Satisfaction and safety using dexmedetomidine or propofol sedation during endoscopic oesophageal procedures: A randomised controlled trial

The Study of Remazolam Combined With Propofol on Painless Gastroscopy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

PURPOSE

Gastroscopy is one of the most commonly used diagnostic modalities for upper gastrointestinal disorders. Remazolam besylate, a new type of ultrashort-acting benzodiazepine drug, has been less studied in gastroscopy. In this study, we studied the efficacy and safety of remazolam combined with propofol for painless gastroscopy.

DESIGN

This was a single-center, placebo-controlled randomized trial.

METHODS

One hundred patients undergoing painless gastroscopy were included in this study and randomly divided into 2 groups (n = 50 per group): the control group (Con group) and the remazolam group (Rem group). Sufentanil, remazolam, and propofol were used to anesthetize the patients, and then, the effects of different solutions on these patients were compared and analyzed. The patient's general condition, vital signs at different times, the dosage of propofol (mg) and additional times, complications, duration of gastroscopy (minutes), recovery time (minutes), length of stay in the recovery room (minutes), and adverse reactions were recorded.

FINDINGS

Rem group systolic blood pressure was more stable (P < .05). The amount of additional propofol in Rem group was less (P < .05). The incidence of hypotension, bradycardia, and dizziness was lower in Rem group, as well as the time of awakening and stay in the recovery room were shorter (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Remazolam combined with sufentanil and propofol has less effect on hemodynamics in painless gastroscopy, and the patients have shorter awakening times.

Development and validation of a predictive model for PACU hypotension in elderly patients undergoing sedated gastrointestinal endoscopy

BACKGROUND

Hypotension, characterized by abnormally low blood pressure, is a frequently observed adverse event in sedated gastrointestinal endoscopy procedures. Although the examination time is typically short, hypotension during and after gastroscopy procedures is frequently overlooked or remains undetected. This study aimed to construct a risk nomogram for post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) hypotension in elderly patients undergoing sedated gastrointestinal endoscopy.

METHODS

This study involved 2919 elderly patients who underwent sedated gastrointestinal endoscopy. A preoperative questionnaire was used to collect data on patient characteristics; intraoperative medication use and adverse events were also recorded. The primary objective of the study was to evaluate the risk of PACU hypotension in these patients. To achieve this, the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression analysis method was used to optimize variable selection, involving cyclic coordinate descent with tenfold cross-validation. Subsequently, multivariable logistic regression analysis was applied to build a predictive model using the selected predictors from the LASSO regression. A nomogram was visually developed based on these variables. To validate the model, a calibration plot, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, and decision curve analysis (DCA) were used. Additionally, external validation was conducted to further assess the model's performance.

RESULTS

The LASSO regression analysis identified predictors associated with an increased risk of adverse events during surgery: age, duration of preoperative water abstinence, intraoperative mean arterial pressure (MAP) <65 mmHg, decreased systolic blood pressure (SBP), and use of norepinephrine (NE). The constructed model based on these predictors demonstrated moderate predictive ability, with an area under the ROC curve of 0.710 in the training set and 0.778 in the validation set. The DCA indicated that the nomogram had clinical applicability when the risk threshold ranged between 20 and 82%, which was subsequently confirmed in the external validation with a range of 18-92%.

CONCLUSION

Incorporating factors such as age, duration of preoperative water abstinence, intraoperative MAP <65 mmHg, decreased SBP, and use of NE in the risk nomogram increased its usefulness for predicting PACU hypotension risk in elderly patient undergoing sedated gastrointestinal endoscopy.

A prospective, randomized, single-blinded study comparing the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine and propofol for sedation during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

BACKGROUND

Balanced propofol sedation is extensively used in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), but sedation-related adverse events (SRAEs) are common. In various clinical settings, the combination of dexmedetomidine with opioids and benzodiazepines has provided effective sedation with increased safety. The aim of this investigation was to compare the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine and propofol for sedation during ERCP.

