Therapeutic Endoscopy Can Be Performed Safely in an Ambulatory Surgical Center: A Multicenter, Prospective Study

Background. Even amongst experienced endoscopists, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and endoscopic ultrasound with fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) carry a potential risk for complications. These procedures are typically performed in a hospital-based endoscopy unit with general anesthesia. Aims. The goal of our study was to evaluate the feasibility of ERCP and EUS-FNA in an ambulatory surgical center (ASC). Methods. From June to November of 2014, we prospectively enrolled consecutive subjects undergoing ERCP and/or EUS-FNA in an ASC. An anesthesiologist, who was not involved in our study group, screened all subjects prior to their scheduled procedure. In order to monitor for adverse events (AE), all subjects received a telephone call at day 1 and 30 days after procedure. Results. 375 subjects (98 inpatients and 277 from an ASC) were enrolled. In the total population, a high proportion of subjects underwent procedures for neoplasms (21 (23.3%) inpatients versus 44 (17.1%) from an ASC) and for sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (SOD) (27 (27.5%) versus 48 (17.3%)) and had the American Society for Anesthesiologists (ASA) class ≥III (75 (76.5%) versus 140 (50.5%)) and high-risk features (17 (17.3%) versus 75 (27.1%)). Overall ERCP-related AE (10 (13.2%) versus 12 (7.5%), p = 0.2), pancreatitis (7 (9.2%) versus 11 (6.9%), p = 0.6), and hemorrhage (3.9% versus 0.6%, p = 0.25) were not different between inpatients and ASC subjects. There was also no difference between inpatients and ASC subjects' EUS-related AE (1 (4.5%) versus 4 (3.4%), p = 0.6), pancreatitis (1 (4.5%) versus 3 (2.6%), p = 0.2), and hemorrhage (0% versus 1 (0.9%), p = 0.9). Conclusions. ERCP and EUS can be performed in a higher risk population under the supervision of anesthesia in ASCs. Overall, the AE are equivalent between inpatients and ASC subjects.