Endoscopist-directed propofol: Pros and cons

Eun Hye Kim, Sang Kil Lee

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Concerns about the safety of endoscopist-directed propofol (EDP) have been voiced that propofol should be given only by healthcare professionals trained in the administration of general anesthesia. Here we discuss the safety and drawbacks of EDP for routine endoscopic procedures. Currently, both diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopy are well tolerated and accepted by both patients and endoscopists due to the application of sedation in most clinics worldwide. Accordingly, propofol use is increasing in many countries. It is crucial for endoscopists to be very familiar with the use of propofol or a combination of drugs. However, the controversy regarding the administration of sedation by an endoscopist or an anesthesiologist continues. Until now, there have been no randomized control trials comparing sedation induced by propofol administered by an endoscopist or by an anesthesiologist. It might be difficult to perform this kind of study. For the convenience and safety of sedative endoscopy, it would be important that EDP be generally applied to endoscopic procedures, and for more safety, an anesthesiologist may automatically take care of particular patients at high risk of suffering from propofol side effects.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)129-134
Number of pages6
JournalClinical Endoscopy
Volume47
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014 Mar

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Medicine (miscellaneous)
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Gastroenterology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Endoscopist-directed propofol: Pros and cons'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this