METHODS

Forty-one patients were randomly divided into two groups: the dexmedetomidine (DEX) group and the propofol (PRO) group. Patients in the DEX group received an additional bolus of 0.6 μg kg-1 dexmedetomidine followed by a dexmedetomidine infusion at 1.2 μg kg-1 h-1, whereas the PRO group received 1-2 mg kg-1 of propofol bolus followed by a propofol infusion at 2-3 mg kg-1 h-1. During ERCP, the primary outcome was the incidence of hypoxemia (SpO2 < 90% for > 10 s). Other intraoperative adverse events were also recorded as secondary outcomes, including respiratory depression (respiratory rate of < 10 bpm min-1), hypotension (MAP < 65 mmHg), and bradycardia (HR < 45 beats min-1).

RESULTS

The incidence of hypoxemia was significantly reduced in the DEX group compared to the PRO group (0% versus 28.6%, respectively; P = 0.032). Patients in the PRO group exhibited respiratory depression more frequently than patients in the DEX group (35% versus 81%, respectively; P = 0.003). There were no significant differences in terms of hypotension and bradycardia episodes between groups. During the procedures, the satisfaction scores of endoscopists and patients, as well as the pain and procedure memory scores of patients were comparable between groups.

CONCLUSION

In comparison with propofol, dexmedetomidine provided adequate sedation safety with no adverse effects on sedation efficacy during ERCP.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2200061468, 25/06/2022.

Safety and effcacy of remimazolam tosilate for sedation during combined spinal-epidural anesthesia for orthopedic procedures: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of Remimazolam in the context of combined spinal-epidural anesthesia for sedation during orthopedic surgery.

METHODS

This randomized controlled trial enrolled patients scheduled for orthopedic surgery under combined spinal-epidural anesthesia (N = 80), who were randomly allocated to receive either dexmedetomidine (Group-D) or remimazolam (Group-R). The target sedation range aimed for a Ramsay score of 2-5 or a BIS value of 60-80 to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of remimazolam during sedation.

RESULTS

The time taken to achieve the desired level of sedation was significantly shorter in the remimazolam group compared to the dexmedetomidine group (3.69 ± 0.75 vs. 9.59 ± 1.03; P < 0.0001). Patients in the remimazolam group exhibited quicker recovery, fewer intraoperative adverse events, more consistent vital signs, and greater satisfaction at various time points throughout the surgery.

CONCLUSION

This preliminary study demonstrates that remimazolam tosilate serves as a safe and effective sedative for orthopedic surgery performed under combined spinal-epidural anesthesia, in comparison with dexmedetomidine.

Dexmedetomidine as an Adjunct to Propofol in Patients Undergoing Elective Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangio-Pancreaticography - A Double-blind Randomized Controlled Study

Background

Propofol is the drug of choice for procedural sedation. The addition of α2 agonist dexmedetomidine may improve the safety profile of the procedure by providing stable hemodynamics, better sedation quality, and decreasing the side effects of each drug during elective endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreaticography (ERCP).

Materials and Methods

Eighty patients aged between 18 and 60 years were distributed randomly into two groups. The dexmedetomidine + propofol group (group DP) received an injection of dexmedetomidine at the dose of 1 mcg/kg in 100 mLsaline, and the propofol group (group P) received plain 100 mL normal saline over 10 min. Subsequently, both groups received a bolus dose of injection propofol 1 mg/kg as sedation, and a modified observer's assessment of alertness/sedation score (MOASS) score was assessed, followed by infusion at the rate of 50 mcg/kg/min during the procedure. A rescue bolus dose (20 mg) of propofol was administered when the patient showed signs of inadequate sedation or analgesia in both groups. Cardiovascular and respiratory parameters were recorded every 10 min throughout the procedure. Post-procedure modified Aldrete score was evaluated for 30 min, and the endoscopist's score was noted at the end of the procedure.

Results

There was a significant difference (P = 0.001) in the additional number of rescue doses of propofol administered in group DP (3.47 ± 0.77) as compared to group P (8.78 ± 1.11). The total dose of propofol was lower in group DP (316.59 ± 43.29 mg) than in group P (443 ± 41.1 mg) with P value = 0.001. Statistically significant differences in the hemodynamic values were observed in group DP during infusion (P value < 0.05) of dexmedetomidine and throughout the procedure (P < 0.05) when compared with group P. Endoscopists graded the satisfaction score as very high (3.477 ± 0.77) in group DP.

