Safety and Effectiveness of Endoscopist-Directed Nurse-Administered Sedation during Gastric Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection
Table 3
Comparison of clinical factors in circulatory adverse event due to sedation during endoscopic submucosal dissection.
Nonadverse event ()
Adverse event ()
value
Odds ratio (95% CI)
Univariate
Multivariate
Gender, n (%)
0.411
—
—
Male/female
89 (62.7)/53 (37.3)
38 (56.7)/29 (43.3)
Age ≥ 75 (yr)
32 (22.5)
18 (26.9)
0.494
—
—
Sedation method, n (%)
0.047
0.019
2.17 (1.14–4.15)
M/MP
63 (44.4)/79 (55.6)
20 (29.9)/47 (70.1)
Body mass index (kg/m2)
24.8 ± 3.6
24.8 ± 2.8
0.93
—
—
Smoking history, n (%)
—
—
0.016
0.432
0.42 (0.05–3.65)
Non- or ex-smoker
117 (82.4)
64 (95.5)
Current smoker
25 (17.6)
3 (4.5)
Alcohol abuse, n (%)
19 (13.4)
7 (10.4)
0.55
—
—
Regular use of sedatives or psychotrophic drugs, n (%)
7 (4.9)
1 (1.5)
0.254
—
—
Midazolam (mg)
5.7 ± 1.9
5.6 ± 1.4
0.742
—
—
Propofol (mg)
50.8 ± 66.2
64.5 ± 83.1
0.201
—
—
Procedure time (min)
38.5 ± 25.0
41.7 ± 32.7
0.396
—
—
ASA physical status, n (%)
0.981
—
—
1/2
110 (77.5)
52 (77.6)
3
32 (22.5)
15 (22.4)
Values are mean ± SD or n (%) of patients. SD: standard deviation; M: sedation with midazolam; MP: sedation with midazolam plus intermittent propofol injection; ASA: American Society of Anesthesiologists.
