PEG tube of 29 months. In the cases of intraperitoneal placement, the PEG tube had been in situ for an average of 6 months. Nurses were unable to remove the PEG tube on two occasions; each had been in situ for approximately 4 years prior to attempted removal.

the complication rates are low following removal of a PEG tube using a traction pull. There was no clear correlation between length of time in situ or tube size and complication rate.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the duodenum is challenging. The water pressure method (WP-ESD) has been developed with a decreased rate of perforation. However, details of perioperative adverse events of WP-ESD are unknown. The purpose of this study was to clarify the frequency and related factors of fecal incontinence and oral regurgitation during WP-ESD.

A chart-based retrospective analysis was performed on 43 patients who underwent duodenal WP-ESD. The saline volume given into the body was calculated in all cases. All adverse events during WP-ESD until 6 weeks were extracted, and factors related to intraoperative fecal incontinence or oral regurgitation were analyzed. The frequency of fecal incontinence and oral regurgitation was also compared to those of 83 conventional ESD cases.

In WP-ESD, intraoperative fecal incontinence occurred in 12 (28%), oral regurgitation in six (14%), and aspiration pneumonia in one patient. For fecal incontinence, the infusion speed (saline volume divided by resection time) around 17 mL/min was a significant factor in multivariable analysis. For oral regurgitation, only tumor size was a significant factor in univariate analysis (P = 0.027). Significant difference was observed in the frequency of fecal incontinence between WP-ESD and conventional ESD (28% vs. 0%, P < 0.001), but no difference was observed in oral regurgitation or aspiration pneumonia.

Intraoperative fecal incontinence is a unique adverse event of WP-ESD related to the infusion speed. WP-ESD did not pose a risk for oral regurgitation, but we should be aware of the risk in large tumor cases.

The American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) organized a multidisciplinary effort to create a clinical practice guideline specific to unscheduled, time-sensitive procedural sedation, which differs in important ways from scheduled, elective procedural sedation. The purpose of this guideline is to serve as a resource for practitioners who perform unscheduled procedural sedation regardless of location or patient age. This document outlines the underlying background and rationale, and issues relating to staffing, practice, and quality improvement.

The multidisciplinary International Committee for the Advancement of Procedural Sedation presents the first fasting and aspiration prevention recommendations specific to procedural sedation, based on an extensive review of the literature. These were developed using Delphi methodology and assessment of the robustness of the available evidence. The literature evidence is clear that fasting, as currently practiced, often substantially exceeds recommended time thresholds and has known adverse consequences, for example, irritability, dehydration and hypoglycaemia. Fasting does not guarantee an empty stomach, and there is no observed association between aspiration and compliance with common fasting guidelines. The probability of clinically important aspiration during procedural sedation is negligible. In the post-1984 literature there are no published reports of aspiration-associated mortality in children, no reports of death in healthy adults (ASA physical status 1 or 2) and just nine reported deaths in adults of ASA physical status 3 or above. Current concerns about aspiration are out of proportion to the actual risk. Given the lower observed frequency of aspiration and mortality than during general anaesthesia, and the theoretical basis for assuming a lesser risk, fasting strategies in procedural sedation can reasonably be less restrictive. We present a consensus-derived algorithm in which each patient is first risk-stratified during their pre-sedation assessment, using evidence-based factors relating to patient characteristics, comorbidities, the nature of the procedure and the nature of the anticipated sedation technique. Graded fasting precautions for liquids and solids are then recommended for elective procedures based upon this categorisation of negligible, mild or moderate aspiration risk. This consensus statement can serve as a resource to practitioners and policymakers who perform and oversee procedural sedation in patients of all ages, worldwide.

a prospective, randomized study was performed to assess the influence of conscious sedation on the overall quality of colonoscopy, simultaneously quantifying its effect on the scientific quality, perceived quality and patient safety.

patients referred for a colonoscopy were included in the study and were randomized to receive or not receive sedation. Demographic data, indication for colonoscopy, cecal intubation, introduction and withdrawal time, resected adenomas and complications during the exploration were collected. Thirty days later, a satisfaction questionnaire was performed (GHAA 9-me) and patients were asked about complications after the examination.

