Computerized tests to evaluate recovery of cognitive function after deep sedation with propofol and remifentanil for colonoscopy.J Clin Monit Comput. 2019;33:107-113. [PMID: 29589170 DOI: 10.1007/s10877-018-0134-3]

Effects of adding adjuvants to propofol on the post-anesthesia cognitive function in patients undergoing gastroscopy/colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to elucidate the effects of propofol plus adjuvants on postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) and patient satisfaction.

METHODS

Studies published up to September 2023 on the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Data, Sinomed, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Clinictrials.gov websites were searched. Binary summary of results was used for meta-analyses.

RESULTS

We included 18 studies (2691 patients). The combined sedation did not affect the processing speed (ES = 0.02, 95%CI: -0.01, 0.04; I2 = 79.3%, p < 0.001), attention (ES = 0.02, 95%CI: -0.02, 0.05; I2 = 95.0%, p < 0.001), nor working memory (ES = 0.02, 95%CI: -0.03, 0.06; I2 = 94.4%, p < 0.001) in CogState brief battery tool. A significant effect of combined sedation was observed in the domain of visual learning in CogState tool (ES = -0.03, 95%CI: -0.04, -0.02; I2 = 15.8%, p = 0.306). The TDT (ES = 4.96, 95%CI: 2.92, 7.00) indicates that combined sedation would increase error rates in the tests of cognitive function. The DSST (ES = 0.16, 95% CI: -0.44, 0.75) shown that combined sedation does not affect cognitive function. In addition, an insignificant difference in patient satisfaction between combined sedation and propofol alone was observed (ES = -0.03, 95%CI: -0.09, 0.02).

CONCLUSION

The available evidence suggests that propofol combined with adjuvants may affect POCD but not patient satisfaction.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

INPLASY2023110092.

Efficacy and safety of alfentanil plus propofol versus propofol only in painless gastrointestinal endoscopy: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of alfentanil plus propofol versus propofol only for painless gastrointestinal endoscopy.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, China Biology Medicine, CNKI, WanFang, and VIP databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials on alfentanil combined with propofol versus propofol only for painless gastrointestinal endoscopy from the inception of the database to August 2022. The Rev Man 5.4 software was used for statistical analyses.

RESULTS

Thirteen randomized controlled trials involving 1762 patients were identified as eligible for this study. The meta-analysis showed that compared with propofol, alfentanil combined with propofol had a more stable mean arterial pressure [mean difference (MD) = 5.38, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.97-8.80; P = .002], heart rate (MD = 3.78, 95% CI: 1.30-6.26; P = .003) and pulse oxygen saturation (MD = 1.90, 95% CI: 0.93-2.78; P = .0001); a lower propofol dose (standard mean difference = -2.82, 95% CI: -3.70 to -1.94; P < .00001), lower awakening time (MD = -3.23, 95% CI: -4.01 to -2.45; P < .00001) and lower directional force recovery time (MD = -3.62, 95% CI: -4.22 to -3.03; P < .00001); a lower incidence of nausea and vomiting (relative risk [RR] = 0.32, 95% CI: 0.14-0.71; P = .005), body movement (RR = 0.27, 95% CI: 0.13-0.54; P = .0002), hypotension (RR = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.12-0.46; P < .0001), respiratory depression (RR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.15-0.89; P = .03) and cough reflex (RR = 0.33, 95% CI: 0.12-0.89; P = .03).

CONCLUSION

This meta-study found that current evidence indicates that alfentanil plus propofol is better than propofol alone for painless gastrointestinal endoscopy and is associated with a lower incidence of adverse reactions. Due to the limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high-quality studies are needed to validate these above conclusions.

Sedative-sparing effect of acupuncture in gastrointestinal endoscopy: systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

This study aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify the efficacy of acupuncture therapy (including manual acupuncture and electroacupuncture) performed before or during gastrointestinal endoscopy with propofol as the main sedative, compared with placebo, sham acupuncture, or no additional treatment other than the same sedation.

