Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.
KMID : 1038120230560050658
Clinical Endoscopy
2023 Volume.56 No. 5 p.658 ~ p.665
Anesthesia care provider sedation versus conscious sedation for endoscopic ultrasound?guided tissue acquisition: a retrospective cohort study
Sneha Shaha

Yinglin Gao
Jiahao Peng
Kendrick Che
John J. Kim
Wasseem Skef
Abstract
Background/Aims : We aimed to study the effects of sedation on endoscopic ultrasound?guided tissue acquisition.

Methods : We conducted a retrospective study evaluating the role of sedation in endoscopic ultrasound?guided tissue acquisition by comparing two groups: anesthesia care provider (ACP) sedation and endoscopist-directed conscious sedation (CS).

Results : Technical success was achieved in 219/233 (94.0%) in the ACP group and 114/136 (83.8%) in the CS group (p=0.0086). In multivariate analysis, the difference in technical success between the two groups was not significant (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.234?1.069; p=0.0738). A successful diagnostic yield was present in 146/196 (74.5%) in the ACP group and 66/106 (62.3%) in the CS group, respectively (p=0.0274). In multivariate analysis, the difference in diagnostic yield between the two groups was not significant (aOR, 0.643; 95% CI, 0.356?1.159; p=0.142). A total of 33 adverse events (AEs) were observed. The incidence of AEs was significantly lower in the CS group (5/33 CS vs. 28/33 ACP; OR, 0.281; 95% CI, 0.095?0.833; p=0.022).

Conclusions : CS provided equivalent technical success and diagnostic yield for malignancy in endoscopic ultrasound?guided tissue acquisition. Increased AEs were associated with anesthesia for the endoscopic ultrasound?guided tissue acquisition.
KEYWORD
Anesthesia, Conscious sedation, Endoscopic ultrasound?guided fine needle aspiration, General anesthesia, Pancreatic neoplasm
FullTexts / Linksout information
Listed journal information