Background/Aims: This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of continuous propofol infusion for anesthesia during endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS). Methods: A total of 427 consecutive patients who underwent EUS between May 2018 and February 2019 were enrolled in this study. The patients were divided into two propofol infusion groups: continuous (n=207) and intermittent (n=220). The following parameters were compared: (1) propofol dose, (2) respiratory and circulatory depression, (3) body movement requiring discontinuation of the examination, (4) awakening score, and (5) patient satisfaction. Results: The median total maintenance dose of propofol was significantly higher in the continuous group than in the intermittent group (160.0 mg vs. 130.0 mg, respectively); however, the reduction in SpO2 was significantly lower in the continuous group (2.9% vs. 13.2%). Body movements occurred less frequently in the continuous group than in the intermittent group (40.1% vs. 49.5%, respectively). The rate of complete awakening was significantly higher in the continuous group than in the intermittent group. Finally, there was a significant difference in the percentage of patients who answered “absolutely yes” when asked about receiving EUS again: 52.7% in the continuous group vs. 34.3% in the intermittent group. Conclusions Continuous infusion resulted in stable sedation and reduced propofol-associated risks.

Background/Aims: This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of continuous propofol infusion for anesthesia during endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS). Methods: A total of 427 consecutive patients who underwent EUS between May 2018 and February 2019 were enrolled in this study. The patients were divided into two propofol infusion groups: continuous (n=207) and intermittent (n=220). The following parameters were compared: (1) propofol dose, (2) respiratory and circulatory depression, (3) body movement requiring discontinuation of the examination, (4) awakening score, and (5) patient satisfaction. Results: The median total maintenance dose of propofol was significantly higher in the continuous group than in the intermittent group (160.0 mg vs. 130.0 mg, respectively); however, the reduction in SpO2 was significantly lower in the continuous group (2.9% vs. 13.2%). Body movements occurred less frequently in the continuous group than in the intermittent group (40.1% vs. 49.5%, respectively). The rate of complete awakening was significantly higher in the continuous group than in the intermittent group. Finally, there was a significant difference in the percentage of patients who answered “absolutely yes” when asked about receiving EUS again: 52.7% in the continuous group vs. 34.3% in the intermittent group. Conclusions Continuous infusion resulted in stable sedation and reduced propofol-associated risks.

Background/Aims: This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of continuous propofol infusion for anesthesia during endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS). Methods: A total of 427 consecutive patients who underwent EUS between May 2018 and February 2019 were enrolled in this study. The patients were divided into two propofol infusion groups: continuous (n=207) and intermittent (n=220). The following parameters were compared: (1) propofol dose, (2) respiratory and circulatory depression, (3) body movement requiring discontinuation of the examination, (4) awakening score, and (5) patient satisfaction. Results: The median total maintenance dose of propofol was significantly higher in the continuous group than in the intermittent group (160.0 mg vs. 130.0 mg, respectively); however, the reduction in SpO2 was significantly lower in the continuous group (2.9% vs. 13.2%). Body movements occurred less frequently in the continuous group than in the intermittent group (40.1% vs. 49.5%, respectively). The rate of complete awakening was significantly higher in the continuous group than in the intermittent group. Finally, there was a significant difference in the percentage of patients who answered “absolutely yes” when asked about receiving EUS again: 52.7% in the continuous group vs. 34.3% in the intermittent group. Conclusions Continuous infusion resulted in stable sedation and reduced propofol-associated risks.

Background/Aims: Bispectral index (BIS) monitors process and display electroencephalographic data are used to assess the depth of anesthesia. This study retrospectively evaluated the usefulness of BIS monitoring during endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS). Methods: This study included 725 consecutive patients who underwent EUS under sedation with propofol. BIS monitoring was used in 364 patients and was not used in 361. The following parameters were evaluated: (1) median dose of propofol; (2) respiratory and circulatory depression; (3) occurrence of body movements; (4) awakening score >8 at the time; and (5) awakening score 2 hours after leaving the endoscopy room. Results: The BIS group received a significantly lower median dose of propofol than the non-BIS group (159.2 mg vs. 167.5 mg; p=0.015) in all age groups. For patients aged ≥75 years, the reduction in heart rate was significantly lower in the BIS group than in the non-BIS group (1.2% vs. 9.1%; p=0.023). Moreover, the occurrence of body movements was markedly lower in the BIS group than in the non-BIS group (8.5% vs. 39.4%; p<0.001). Conclusions During EUS examination, BIS monitoring is useful for maintaining a constant depth of anesthesia, especially in patients 75 years of age or older.