Methods

A systematic search was performed through PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Chinese Biomedical Databases (CBM), Wanfang database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), SinoMed, and Chinese Scientific Journal Database (VIP) to collect randomized controlled trials published before 5 November 2022. Bias assessment of the included RCTs was performed according to Version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2). Stata16.0 software was used to perform statistical analysis, sensitivity analysis, and publication bias analysis. The primary outcome was sedative consumption, and the secondary outcomes included the incidence of adverse events and wake-up time.

Results

A total of 10 studies with 1331 participants were included. The results showed that sedative consumption [mean difference (MD) = -29.32, 95% CI (-36.13, -22.50), P < 0.001], wake-up time [MD = -3.87, 95% CI (-5.43, -2.31), P < 0.001] and the incidence of adverse events including hypotension, nausea and vomiting, and coughing (P < 0.05) were significantly lower in the intervention group than in the control group.

Conclusion

Acupuncture combined with sedation reduces sedative consumption and wake-up time compared with sedation alone in gastrointestinal endoscopy; this combined approach allows patients to regain consciousness more quickly after examination and lower the risk of adverse effects. However, with the limited quantity and quality of relevant clinical studies, caution must be applied until more high-quality clinical studies verify and refine the conclusions.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?, identifier: CRD42022370422.

Effects of single-use alfentanil versus propofol on cognitive functions after colonoscopy: A randomized controlled trial

Purpose

Colonoscopy is often accompanied by short-term postoperative cognitive decline. We aimed to explore whether single-use alfentanil for patients undergoing elective colonoscopy could reduce cognitive impairment at discharge compared with propofol.

Patients and methods

172 adult patients undergoing elective colonoscopy were randomized to receive intravenous propofol at 2 mg/kg (group P) or alfentanil at 10 μg/kg (group A); 40 healthy volunteers were included in the blank group. Cognitive function was considered the primary outcome and was measured using five neuropsychological tests before sedation and discharge. The z-score method was used to determine cognitive dysfunction according to z-score >1.96 in two types of neuropsychological tests. Other outcomes included discharge time, vital signs, associated adverse events during colonoscopy, and the satisfaction level of patients and endoscopic physicians.

Results

164 patients (78 in group A and 86 in group P) completed the study protocol. At discharge, the incidence of cognitive dysfunction in group P was 23% and was significantly lower in the alfentanil group (2.5%), with a relative risk of 0.11 (95% confidence interval: 0.03-0.46, P < 0.001). The incidence of hypotension in group A was lower than that in group P (3.8% vs 22.1%, relative risk = 0.17 [95% confidence interval: 0.05-0.46, P = 0.001]), and the discharge time in group A was shorter than that in group P (5 [(Rutter and et al., 2016; Zhang and et al., 2013; Hirsh and et al., 2006; Zhou and et al., 2021; Singh and et al., 2008; Ko and et al., 2010; Sargin et al., 2019) 3-93-9 vs 13 [(Ekmekci and et al., 2017; Eberl and et al., 2012; Eberl and et al., 2014; N'Kaoua and et al., 2002; Chung et al., 1995; Berger and et al., 2019; Quan and et al., 2019; Deng and et al., 2021; Gualtieri and Johnson, 2006) 10-1810-18 min, P < 0.001).

Conclusion

For patients undergoing colonoscopy, single-use alfentanil causes less damage to postoperative cognitive function, less risk of hypotension, and shorter discharge time than propofol.

Discharging select patients without an escort after ambulatory anesthesia: identifying return to baseline function

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The current standard of care requires ambulatory surgical patients to have an escort for discharge. Recent studies have started to challenge this dogma. Modern ultrashort acting anesthetics have minimal psychomotor effects after a couple of hours. Driving simulator performance and psychomotor testing return to baseline as soon as 1 h following propofol sedation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Two recent reports of actual experience with thousands of patients found no increase in complications in patients who were discharged without escort or drove themselves from a sedation center. These studies suggest discharge without escort may be safe in select patients but a method to identify appropriate patients remains undefined.

SUMMARY

A reliable test to document return of function might allow safe discharge without an escort. Currently, there is intense interest in developing reliable, inexpensive, easy to administer psychomotor function testing to improve workplace safety and legally define the effects of drugs on driving impairment. Future studies may be able to adapt this technology and develop a validated test for residual anesthetic impairment.

