1
|
Fung BM, Leon DJ, Beck LN, Tabibian JH. Pre-procedural Preparation and Sedation for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy in Patients with Advanced Liver Disease. Dig Dis Sci 2022; 67:2739-2753. [PMID: 34169430 DOI: 10.1007/s10620-021-07111-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/26/2021] [Accepted: 06/10/2021] [Indexed: 12/09/2022]
Abstract
Gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients with advanced liver disease poses various challenges, a major one being procedural sedation and its associated considerations. While sedation during endoscopy can improve patient comfort, decrease anxiety, and facilitate procedural completion, in patients with advanced liver disease, it is also associated with substantial and unique risks due to alterations in drug metabolism and other factors. As such, the choice of sedative agent(s) and related logistics may require careful inter-disciplinary planning and individualized considerations. Furthermore, a large proportion of agents require dose reductions and particular monitoring of the vital signs, level of consciousness, and other indices. In the present review, we provide a contemporary overview of procedural sedation considerations, commonly used intravenous sedatives, and second-line as well as novel sedatives for gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients with advanced liver disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brian M Fung
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Arizona College of Medicine - Phoenix, Phoenix, AZ, USA. .,Banner - University Medical Center Phoenix, Internal Medicine, LL2, 1111 E McDowell Road, Phoenix, AZ, 85006, USA.
| | - Deanna J Leon
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Lauren N Beck
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - James H Tabibian
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Olive View-UCLA Medical Center, Sylmar, CA, USA.,David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Katsurada M, Tachihara M, Katsurada N, Takata N, Sato H, Mimura C, Yoshioka J, Furukawa K, Yumura M, Otoshi T, Yasuda Y, Kiriu T, Hazama D, Nagano T, Yamamoto M, Nishimura Y, Kobayashi K. Randomized single-blind comparative study of the midazolam/pethidine combination and midazolam alone during bronchoscopy. BMC Cancer 2022; 22:539. [PMID: 35549904 PMCID: PMC9102220 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-022-09640-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/16/2022] [Accepted: 05/03/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Bronchoscopy can be a distress for the patient. There have been few studies on the combination of sedatives and opioids. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the usefulness and safety of administration of the combination of midazolam and pethidine during bronchoscopy. Methods In this prospective randomized single (patient)-blind study, we randomly assigned 100 patients who were scheduled to undergo bronchoscopy biopsy to receive treatment with either the midazolam/pethidine combination (combination group) or midazolam alone (midazolam group) during examinations. After the end of bronchoscopy, patients completed a questionnaire and the visual analogue scale was measured. The primary outcome was the patients’ acceptance of re-examination assessed by visual analogue scale. We also assessed pain levels, vital signs, midazolam use, xylocaine use, and adverse events. Univariate analyses were performed using Fisher’s exact test for categorical data, and the t-test or Mann-Whitney test was carried out for analysis of numeric data. All P-values were two-sided, and values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results We analyzed 47 patients in the combination group and 49 patients in the midazolam group. The primary outcome was a good trend in the combination group, but not significantly different (3.82 ± 2.3 in combination group versus 4.17 ± 2.75 in midazolam alone, P = 0.400). In the combination group, the visual analog scale score for pain during bronchoscopy was significantly lower (1.10 ± 1.88 versus 2.13 ± 2.42, P = 0.022), and the sedation level score per the modified observer’s assessment of alertness/sedation scale was significantly deeper (3.49 ± 0.98 versus 3.94 ± 1.03, P = 0.031). Maximal systolic blood pressure during testing was significantly lower (162.39 ± 23.45 mmHg versus 178.24 ± 30.24 mmHg, P = 0.005), and the number of additional administrations of midazolam was significantly lower (2.06 ± 1.45 versus 2.63 ± 1.35, P = 0.049). There were also significantly fewer adverse events (30 versus 41, P = 0.036). Conclusions The combination uses of midazolam and pethidine for sedation resulted in significant improvements in the pain, blood pressure, additional use of midazolam, and safety during bronchoscopy among patients. Trial registration This study was registered in the University Medical Hospital Information Network in Japan (UMINCTR Registration number: UMIN000032230, Registered: 13/April/2018). Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09640-y.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Masahiro Katsurada
- Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, Kobe, 650-0017, Japan
| | - Motoko Tachihara
- Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, Kobe, 650-0017, Japan.