Conclusion

The addition of dexmedetomidine to propofol during ERCP provided better and safer sedation.

Efficacy and safety of sedation with dexmedetomidine in adults undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background: The sedative role of dexmedetomidine (DEX) in gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures is unclear. We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of sedation with DEX during gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures with a view to providing evidence-based references for clinical decision-making. Methods: The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared DEX with different sedatives comparators (such as propofol, midazolam, and ketamine) for sedation in a variety of adult gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures from inception to 1 July 2022. Standardized mean difference (SMD) and weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) or pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% CI were used for continuous outcomes or dichotomous outcomes, respectively, and a random-effect model was selected regardless of the significance of the heterogeneity. Results: Forty studies with 2,955 patients were assessed, of which 1,333 patients were in the DEX group and 1,622 patients were in the control (without DEX) group. The results suggested that the primary outcomes of sedation level of DEX are comparable to other sedatives, with similar RSS score and patient satisfaction level, and better in some clinical outcomes, with a reduced risk of body movements or gagging (RR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.37 to 0.97; p = 0.04; I2 = 68%), and a reduced additional requirement for other sedatives, and increased endoscopist satisfaction level (SMD: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.05 to 0.77; p = 0.03; I2 = 86%). In terms of secondary outcomes of adverse events, DEX may benefit patients in some clinical outcomes, with a reduced risk of hypoxia (RR:0.34; 95% CI: 0.20 to 0.55; p < 0.0001; I2 = 52%) and cough (RR: 0.25; 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.54; p = 0.0004; I2 = 0%), no significant difference in the risk of hypotension, while an increased risk of bradycardia (RR: 3.08; 95% CI: 2.12 to 4.48; p < 0.00001; I2 = 6%). Conclusion: This meta-analysis indicates that DEX is a safe and effective sedative agent for gastrointestinal endoscopy because of its benefits for patients in some clinical outcomes. Remarkably, DEX is comparable to midazolam and propofol in terms of sedation level. In conclusion, DEX provides an additional option in sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#searchadvanced.

Advances in Anesthesia for Shoulder Surgery: A Comprehensive Review of Dexmedetomidine-Enhanced Interscalene Brachial Plexus Block

Surgical procedures on the shoulder pose distinctive challenges in managing pain during the perioperative period, underscoring the importance of exploring innovative anesthesia techniques. This comprehensive review article delves into integrating dexmedetomidine, an alpha-2 adrenergic agonist, within interscalene brachial plexus blocks for shoulder surgery. The review initiates by underscoring the pivotal role of effective anesthesia in shoulder surgery and elucidates the rationale behind investigating dexmedetomidine as an adjunct. It meticulously examines the anatomy and physiology of the brachial plexus, emphasizing its critical significance in shoulder surgery. Furthermore, the article expounds on dexmedetomidine's mechanisms of action and pharmacokinetics, encompassing its safety profile and potential side effects. The conventional interscalene brachial plexus block techniques, along with their limitations and challenges, are discussed, laying the foundation for the integration of dexmedetomidine. The review subsequently delves into exploring the role of dexmedetomidine in regional anesthesia, covering previous studies, mechanisms of action, and the potential advantages of incorporating it into nerve blocks. The review's core concentrates on the practical application of dexmedetomidine-enhanced interscalene brachial plexus blocks. This includes discussions on administration techniques, dosage guidelines, and compelling evidence supporting its utilization. Clinical scenarios where this approach proves most advantageous are thoroughly explored, comparing its effectiveness with traditional techniques in terms of pain control and patient outcomes. A comprehensive examination of relevant clinical trials and case studies highlights the evidence supporting its efficacy. The review also underscores safety considerations associated with dexmedetomidine. It proposes strategies for mitigating risks to ensure patient safety. Insights into future directions and research are provided, encompassing ongoing studies, areas necessitating further investigation, and potential refinements in technique. Finally, the article summarizes key findings, emphasizing the practicality of dexmedetomidine-enhanced interscalene brachial plexus blocks in shoulder surgery and its far-reaching implications for clinical practice and patient care.