Progress in research of postoperative nausea and vomiting after painless gastrointestinal endoscopy

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) refers to nausea and vomiting occurring within 24 h after surgery. PONV seriously affects the quality of postoperative recovery after painless gastrointestinal endoscopy. In this paper, we review the progress in the research of PONV after painless gastrointestinal endoscopy to provide clinical guidance for improving the medical safety and service quality of painless and comfortable anesthesia. PONV after painless gastrointestinal endoscopy has unique factors and characteristics. On the basis of comprehensive evaluation and according to the patient's specific situation, the doctors should identify the risk factors, optimize the anesthesia scheme, choose anesthetics and analgesics rationally, and take comprehensive diagnostic and therapeutic measures.

Current status of perioperative hypnotics, role of benzodiazepines, and the case for remimazolam: a narrative review

Anaesthesiologists and non-anaesthesiologist sedationists have a limited set of available i.v. hypnotics, further reduced by the withdrawal of thiopental in the USA and its near disappearance in Europe. Meanwhile, demand for sedation increases and new clinical groups are using what traditionally are anaesthesiologists' drugs. Improved understanding of the determinants of perioperative morbidity and mortality has spotlighted hypotension as a potent cause of patient harm, and practice must be adjusted to respect this. High-dose propofol sedation may be harmful, and a critical reappraisal of drug choices and doses is needed. The development of remimazolam, initially for procedural sedation, allows reconsideration of benzodiazepines as the hypnotic component of a general anaesthetic even if their characterisation as i.v. anaesthetics is questionable. Early data suggest that a combination of remimazolam and remifentanil can induce and maintain anaesthesia. Further work is needed to define use cases for this technique and to determine the impact on patient outcomes.

A randomized controlled trial for measuring effects on cognitive functions of adding ketamine to propofol during sedation for colonoscopy

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of adding ketamine to propofol on cognitive functions in patients undergoing sedation for colonoscopy.

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blinded, and controlled study, 200 patients were randomly allocated to ketamine/propofol admixture group (Group KP, n = 100), and propofol group (Group P, n = 100). Patients in Group KP received 0.25 mg/kg of ketamine and 0.5 mg/kg of propofol. Patients in Group P received 0.5 mg/kg propofol. Cognitive functions were measured using CogState battery before and after the colonoscopy procedure. Ninety five patients in Group KP and 92 patients in Group P had completed the CogStates tests and were included in the data analysis.

RESULTS

Compared with before procedure baseline, the performance on detection and identification tasks were significantly impaired after the procedure in both Group KP (P = .004, P = .001) and Group P patients (P = .005, P < .001). However, one-card learning accuracy and One-back memory was only impaired in Group KP patients (P = .006, P = .040) after the endoscopy but left intact in Group P patients. Group KP patients showed more severe impairment in one-card learning accuracy compared with Group P patients (P = .044). Group KP patients have better 5 minutes MAP (P = .005) and were also less likely to suffer from complications such as respiratory depression (P = .023) and hypotension (P = .015). OAA/S scores, BIS, MAP, complications, recovery times, and endoscopist and patient satisfaction were similar between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

Although adding ketamine to propofol for sedation in colonoscopy provided fewer complications such as respiratory depression and hypotension, it also causes more impairment in cognitive functions.

End of year summary 2019: anaesthesia and airway management

This end of the year summary reviews anesthesia related manuscripts that have been published in the Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing in 2019. Anesthesia is currently defined as being composed of unconsciousness, immobility, and autonomic nervous system (ANS) control (Br J Anaesth;122:e127-e135135, Egan 2019). Pain is a postoperative issue, because by definition unconsciousness implies pain cannot be experienced. We first review work related to these aspect of the profession: unconsciousness (EEG, target control), immobility (muscle relaxants), and ANS control. Regaining consciousness has to be accompanied by pain control, and it is important to ensure that the patient regains baseline cognitive function. Anesthesia machine equipment, drug administration, and airway related topics make up the rest of published manuscripts.