INTRODUCTION: Nurse administered propofol sedation was widely used for endoscopic procedures until 2009 when its use was restricted to anesthesiologists per CMS guidelines, a practice that has led to increases in healthcare costs. Aim was to evaluate the safety of endoscopist-directed balanced propofol sedation (EDBPS) for endoscopy. METHODS: We identified patients who underwent endoscopic procedures with EDBPS from Jan to Jun 2017. Medical records were abstracted for data on procedure indication, medication doses, time to induction of sedation, duration of procedure and recovery time. Adverse events (AEs) included: Hypoxia - oxygen saturation (SPO₂) 50 mm Hg, c) Drop in mean arterial pressure (MAP) > 30%; Bradycardia (heart rate < 40 beats/minute). Major complications include death, neurologic sequelae (CVA, permanent cognitive impairment), and need for hospitalization or endotracheal intubation. RESULTS: A total of 1897 patients received EDBPS during the study period. Mean age was 55 (SD 11.4) years and 43.6% were men. Patients received median doses of 50 mcg fentanyl and 2 mg of midazolam and a mean propofol dose of 160 ± 99 mg (range 20–960). Mean time for sedation induction was 3.4 (SD 1.9) and mean recovery was 14 (SD 10.2) min. There were no major complications (0%; 95% CI, 0–0.19%). Three hundred thirty-four patients (17.6%) experienced an AE, all of which were managed with simple measures (chin-lift, jaw thrust and increasing flow of O₂ and IV fluids): 65 (3.4%) had transient hypoxia, 277 (14.6%) had hypotension. In bivariate analysis, a 5-yr increase in patient age was associated with in increased risk of hypotension. A 50 mg increase in propofol dose was associated with a statistically significant risk of transient hypoxia. A 10-min increase in procedure duration was associated with statistically significant risk of both transient hypoxia and hypotension (Table 1). Age, weight, BMI, propofol dose and procedure length were associated with AEs (Table 2). Gender had no association with AEs. In multivariate analysis, only procedure length was independently associated with AEs. CONCLUSION: EDBPS is safe for endoscopic procedural sedation, as AEs occurred infrequently. Given the much higher cost of anesthesia-administered propofol for routine endoscopic procedures, endoscopists should re-instate EDBPS by revising institutional sedation policies.Table 1Table 2