| | - Naoko Katsurada
- Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, Kobe, 650-0017, Japan
| | - Naoya Takata
- Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, Kobe, 650-0017, Japan
| | - Hiroki Sato
- Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, Kobe, 650-0017, Japan
| | - Chihiro Mimura
- Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, Kobe, 650-0017, Japan
| | - Junya Yoshioka
- Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, Kobe, 650-0017, Japan
| | - Koichi Furukawa
- Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, Kobe, 650-0017, Japan
| | - Masako Yumura
- Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, Kobe, 650-0017, Japan
| | - Takehiro Otoshi
- Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, Kobe, 650-0017, Japan
| | - Yuichiro Yasuda
- Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, Kobe, 650-0017, Japan
| | - Tatsunori Kiriu
- Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, Kobe, 650-0017, Japan
| | - Daisuke Hazama
- Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, Kobe, 650-0017, Japan
| | - Tatsuya Nagano
- Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, Kobe, 650-0017, Japan
| | - Masatsugu Yamamoto
- Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, Kobe, 650-0017, Japan
| | - Yoshihiro Nishimura
- Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, Kobe, 650-0017, Japan
| | - Kazuyuki Kobayashi
- Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, Kobe, 650-0017, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Gotoda T, Akamatsu T, Abe S, Shimatani M, Nakai Y, Hatta W, Hosoe N, Miura Y, Miyahara R, Yamaguchi D, Yoshida N, Kawaguchi Y, Fukuda S, Isomoto H, Irisawa A, Iwao Y, Uraoka T, Yokota M, Nakayama T, Fujimoto K, Inoue H. Guidelines for sedation in gastroenterological endoscopy (second edition). Dig Endosc 2021; 33:21-53. [PMID: 33124106 DOI: 10.1111/den.13882] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/18/2020] [Revised: 10/12/2020] [Accepted: 10/21/2020] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Sedation in gastroenterological endoscopy has become an important medical option in routine clinical care. Here, the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society and the Japanese Society of Anesthesiologists together provide the revised "Guidelines for sedation in gastroenterological endoscopy" as a second edition to address on-site clinical questions and issues raised for safe examination and treatment using sedated endoscopy. Twenty clinical questions were determined and the strength of recommendation and evidence quality (strength) were expressed according to the "MINDS Manual for Guideline Development 2017." We were able to release up-to-date statements related to clinical questions and current issues relevant to sedation in gastroenterological endoscopy (henceforth, "endoscopy"). There are few reports from Japan in this field (e.g., meta-analyses), and many aspects have been based only on a specialist consensus. In the current scenario, benzodiazepine drugs primarily used for sedation during gastroenterological endoscopy are not approved by national health insurance in Japan, and investigations regarding expense-related disadvantages have not been conducted. Furthermore, including the perspective of beneficiaries (i.e., patients and citizens) during the creation of clinical guidelines should be considered. These guidelines are standardized based on up-to-date evidence quality (strength) and supports on-site clinical decision-making by patients and medical staff. Therefore, these guidelines need to be flexible with regard to the wishes, age, complications, and social conditions of the patient, as well as the conditions of the facility and discretion of the physician.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Takuji Gotoda
- Japanese Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Takuji Akamatsu
- Japanese Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Seiichiro Abe
- Japanese Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society, Tokyo, Japan
| | | | - Yousuke Nakai
- Japanese Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Waku Hatta
- Japanese Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Naoki Hosoe
- Japanese Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yoshimasa Miura
- Japanese Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Ryoji Miyahara
- Japanese Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society, Tokyo, Japan
| | | | - Naohisa Yoshida
- Japanese Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society, Tokyo, Japan
| | | | - Shinsaku Fukuda
- Japanese Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Hajime Isomoto
- Japanese Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Atsushi Irisawa
- Japanese Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yasushi Iwao
- Japanese Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Toshio Uraoka
- Japanese Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society, Tokyo, Japan
| | | | - Takeo Nakayama
- Department of Health Informatics, Kyoto University School of Public Health, Kyoto, Japan
| | - Kazuma Fujimoto
- Japanese Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Haruhiro Inoue
- Japanese Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society, Tokyo, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Finn RT, Boyd A, Lin L, Gellad ZF. Bolus Administration of Fentanyl and Midazolam for Colonoscopy Increases Endoscopy Unit Efficiency and Safety Compared With Titrated Sedation. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017; 15:1419-1426.e2. [PMID: 28365484 DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.03.030] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/14/2016] [Revised: 02/23/2017] [Accepted: 03/02/2017] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS Guidelines recommend slow titration of sedatives for moderate sedation. Bolus sedation, in which a larger weight-based dose of medication is given upfront, has been shown in a single trial to be beneficial. We evaluated the effects of bolus sedation on procedural safety, efficiency, and patient experience. METHODS We performed a retrospective analysis of colonoscopies performed between April 2010 and April 2011 at Duke Medical Center. Colonoscopies before October 2010 were performed with nurse-directed titration of sedative (n = 966); colonoscopies performed after October 2010 were performed with physician-directed administration of bolus sedative (n = 699). We compared sedation and recovery times, medication doses, and adverse events between groups. We also compared patient satisfaction in a subset of patients from each group. Data were compared using the chi-square test for categorical variables and Wilcoxon rank sum test for continuous and ordinal categorical variables. RESULTS Patients in the bolus group had a shorter sedation time (6.0 min) than patients in the titration group (13.0 min; P < .01) and a slightly longer colonoscopy time (25.0 min vs 24.0 min in the titration group; P < .01). Recovery time did not differ significantly between groups (53.0 min in the bolus group vs 52.1 min in the titration group; P = .07). Patients in the bolus group received lower weight-adjusted doses of fentanyl (1.71 μg/kg vs 1.89 μg/kg in the titration group) and midazolam (0.065 mg/kg vs 0.075 mg/kg in the titration group). A smaller proportion of patients in the bolus sedative group developed hypotension (12.7% vs 17.9% in the titration group; P < .01). These findings persisted even after adjustment for baseline patient age, race, sex, smoking status, alcohol use, body mass index, and American Society of Anesthesiologists' classification. CONCLUSIONS In a retrospective study of patients undergoing colonoscopy, we found that compared with titrated administration of sedative, bolus dosing improves endoscopy unit efficiency and safety and decreases the amount of sedative required. This benefit does not come at the expense of the patient experience.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Thomas Finn
