Anyone see the recent clinical guidelines published in the British Journal of Anesthesia for ERCPs? They state rather pointedly that MAC is the favored anesthetic and should be done for the majority of ERCPs. Complex procedures or specific patient factors may favor GA.
Deep sedation without tracheal intubation (monitored anaesthesia care) and general anaesthesia with tracheal intubation are commonly used anaesthesia techniques for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). There are distinct pathophysiological differences between monitored...
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
I'm kind of surprised by this - I can't think of any other surgery that has published "clinical guidelines" stating to do one anesthetic over the other. Also bugs me that they're calling it MAC when it's really GA without an airway. Some of the discussion in it is about utilization of hospital resources and time and that MAC is better for those - I can't help but think this is being heavily pushed by the GI docs because MAC is certainly not less work for an ERCP for the anesthesiologist. They dismiss oxygen desaturations and apnea, events more common in the MAC group, as inconsequential because the anesthesiologist "can manage them."
Admittedly I'm biased because I do ERCPs under GA, and the one time I did MAC the patient aspirated. That was supposed to be a "quick, easy case" per the GI. /narrator It was not.