Division of Gastroenterology and Liver Disease, University Hospitals/Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio.
Division of Gastroenterology, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, Missouri, USA.
Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2019 Aug;32(4):531-537. doi: 10.1097/ACO.0000000000000741.
The decision to undertake monitored anesthesia care (MAC) or general endotracheal anesthesia (GEA) for patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is influenced by many factors. These include locoregional practice preferences, procedure complexity, patient position, and comorbidities. We aim to review the data regarding anesthesia-administered sedation for ERCP and identify the impact of airway management on procedure success, adverse event rates and endoscopy unit efficiency.
Several studies have consistently identified patients at high risk for sedation-related adverse events during ERCP. This group includes those with higher American Society of Anesthesiologists class and (BMI). ERCP is commonly performed in the prone position, which can make the placement of an emergent advanced airway challenging. Although this may be alleviated by performing ERCP in the supine position, this technique is more technically cumbersome for the endoscopist. Data regarding the impact of routine GEA on endoscopy unit efficiency remain controversial.
Pursuing MAC or GEA for patients undergoing ERCP is best-approached on an individual basis. Patients at high risk for sedation-related adverse events likely benefit from GEA. Larger, multicenter randomized controlled trials will aid significantly in better delineating which sedation approach is best for an individual patient.
接受内镜逆行胰胆管造影术(ERCP)的患者选择监测麻醉护理(MAC)或全身气管内麻醉(GEA)受多种因素影响。这些因素包括局部实践偏好、手术复杂性、患者体位和合并症。我们旨在回顾有关 ERCP 麻醉镇静的数据,并确定气道管理对手术成功率、不良事件发生率和内镜单位效率的影响。
多项研究一致确定了 ERCP 期间存在镇静相关不良事件高风险的患者。这群人包括美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)分级较高和(BMI)较高的患者。ERCP 通常在俯卧位进行,这使得紧急高级气道的放置具有挑战性。虽然在仰卧位进行 ERCP 可以缓解这种情况,但这种技术对内镜医生来说更复杂。关于常规 GEA 对内镜单位效率影响的数据仍存在争议。
为接受 ERCP 的患者选择 MAC 或 GEA 最好基于个体情况。镇静相关不良事件高风险的患者可能受益于 GEA。更大规模、多中心的随机对照试验将极大地帮助更好地确定哪种镇静方法最适合个体患者。