- Division of Gastroenterology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Amanda Boyd
- Division of Gastroenterology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Li Lin
- Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Ziad F Gellad
- Division of Gastroenterology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina; Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina; Durham VA Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Thanthong S, Rojthamarat S, Worasawate W, Vichitvejpaisal P, Nantajit D, Ieumwananontachai N. Comparison of efficacy of meperidine and fentanyl in terms of pain management and quality of life in patients with cervical cancer receiving intracavitary brachytherapy: a double-blind, randomized controlled trial. Support Care Cancer 2017; 25:2531-2537. [PMID: 28315010 DOI: 10.1007/s00520-017-3662-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/29/2016] [Accepted: 03/06/2017] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of two sedative regimens, a benzodiazepine with either meperidine or fentanyl, in relieving pain in patients with cervical cancer undergoing intracavitary brachytherapy in terms of pain score and quality of life. METHODS Forty unselected outpatients undergoing brachytherapy (160 fractions) were enrolled with informed consent and randomized to receive a benzodiazepine with either meperidine or fentanyl. The perceived pain score according to a standard 10-item numeric rating scale was collected every 15 min during the procedure, and the perceived quality of life was determined at the end of each procedure using the EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire. The patients and medical staff members directly involved with the procedure were blinded to the medication used. RESULTS The patients' pain levels were mild in both analgesic groups. Meperidine appeared to be slightly more effective than fentanyl, although the differences in the average pain score and quality of life were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION Both meperidine and fentanyl in combination with benzodiazepine were effective in relieving pain and discomfort in patients undergoing brachytherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION NCT02684942, ClinicalTrials.gov.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Saengrawee Thanthong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Chulabhorn Hospital, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, 54 Kamphang Phet 6 Rd, Lak Si, Bangkok, 10210, Thailand.
| | - Sirikorn Rojthamarat
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Chulabhorn Hospital, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, 54 Kamphang Phet 6 Rd, Lak Si, Bangkok, 10210, Thailand
| | - Wipra Worasawate
- Department of Anesthesiology, Chulabhorn Hospital, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand
| | | | - Danupon Nantajit
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Chulabhorn Hospital, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, 54 Kamphang Phet 6 Rd, Lak Si, Bangkok, 10210, Thailand
| | - Nantakarn Ieumwananontachai
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Chulabhorn Hospital, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, 54 Kamphang Phet 6 Rd, Lak Si, Bangkok, 10210, Thailand
- Department of Radiology, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Abstract
OPINION STATEMENT Sedation practices in the endoscopy suite have changed dramatically in the decades since the introduction of routine colonoscopy and esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). Patients initially received moderate sedation (or even no sedation), but now frequently receive monitored anesthesia care (MAC). This significant shift has introduced anesthesiologists to the endoscopy suite along with new sedative medications and safety concerns. Appreciating the ramifications of this change requires an understanding of sedation depth, patient selection, drug use, sedation delivery, patient monitoring, recovery from sedation, and patient outcomes. Furthermore, the changing landscape of healthcare quality and reimbursement challenges us to provide the best possible care for our patients in the most economical way possible. The endoscopy suite is a unique sedation environment, and it is the purpose of this article to review those elements that contribute to a uniquely demanding work environment.
Collapse
|
7
|
Studying and Incorporating Efficiency into Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Centers. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2015; 2015:764153. [PMID: 26101525 PMCID: PMC4458534 DOI: 10.1155/2015/764153] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2015] [Accepted: 04/26/2015] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Efficiency is defined as the use of resources in such a way as to maximize the production of goods and services. Improving efficiency has been the focus of management in many industries; however, it has not been until recently that incorporating efficiency models into healthcare has occurred. In particular, the study and development of improvement projects aimed at enhancing efficiency in GI have been growing rapidly in recent years. This focus on improving efficiency in GI has been spurred by the dramatic rise in the demand for endoscopic procedures as well as the rising number of insured patients requiring GI care coupled at the same time with limited resources in terms of staffing and space in endoscopy centers. This paper will critically review the history of efficiency in endoscopy centers, first by looking at other healthcare industries that have extensively studied and improved efficiency in their fields, examine a number of proposed efficiency metrics and benchmarks in endoscopy centers, and finally discuss opportunities where endoscopy centers could improve their efficiency.
Collapse
|
8
|
Mönkemüller K, Wilcox CM. Positive domino effect, choice of conscious sedation, and endoscopic unit efficiency. Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 77:888-90. [PMID: 23684092 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2013.02.036] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/13/2013] [Accepted: 02/26/2013] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
|