a total of 5,328 patients were included, the average age was 62 ± 15.22 years, 47% were male, 3,734 were sedated and 1,594 were not sedated. The sedated patients had a shorter endoscope insertion time (7'20 ± 2'15 min vs 6'15 ± 3'12 min, p < 0.019), a higher rate of cecal intubations (96% vs 88%, p < 0.05), longer withdrawal time (7'20 ± 2'15 min vs 6'15 ± 3'12 min, p < 0.01) and higher adenoma detection rates (22% vs 17%, p < 0.05). The use of sedation reduced discomfort during and after the exploration, without increasing the complications. The satisfaction questionnaire score was higher (23.6 ± 1.5 vs 16.6 ± 4.8, p < 0.001) in the sedated patients.

superficial sedation not only reduces patient discomfort but also improves the overall quality of the colonoscopy. Therefore, we must consider the use of sedation as an essential part of colonoscopy.

Sedation has been established for GI endoscopic procedures in most countries, but it is also associated with an added risk of complications. Reported complication rates are variable due to different study methodologies and often limited sample size.

Acute sedation-associated complications were prospectively recorded in an electronic endoscopy documentation in 39 study centres between December 2011 and August 2014 (median inclusion period 24 months). The sedation regimen was decided by each study centre.

A total of 368 206 endoscopies was recorded; 11% without sedation. Propofol was the dominant drug used (62% only, 22.5% in combination with midazolam). Of the sedated patients, 38 (0.01%) suffered a major complication, and overall mortality was 0.005% (n=15); minor complications occurred in 0.3%. Multivariate analysis showed the following independent risk factors for all complications: American Society of Anesthesiologists class >2 (OR 2.29) and type and duration of endoscopy. Of the sedation regimens, propofol monosedation had the lowest rate (OR 0.75) compared with midazolam (reference) and combinations (OR 1.0-1.5). Compared with primary care hospitals, tertiary referral centres had higher complication rates (OR 1.61). Notably, compared with sedation by a two-person endoscopy team (endoscopist/assistant; 53.5% of all procedures), adding another person for sedation (nurse, physician) was associated with higher complication rates (ORs 1.40-4.46), probably due to higher complexity of procedures not evident in the multivariate analysis.

This large multicentre registry study confirmed that severe acute sedation-related complications are rare during GI endoscopy with a very low mortality. The data are useful for planning risk factor-adapted sedation management to further prevent sedation-associated complications in selected patients.

DRKS00007768; Pre-results.

Although pulmonary aspiration complicating operative general anaesthesia has been extensively studied, little is known regarding aspiration during procedural sedation.

We performed a comprehensive, systematic review to identify and catalogue published instances of aspiration involving procedural sedation in patients of all ages. We sought to report descriptively the circumstances, nature, and outcomes of these events.

Of 1249 records identified by our search, we found 35 articles describing one or more occurrences of pulmonary aspiration during procedural sedation. Of the 292 occurrences during gastrointestinal endoscopy, there were eight deaths. Of the 34 unique occurrences for procedures other than endoscopy, there was a single death in a moribund patient, full recovery in 31, and unknown recovery status in two. We found no occurrences of aspiration in non-fasted patients receiving procedures other than endoscopy.

This first systematic review of pulmonary aspiration during procedural sedation identified few occurrences outside of gastrointestinal endoscopy, with full recovery typical. Although diligent caution remains warranted, our data indicate that aspiration during procedural sedation appears rare, idiosyncratic, and typically benign.

To investigate the anesthetic management of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) and its associated complications.

This study was a single-center, retrospective, observational study comprising a case series of all patients who underwent POEM in our hospital from April 2015 to November 2016. We collected data regarding patient characteristics, anesthetic methods, surgical factors, and complications using an electronic chart.

There were 86 patients who underwent POEM in our hospital during the study period. Preoperatively, patients were maintained on a low residue diet for 48 h prior to the procedure. They were fasted of solids for 24 h before surgery. There was one case of aspiration (1.2%). During POEM, patients were positioned supine with the upper abdomen covered by a clear drape so that pneumoperitoneum could be timeously identified. In three cases, the peak airway pressure exceeded 35 cmH2O during volume controlled ventilation with tidal volumes of 6-8 mL/kg and subsequent impairment of ventilation. These cases had been diagnosed with spastic esophageal disorders (SEDs) and the length of the muscular incision on the esophageal side was longer than normal.

