Dexmedetomidine or midazolam in combination with propofol for sedation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a randomized double blind prospective study
| Autor: | Semsettin Bozgeyik, Senem Koruk, Murat Bilgi, Rauf Gül, Irfan Koruk, Ayse Mizrak Arslan |
|---|---|
| Přispěvatelé: | BAİBÜ, Tıp Fakültesi, Cerrahi Tıp Bilimleri Bölümü, Bilgi, Murat |
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Rok vydání: | 2020 |
| Předmět: |
endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography
medicine.drug_class Urology Sedation Hypnotic 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Bispectral Index medicine bispectral index 030212 general & internal medicine Dexmedetomidine recovery time Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Original Paper Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography medicine.diagnostic_test business.industry Gastroenterology Obstetrics and Gynecology dexmedetomidine Recovery Time sedation Bispectral index Anesthesia Sedative Medicine Midazolam 030211 gastroenterology & hepatology Surgery medicine.symptom business Propofol medicine.drug |
| Zdroj: | Videosurgery and other Miniinvasive Techniques Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques, Vol 15, Iss 3, Pp 526-532 (2020) |
| Popis: | WOS:000561377700019 PubMed: 32904611 Introduction: Interventional endoscopic procedures, such as endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), often require sedation during the procedure. The most commonly used drugs for this purpose are midazolam and propofol, which are used as sedative and hypnotic agents with minimal analgesic potential. Aim: To compare the analgesic sedative effects of midazolam-propofol and dexmedetomidine-propofol combinations and their influence on hemodynamic and respiratory variables in patients undergoing ERCP. Material and methods: Forty adult patients aged 20-78 and undergoing ERCP were randomized to two groups. Patients were premedicated with midazolam (0.05 mg/kg 10 min before the procedure) in group M and with dexmedetomidine (1 mu g/kg for 10 min) in group D. Propofol was used for maintenance. The sedation level was monitored using the bispectral index (BIS) to maintain a score between 70 and 80. Hemodynamic and respiratory variables, recovery time and adverse events were recorded. Results: The hemodynamic and respiratory variables were similar in both groups. Total propofol consumption was significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group (208.5 +/- 80.0 vs. 154.5 +/- 66.7 mg; p = 0.011). The recovery period was shorter in group D (time to achieve the Aldrete score 9 was 9.4 +/- 2.1 vs. 6.6 +/- 1.1 min; p < 0.001). Changes in hemodynamic and respiratory variables and adverse events were not different between the two groups. Conclusions: We found a shorter recovery time and comparable sedative and adverse effects with the dexmedetomidine-propofol combination compared with the midazolam-propofol combination. Dexmedetomidine in combination with propofol may be a safe and useful alternative for sedation for ERCP patients. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|