Effects of dexmedetomidine in non-operating room anesthesia in adults: a systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Dexmedetomidine (DEX) is an α2-adrenergic receptor agonist used for its sedative, analgesic, and anxiolytic effects. Non-Operating Room Anesthesia (NORA) is a modality of anesthesia that can be done under general anesthesia or procedural sedation or/and analgesia. In this particular setting, a level-2 sedation, such as the one provided by DEX, is beneficial. We aimed to study the effects and safety of DEX in the different NORA settings in the adult population.

METHODS

A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was conducted. Interventions using DEX only or DEX associated with other sedative agents, in adults (18 years old or more), were included. Procedures outside the NORA setting and/or without a control group without DEX were excluded. MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov, Scopus, LILACS, and SciELO were searched. The primary outcome was time until full recovery. Secondary outcomes included hemodynamic and respiratory complications and other adverse events, among others.

RESULTS

A total of 97 studies were included with a total of 6,706 participants. The meta-analysis demonstrated that DEX had a higher time until full recovery (95% CI = [0.34, 3.13] minutes, a higher incidence of hypotension (OR = 1.95 [1.25, 3.05], p = 0.003, I2 = 39%) and bradycardia (OR = 3.60 [2.29, 5.67], p < 0.00001, I2 = 0%), and a lower incidence of desaturation (OR = 0.40 [0.25, 0.66], p = 0.0003, I² = 60%).

CONCLUSION

DEX in NORA procedures in adults was associated with a lower incidence of amnesia and respiratory effects but had a long time to recovery and more hemodynamic complications.

The study of different dosages of remazolam combined with sufentanil and propofol on painless gastroscopy: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Gastroscopy is one of the most commonly used diagnostic modalities for upper gastrointestinal disorders. Remazolam besylate, a new type of ultrashort-acting benzodiazepine drug, has been less studied in gastroscopy. In this study, we studied the efficacy and safety of remazolam combined with propofol for painless gastroscopy.

METHODS

This is a single-center, randomized controlled clinical trial. Hundred patients undergoing painless gastroscopy were included in this study and randomly divided into 2 groups (n = 50 per group): the remazolam 3 mg group (R3 group) and the remazolam 6 mg group (R6 group). Sufentanil, remazolam, and propofol are used to anesthetize the patients, and then, the effects of different dosages of remazolam on these patients are compared and analyzed. The patient's general condition, vital signs at different times, the dosage of propofol (mg) and additional times, complications, duration of gastroscopy (minute), awakening time (minute), residence time in the resuscitation room (minute), and adverse reactions were recorded.

RESULTS

R3 group systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure are more stable (P < .05); The number of additional propofol in R6 group was less (P < .05). The incidence of hypotension was lower in R3 group, as well as the time of awakening and staying in the resuscitation room were shorter (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Remazolam 3mg combined with sufentanil and propofol have less effect on hemodynamics in painless gastroscopy, and the patients have shorter awakening time.

Effect of different doses of dexmedetomidine on the median effective concentration of propofol during gastrointestinal endoscopy: a randomized controlled trial

AIMS

Dexmedetomidine could be an ideal adjuvant to propofol during gastrointestinal endoscopy because it provides both analgesia and sedation without respiratory depression. This study investigates the effect of different doses of dexmedetomidine on the median effective concentration of propofol during gastrointestinal endoscopy.

METHODS

Ninety adult patients were randomly assigned to Group Control, Group DEX0.5 (0.5 μg/kg dexmedetomidine) or Group DEX1.0 (1.0 μg/kg dexmedetomidine). Anaesthesia during endoscopy was implemented by plasma target-controlled infusion (TCI) of propofol with different doses of dexmedetomidine. TCI concentration of the first patient for each group was 2.5 μg/mL and the consecutive adjacent concentration gradient was 0.5 μg/mL. Median effective concentration (EC₅₀ ) of propofol by TCI for gastrointestinal endoscopy was determined by using the modified Dixon's up-and-down method. Cardiovascular variables were also measured.

