Efficacy and Safety of Etomidate in Comparison with Propofol or Midazolam as Sedative for Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
1
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Background/Aims: In this study, we compared the efficacy and safety of etomidate with those of propofol or midazolam for themaintenance of sedation during endoscopy. Methods: The study enrolled patients who underwent sedative endoscopy in our hospital and divided them into three groups. Patients in each group were administered midazolam as induction therapy and were subsequently administered either midazolam(M + M group), propofol (M + P group), or etomidate (M + E group) as maintenance medication. The primary outcome was overallcardiovascular and respiratory adverse events. Results: In total, 105 patients who underwent sedative endoscopic examination were enrolled. The outcomes related to the procedureand sedation were not significantly different among the groups. Overall cardiovascular and respiratory adverse events were observedin 9 patients (25.7%) in the M + M group, 8 patients (23.5%) in the M + P group, and 10 patients (27.8%) in the M + E group. Thelogistic regression analysis revealed that etomidate use was not an independent risk factor for overall cardiovascular and respiratoryadverse events. Conclusions: The outcomes following the use of etomidate for maintenance after induction with midazolam for sedation in uppergastrointestinal endoscopy were not inferior to those following midazolam or propofol use from the perspectives of safety andefficacy.
Abstract
Background/Aims: In this study, we compared the efficacy and safety of etomidate with those of propofol or midazolam for themaintenance of sedation during endoscopy. Methods: The study enrolled patients who underwent sedative endoscopy in our hospital and divided them into three groups. Patients in each group were administered midazolam as induction therapy and were subsequently administered either midazolam(M + M group), propofol (M + P group), or etomidate (M + E group) as maintenance medication. The primary outcome was overallcardiovascular and respiratory adverse events. Results: In total, 105 patients who underwent sedative endoscopic examination were enrolled. The outcomes related to the procedureand sedation were not significantly different among the groups. Overall cardiovascular and respiratory adverse events were observedin 9 patients (25.7%) in the M + M group, 8 patients (23.5%) in the M + P group, and 10 patients (27.8%) in the M + E group. Thelogistic regression analysis revealed that etomidate use was not an independent risk factor for overall cardiovascular and respiratoryadverse events. Conclusions: The outcomes following the use of etomidate for maintenance after induction with midazolam for sedation in uppergastrointestinal endoscopy were not inferior to those following midazolam or propofol use from the perspectives of safety andefficacy.
참고문헌 (24)
- Abraham NS, "Assessing clinical generalizability in sedation studies of upper GI endoscopy", Gastrointest Endosc, 60, pp.28~33 (2004)
- Igea F, "Sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy", Endoscopy, 46, pp.720~731 (2014)
- Cohen LB, "Endoscopic sedation in the United States : results from a nationwide survey", Am J Gastroenterol, 101, pp.967~974 (2006)
- Riphaus A, "Endoscopic sedation and monitoring practice in Germany : re-evaluation from the first nationwide survey 3years after the implementation of an evidence and consent based national guideline", Z Gastroenterol, 51, pp.1082~1088 (2013)
- Erdoes G, "Etomidate--a review of robust evidence for its use in various clinical scenarios", Acta Anaesthesiol Scand, 58, pp.380~389 (2014)
- Falk J, "Etomidate for procedural sedation in the emergency department", Ann Pharmacother, 38, pp.1272~1277 (2004)
- Guler A, "Magnesium sulfate pretreatment reduces myoclonus after etomidate", Anesth Analg, 101, pp.705~709 (2005)
- Hüter L, "Low-dose intravenous midazolam reduces etomidate-induced myoclonus : a prospective, randomized study in patients undergoing elective cardioversion", Anesth Analg, 105, pp.1298~1302 (2007)
- Conway A, "Midazolam for sedation before procedures", Cochrane Database Syst Rev, (5), pp.CD009491~ (2016)
- Lewis JH, "Safety of midazolam and diazepam for conscious sedation", J Clin Gastroenterol, 12, pp.716~717 (1990)
- Nishizawa T, "Propofol for gastrointestinal endoscopy", United European Gastroenterol J, 6, pp.801~805 (2018)
- Mackenzie N, "Propofol for intravenous sedation", Anaesthesia, 42, pp.3~6 (1987)
- Sasaki T, "Propofol sedation with bispectral index monitoring is useful for endoscopic submucosal dissection : a randomized prospective phase II clinical trial", Endoscopy, 44, pp.584~589 (2012)
- Otto S. Lin, "Sedation for routine gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures: a review on efficacy, safety, efficiency, cost and satisfaction", Intestinal research, 15(4), pp.456~466 (2017), 대한장연구학회
- 박종혁, "프로포폴 투여와 관련된 사망에 대한 법의학적 고찰 - 36 부검례에 대한 분석 -", 대한법의학회지, 36(1), pp.56~62 (2012), 대한법의학회[DOI]
- Lee TH, "Balanced propofol sedation versus propofol monosedation in therapeutic pancreaticobiliary endoscopic procedures", Dig Dis Sci, 57, pp.2113~2121 (2012)
- Lee CK, "Balanced propofol sedation for therapeutic GI endoscopic procedures : a prospective, randomized study", Gastrointest Endosc, 73, pp.206~214 (2011)
- Levitzky BE, "Moderate sedation for elective upper endoscopy with balanced propofol versus fentanyl and midazolam alone : a randomized clinical trial", Endoscopy, 44, pp.13~20 (2012)
- Kim MG, "Etomidate versus propofol sedation for complex upper endoscopic procedures : a prospective double-blinded randomized controlled trial", Gastrointest Endosc, 86, pp.452~461 (2017)
- Lee JM, "Efficacy and safety of etomidate-midazolam for screening colonoscopy in the elderly: a prospective double-blinded randomized controlled study", Medicine(Baltimore), 97, pp.e10635~ (2018)
- Park CH, "Efficacy and safety of etomidate-based sedation compared with propofol-based sedation during ERCP in lowrisk patients : a double-blind, randomized, noninferiority trial", Gastrointest Endosc, 87, pp.174~184 (2018)
- Gelissen HP, "Inotropic effects of propofol, thiopental, midazolam, etomidate, and ketamine on isolated human atrial muscle", Anesthesiology, 84, pp.397~403 (1996)
- Schwarzkopf KR, "Midazolam pretreatment reduces etomidate-induced myoclonic movements", Anaesth Intensive Care, 31, pp.18~20 (2003)
- Forman SA, "Clinical and molecular pharmacology of etomidate", Anesthesiology, 114, pp.695~707 (2011)