Impact of opioid addition on procedural conditions during colonoscopy: a randomized trial comparing propofol-based sedation protocols
2
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Background/Aims: Propofol is the most effective sedative for colonoscopy; however, opioids do have several adverse effects that needto be discussed. The objective of this study was to compare the ease of colonoscopy during propofol-based sedation with and withoutfentanyl, while closely monitoring ventilatory data and the safety of the procedure. Methods: This prospective single-center trial randomized 50 patients who underwent minor colonoscopies. The propofol group receivedsedation exclusively via propofol, whereas the propofol+fentanyl group was premedicated with 1 μg/kg fentanyl. Patients weremonitored using a bioimpedance ventilatory monitor, and both the patients and endoscopists were questioned regarding their level ofsatisfaction. Results: The endoscopists reported a higher level of ease with the colonoscopy procedure (mean on a 5-point scale, 1.2 vs. 1.72;p=0.028) and the overall patient satisfaction score was higher (1.15 vs. 1.28, p=0.026) in the propofol+fentanyl group. No significantdifferences were observed in the ventilatory parameters between the groups. No major adverse events were reported in any of thegroups. Conclusions: The inclusion of fentanyl leads to enhanced levels of satisfaction for both the endoscopist and the patient, without anyimpact on ventilation and safety. The use of bioimpedance monitoring of ventilation during colonoscopy is a suitable approach thatmay enhance the safety of procedural sedation.
Abstract
Background/Aims: Propofol is the most effective sedative for colonoscopy; however, opioids do have several adverse effects that needto be discussed. The objective of this study was to compare the ease of colonoscopy during propofol-based sedation with and withoutfentanyl, while closely monitoring ventilatory data and the safety of the procedure. Methods: This prospective single-center trial randomized 50 patients who underwent minor colonoscopies. The propofol group receivedsedation exclusively via propofol, whereas the propofol+fentanyl group was premedicated with 1 μg/kg fentanyl. Patients weremonitored using a bioimpedance ventilatory monitor, and both the patients and endoscopists were questioned regarding their level ofsatisfaction. Results: The endoscopists reported a higher level of ease with the colonoscopy procedure (mean on a 5-point scale, 1.2 vs. 1.72;p=0.028) and the overall patient satisfaction score was higher (1.15 vs. 1.28, p=0.026) in the propofol+fentanyl group. No significantdifferences were observed in the ventilatory parameters between the groups. No major adverse events were reported in any of thegroups. Conclusions: The inclusion of fentanyl leads to enhanced levels of satisfaction for both the endoscopist and the patient, without anyimpact on ventilation and safety. The use of bioimpedance monitoring of ventilation during colonoscopy is a suitable approach thatmay enhance the safety of procedural sedation.