RESULTS

EC₅₀ of propofol by TCI and 95% confidence interval (CI) for gastrointestinal endoscopy were 3.77 (3.48-4.09), 2.51 (2.27-2.78) and 2.10 (1.90-2.33) μg/mL in Group Control, Group DEX0.5 and Group DEX1.0, respectively. The average percent change from heart rate (HR) baseline was 2.8 (8.9), -7.4 (7.7) and -10.5 (8.8) (P < .001), and the average percent change from mean arterial pressure (MAP) baseline was -10.6 [-24.7; 3.5], -9.5 [-29.2; 11.4] and -4.0 [-27.3; 15.5] (P = .034) in Group Control, Group DEX0.5 and Group DEX1.0, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Dexmedetomidine reduced the EC₅₀ of propofol by TCI. A 0.5-1 μg/kg dose of dexmedetomidine caused a decrease in HR without bradycardia. The decrease in dosage of propofol with increasing doses of dexmedetomidine caused more stable MAP. Dexmedetomidine is an ideal adjuvant drug to propofol during gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Low-Dose Esketamine as an Adjuvant to Propofol Sedation for Same-Visit Bidirectional Endoscopy: Protocol for a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Same-visit bidirectional endoscopy (esophagogastroduodenoscopy and colonoscopy) is widely performed under sedation. At present, the optimal sedation regimen remains unclear. This study aims to test the hypothesis that a low-dose esketamine added to propofol sedation reduces hemodynamic and respiratory adverse events in these procedures.

Methods

In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 660 adult patients scheduled for same-visit bidirectional endoscopy under sedation from 3 teaching hospitals in China will be recruited. Patients will be randomly allocated, in a 1:1 ratio, to an esketamine group or a normal saline group (n = 330 in each group), stratified by study center. All patients will receive intravenous propofol 0.5 mg/kg and sufentanil 0.1 μg/mL for induction of sedation, followed by intravenous esketamine 0.15 mg/kg or the same volume of normal saline. Propofol will be titrated to the target sedation levels during the procedures. The primary endpoint is a composite of desaturation (peripheral oxygen saturation < 90%) and hypotension (systolic blood pressure <80 mmHg or decrease >30% of baseline). Secondary endpoints include desaturation, hypotension, total dose of propofol, pain scores and fatigue scores on the 0-10 numerical rating scale, dizziness or headache, hallucination or nightmare, nausea or vomiting, endoscopist satisfaction, and patient satisfaction. All analyses will be intention-to-treat.

Discussion

We expect that a low-dose esketamine adjunct to propofol-based sedation will improve cardiorespiratory stability in patients undergoing same-visit bidirectional endoscopy, providing reference for clinical sedation practice during these procedures.

Trial Registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (Identifier: ChiCTR-ChiCTR2200055938).

Dexmedetomidine versus propofol sedation in flexible bronchoscopy: a randomized controlled trial

Background

Dexmedetomidine (DEX), is a highly selective alpha2 adrenoceptor (α2-AR) agonist, successfully used in various procedures including flexible bronchoscopy. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating DEX sedation during bronchoscopy report equivocal results regarding respiratory and hemodynamic outcomes.

Methods

We conducted an RCT to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine compared to propofol for sedation during bronchoscopy. The primary outcome was the number of desaturation events, secondary outcomes were transcutaneous Pco2 level, hemodynamic adverse events and physician and patient satisfaction.

Results

Overall, 63 patients were included, 30 and 33 in the DEX and propofol groups, respectively. The number of desaturation events was similar between groups, median (IQR) 1 (0–1) and 1 (0–2) in the DEX and control groups, respectively (P = 0.29). Median desaturation time was 1 (0–2) and 1 (0–3) minutes in the DEX and control groups, respectively (P = 0.48). Adverse events included hypotension, 33% vs 21.1% in intervention and control groups, respectively (P = 0.04), bradycardia, cough, and delayed recovery from sedation. Total adverse events were 22 and 7 in DEX and propofol groups, respectively (P = 0.009).

Conclusion

Dexmedetomidine sedation during bronchoscopy did not show differences in oxygen saturation and transcutaneous CO2 level in comparison to propofol. Moreover, DEX sedation required a significantly higher number of rescue boluses, due to inadequate sedation and was associated with a higher rate of adverse events.

Trial registration NCT04211298, registration date: 26.12.2019.

Effect of intravenous lidocaine on propofol consumption in elderly patients undergoing colonoscopy: a double-blinded, randomized, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Elderly patients undergoing colonoscopy with propofol as sedation are prone to respiratory or cardiovascular complications. Intravenous lidocaine has analgesic efficacy and reduces propofol consumption during surgery. Here, the effect of intravenous lidocaine on propofol consumption was evaluated in elderly patients undergoing colonoscopy.