In the anesthetic management of POEM, it is important to prevent aspiration during induction of anesthesia and to identify and treat complications associated with CO2 insufflation.

Apparent aspiration is a notable adverse event during gastrointestinal endoscopy under sedation (GIES), but data about inapparent aspiration are scarce. Generally, particularly older patients are at higher risk of suffering from adverse events.

The objective of this article is to determine the risk of pneumonia, lower respiratory tract infection (LRI) and systemic inflammatory activation after GIES, especially in patients of at least 65 years.

The retrospective case-control study included 250 patients undergoing GIES and assigned age-, gender- and time of performance-matched controls without invasive procedure or sedation (ratio 1:1).

On day 3 patients of advanced age presented with both pneumonia and LRI more often (2.6 vs. 0.0%, p = 0.041 and 7.8 vs. 2.5%, p = 0.034, respectively). In general, several inflammatory parameters increased significantly after GIES (i.e. white blood cell count (increase of ≥ 25%) 18.6 vs. 6.9%, p < 0.001), leading to more frequent antibiotic treatment (6.8 vs. 1.6%, p = 0.004). The effects were less pronounced on day 7.

Patients of advanced age carry an increased risk of pneumonia and LRI after GIES. Patients are generally more likely to feature inflammation and to receive antibiotic treatment.

Endoscopist-directed propofol (EDP) refers to delivery of propofol for endoscopic sedation under the direction of an endoscopist without any involvement of an anesthesia specialist (anesthesiologist or nurse anesthetist). EDP has been proven to be safe and is also cost-effective compared with the anesthetist delivered sedation for endoscopy. EDP has been endorsed by US gastroenterology societies as an appropriate paradigm for clinical practice. EDP has proliferated in Switzerland and Germany, but its expansion in the United States has been limited by financial disincentives, concerns about medical-legal risk for endoscopists, and regulatory obstacles.

The intraneuronal inclusions called Lewy bodies and neurites, which represent the characteristic pathological changes in Parkinson's disease, are found in the enteric neurons in the great majority of parkinsonian patients. This observation led to a substantial amount of research over the last few years in order to develop a minimally invasive diagnostic procedure in living patients based on gastrointestinal (GI) biopsies.

In this review, we will begin by discussing the studies that focused on the detection of Lewy bodies and neurites in GI biopsies, then broaden the discussion to the pathological changes that also occur in the enteric glial cells and intestinal epithelial cells. We conclude by proposing that a GI biopsy could represent a unique window to assess the whole pathological process of the brain in Parkinson's disease.

Few studies evaluate the impact of anesthesia providers during procedures, such as colonoscopy, on low-risk patients. The objective of this study was to compare the effect of anesthesia providers on several outcome variables, including major morbidity, following screening colonoscopies.

A propensity-matched cohort study of 14,006 patients who enrolled with a national insurer offering health maintenance organization (HMO), preferred provider organization (PPO), and Medicare Advantage plans for a screening colonoscopy between July 1, 2005 and June 30, 2007 were studied. Records were evaluated for completion of the colonoscopy, new cancer diagnosis (colon, anal, rectal) within 6 months of the colonoscopy, new primary diagnosis of myocardial infarction (MI), new primary diagnosis of stroke, hospital admission within 7 days of the colonoscopy, and adherence to guidelines for use of anesthesia providers.

The presence of an anesthesia provider did not affect major morbidity or the percent of completed exams. Overall morbidity within 7 days was very low. When an anesthesia provider was present, a nonsignificant trend toward greater cancer detection within 6 months of the procedure was observed. Adherence to national guidelines regarding the use of anesthesia providers for low-risk patients was poor.

A difference in outcome associated with the presence or absence of an anesthesia provider during screening colonoscopy in terms of MI, stroke, or hospital admission within 7 days of the procedure was not observed. Adherence to published guidelines for the use of anesthesia providers is low. The incidence of completed exams was unaffected by the presence of an anesthesia provider. However, a nonstatistically significant trend toward increased cancer detection requires further study.