Continuous infusion versus intermittent bolus injection of propofol during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography
2
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Background/Aims: It is unclear whether continuous infusion or intermittent bolus injection of propofol is better for achieving adequate sedation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of continuous infusion and intermittent bolus injection of propofol during therapeutic ERCP. Methods: In this prospective study, we randomly assigned 232 patients undergoing therapeutic ERCP to either continuous infusion (CI group, n = 113) or intermittent bolus injection (BI group, n = 119) of propofol. The primary outcome was the quality of sedation as assessed by the endoscopist. Other sedation-related parameters included sedation induction time, total dose of propofol, recovery time, involuntary patient movement, and adverse events. Results: Overall satisfaction with sedation by the endoscopist and monitoring nurse were significantly higher in the CI group than the BI group (mean satisfaction score, 9.66 vs. 8.0 and 9.47 vs. 7.96, respectively, p < 0.01 for both). However, patients in the CI group had a significantly longer sedation induction time (5.28 minutes vs. 4.34 minutes, p < 0.01) and received a higher dose of propofol than patients in the BI group (4.22 mg/kg vs. 2.08 mg/kg, p < 0.01). There was no significant difference in adverse events between the two groups. Conclusions: Continuous infusion of propofol during therapeutic ERCP had the advantage over intermittent bolus injection of maintaining a constant level of sedation without increasing adverse events. However, it was associated with an increased total dose of propofol and prolonged sedation induction time.
Abstract
Background/Aims: It is unclear whether continuous infusion or intermittent bolus injection of propofol is better for achieving adequate sedation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of continuous infusion and intermittent bolus injection of propofol during therapeutic ERCP. Methods: In this prospective study, we randomly assigned 232 patients undergoing therapeutic ERCP to either continuous infusion (CI group, n = 113) or intermittent bolus injection (BI group, n = 119) of propofol. The primary outcome was the quality of sedation as assessed by the endoscopist. Other sedation-related parameters included sedation induction time, total dose of propofol, recovery time, involuntary patient movement, and adverse events. Results: Overall satisfaction with sedation by the endoscopist and monitoring nurse were significantly higher in the CI group than the BI group (mean satisfaction score, 9.66 vs. 8.0 and 9.47 vs. 7.96, respectively, p < 0.01 for both). However, patients in the CI group had a significantly longer sedation induction time (5.28 minutes vs. 4.34 minutes, p < 0.01) and received a higher dose of propofol than patients in the BI group (4.22 mg/kg vs. 2.08 mg/kg, p < 0.01). There was no significant difference in adverse events between the two groups. Conclusions: Continuous infusion of propofol during therapeutic ERCP had the advantage over intermittent bolus injection of maintaining a constant level of sedation without increasing adverse events. However, it was associated with an increased total dose of propofol and prolonged sedation induction time.
참고문헌 (23)
- Cohen LB, "Endoscopic sedation in the United States : results from a nationwide survey", Am J Gastroenterol, 101, pp.967~974 (2006)
- Jung M, "Improved sedation in diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP : propofol is an alternative to midazolam", Endoscopy, 32, pp.233~238 (2000)
- Riphaus A, "Sedation with propofol for routine ERCP in high-risk octogenarians : a randomized, controlled study", Am J Gastroenterol, 100, pp.1957~1963 (2005)
- McQuaid KR, "A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials of moderate sedation for routine endoscopic procedures", Gastrointest Endosc, 67, pp.910~923 (2008)
- Dumonceau JM, "European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates, and the European Society of Anaesthesiology Guideline:non-anesthesiologist administration of propofol for GI endoscopy", Endoscopy, 42, pp.960~974 (2010)
- ASGE Standards of Practice Committee, "Guidelines for sedation and anesthesia in GI endoscopy", Gastrointest Endosc, 87, pp.327~337 (2018)
- Riphaus A, "Intermittent manually controlled versus continuous infusion of propofol for deep sedation during interventional endoscopy : a prospective randomized trial", Scand J Gastroenterol, 47, pp.1078~1085 (2012)
- Shafer A, "Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of propofol infusions during general anesthesia", Anesthesiology, 69, pp.348~356 (1988)
- "American Society of Anesthesiologists Classification (ASA Class)" (2018)[URL]
- Choi GJ, "Comparison of bolus versus continuous infusion of propofol for procedural sedation : a meta-analysis", Curr Med Res Opin, 33, pp.1935~1943 (2017)
- 문성훈, "Sedation Regimens for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy", Clinical Endoscopy, 47(2), pp.135~140 (2014), 대한소화기내시경학회
- American Association for Study of Liver Diseases, "Multisociety sedation curriculum for gastrointestinal endoscopy", Gastrointest Endosc, 76, pp.e1~e25 (2012)
- Lee TH, "Balanced propofol sedation versus propofol monosedation in therapeutic pancreaticobiliary endoscopic procedures", Dig Dis Sci, 57, pp.2113~2121 (2012)
- Agostoni M, "Midazolam and pethidine versus propofol and fentanyl patient controlled sedation", analgesia for upper gastrointestinal tract ultrasound endoscopy : a prospective randomized controlled trial, 2007, pp.39, 1024~1029
- Shin S, "Patient satisfaction after endoscopic submucosal dissection under propofol-based sedation : a small premedication makes all the difference", Surg Endosc, 31, pp.2636~2644 (2017)
- Cohen LB, "AGA institute review of endoscopic sedation", Gastroenterology, 133, pp.675~701 (2007)
- Qadeer MA, "Propofol versus traditional sedative agents for gastrointestinal endoscopy : a meta-analysis", Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 3, pp.1049~1056 (2005)
- Seifert H, "Sedation with propofol plus midazolam versus propofol alone for interventional endoscopic procedures : a prospective, randomized study", Aliment Pharmacol Ther, 14, pp.1207~1214 (2000)
- Kiriyama S, "Evaluation of pharyngeal function between no bolus and bolus propofol induced sedation for advanced upper endoscopy", Diagn Ther Endosc, 2014, pp.248097~ (2014)
- Fanti L, "Target-controlled propofol infusion during monitored anesthesia in patients undergoing ERCP", Gastrointest Endosc, 60, pp.361~366 (2004)
- Wehrmann T, "Efficacy and safety of intravenous propofol sedation during routine ERCP : a prospective, controlled study", Gastrointest Endosc, 49, pp.677~683 (1999)
- Angsuwatcharakon P, "Cocktail sedation containing Propofol versus conventional sedation for ERCP: a prospective, randomized controlled study", BMC Anesthesiol, 12, pp.20~ (2012)
- Klare P, "Capnographic monitoring of midazolam and propofol sedation during ERCP: a randomized controlled study (EndoBreath Study)", Endoscopy, 48, pp.42~50 (2016)