METHODS

Patients were randomly allocated to receive intravenous lidocaine (1.5 mg/kg bolus dose, followed by a 2 mg/kg/h continuous infusion during the procedure; Group L) or a placebo (saline; Group N). During the procedure, sedation was achieved by propofol. The following outcomes were recorded: total propofol consumption; time to loss of consciousness; number of airway modifications; time to the first airway intervention; incidence of sedation-related events; pain score after awakening; endoscopists' and patients' satisfaction scores; memory level of the procedure; and adverse events within 24 h postoperatively.

RESULTS

Compared with Group N, propofol consumption was reduced by 13.2% in Group L (100.30 ± 25.29 mg vs. 115.58 ± 27.52 mg, respectively, p = 0.008). Kaplan-Meier curves showed that the median time to the loss of consciousness episode was shorter in Group L than in Group N (40 s vs. 55 s, respectively, log rank p < 0.0001). The number of airway modifications, time to the first airway intervention, incidence of sedation-related events, time to awakening, pain score after awakening, endoscopists' and patients' satisfaction scores, memory level of the procedure and adverse events within 24 h postoperatively did not differ between the two groups (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous lidocaine can reduce propofol consumption in elderly patients undergoing colonoscopy, with quicker time to loss of consciousness.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The clinical trial was registered at (12/01/2021, ChiCTR2100042001 ).

The median effective concentration of propofol with different doses of esketamine during gastrointestinal endoscopy in elderly patients: A randomized controlled trial

AIMS

Propofol may result in hypotension, bradycardia and loss of protective reflexes, especially in elderly patients, while esketamine, a N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist, has analgesic, anaesthetic and sympathomimetic properties and is known to cause less cardiorespiratory depression. We hypothesized that esketamine may reduce the median effective concentration (EC₅₀ ) of propofol and coadministration is less likely to produce hypotension during gastrointestinal endoscopy in elderly patients.

METHODS

Ninety elderly patients, aged 65-89 years, undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy were randomly assigned into 3 groups: SK0 (control) group (0 mg/kg esketamine); SK0.25 group (0.25 mg/kg esketamine); and SK0.5 group (0.5 mg/kg esketamine). Anaesthesia was achieved by plasma target-controlled infusion of propofol with different bolus doses of esketamine. The EC₅₀ of propofol for gastrointestinal endoscopy was determined by using the up-and-down method of Dixon. The initial plasma target concentration is 2.5 μg/mL and the adjacent concentration gradient is 0.5 μg/mL. Cardiovascular variables were also measured.

RESULTS

Propofol EC₅₀ s and its 95% confidence interval for gastrointestinal endoscopy in elderly patients were 3.69 (2.59-4.78), 2.45 (1.85-3.05) and 1.71 (1.15-2.27) μg/mL in the SK0, SK0.25 and SK0.5 groups, respectively (P < .05). The average percent change from baseline mean arterial pressure was -19.7 (7.55), -15.2 (7.14) and -10.1 (6.73), in the SK0, SK0.25 and SK0.5 groups, respectively (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Combination medication of propofol with esketamine reduced the propofol EC₅₀ during gastrointestinal endoscopy in elderly patients compared with administration of propofol without esketamine. Increasing doses of SK with propofol are less likely to produce hypotension with shorter recovery time.

Pre-procedure intravenous lidocaine administration on propofol consumption for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: A prospective, randomized, double-blind study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) procedure is generally performed in patients with high comorbidity. We aimed to reduce the consumption of propofol by adding lidocaine before ERCP.

METHODS

Eighty ERCP patients with ASA I-III, aged between 45-75 years, were randomly divided into two groups. Lidocaine group (group L, n = 40), received 1-mg midazolam, 1.5 mg/kg lidocaine, and 1 mg/kg propofol intravenously. The control group (group C, n = 40) received 1-mg midazolam, saline in the same volume as the lidocaine group, and 1 mg/kg propofol intravenously. Propofol was administered with intermittent bolus doses. Propofol consumption, oropharyngeal reflex, recovery time, endoscopist satisfaction, ketamine need, and side-effects were recorded.

RESULTS

Propofol consumption during the procedure was statistically lower in group L than in the control group (157.25 ± 39.16 mg vs 228.75 ± 64.62 mg respectively, P < 0.001). Additionally, recovery time was statistically faster in group L compared with the control group (7.78 ± 3.95 min vs 11.92 ± 3.24 min respectively, P < 0.001). The oropharyngeal reflex was less in group L than control group (6/40 vs 15/40 respectively, P = 0.042). There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding visual analogue scale scores and endoscopist satisfaction (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend the use of intravenous lidocaine before the ERCP procedure as it reduces propofol consumption, recovery times, and oropharyngeal reflex.

Does Including Dexmedetomidine Improve Outcomes After Intravenous Sedation for Outpatient Dentoalveolar Surgery?

PURPOSE

Dexmedetomidine represents an intriguing adjunct to outpatient intravenous (IV) sedation owing to its decreased risk of respiratory depression. The purpose of the present study was to measure the incremental effect of incorporating dexmedetomidine (DXM) into an established IV sedation regimen compared with control IV sedation without the DXM infusion.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We designed a prospective, controlled trial in which American Society of Anesthesiologists Class 1 and 2 patients requiring both maxillary and mandibular dentoalveolar surgery would undergo 2 sedation appointments: 1 arch treated with surgery with control sedation (DXM-) using midazolam, fentanyl, and propofol as needed, and a second surgery on the opposite arch using the experimental sedation regimen (DXM+) of midazolam, fentanyl, and propofol, as needed, and a DXM infusion at 4 μg/kg/hr. The surgeon was the same for every appointment, and the patients were kept unaware regarding which sedation had included the experimental regimen. Whether the experimental sedation was used at the first or second surgery was randomized. The primary measured outcomes were efficiency in terms of anesthesia time for each sedation, the physiologic response in terms of vital signs, and the subjective patient experience.

RESULTS

A total of 12 patients completed the trial. With DXM-, the patients had significantly shorter total (∼15 minutes) and adjusted anesthesia (∼10 minutes) times. With DXM+, the patients had significantly lower average systolic blood pressure (SBP), SBP low values, diastolic blood pressure (DBP) low values, average heart rate (HR), and HR low values. None of the other continuous patient outcomes differed significantly between the 2 groups. Of the 12 patients, 10 (83.3%) reported that they preferred the experimental sedation experience with DXM (95% confidence interval, 0.52 to 0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

Using a DXM infusion with outpatient dentoalveolar surgery allowed for acceptable levels of sedation, greater patient satisfaction, and longer anesthesia and appointment times and often resulted in lower BP and heart rate.

MicroRNA‑214 suppresses propofol‑induced neuroapoptosis through activation of phosphoinositide 3‑kinase/protein kinase B signaling by targeting phosphatase and tensin homolog expression

The present study aimed to investigate the effects of microRNA (miR)‑214 on neuroapoptosis induced by propofol and the possible mechanism of its anti‑apoptotic effects. Initially, it was observed that miR‑214 expression was upregulated in propofol‑induced neuroapoptosis rats. Next, propofol‑treated nerve cells were transfected with miR‑214 mimics. The results revealed that miR‑214 overexpression induced apoptosis, inhibited cell proliferation, inhibited cyclin D1 protein expression, promoted caspase‑3 activity and B‑cell lymphoma 2‑associated X protein expression, and enhanced the levels of inflammation factors in nerve cells treated with propofol. In addition, miR‑214 overexpression suppressed phosphoinositide 3‑kinase/protein kinase B (PI3K/Akt) signaling by targeting the activation of phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN) and nuclear factor‑κB expression in nerve cells treated with propofol. Treatment with a PTEN inhibitor successfully suppressed the PTEN protein expression and decreased the apoptosis of propofol‑treated nerve cells subsequent to miR‑214 overexpression through PI3K/Akt signaling. In conclusion, the present study data revealed that miR‑214 suppressed propofol‑induced neuroapoptosis through the activation of PI3K/Akt signaling by targeting PTEN expression.

Anesthesia for nonintubated video-assisted thoracic surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review focuses primarily on nonintubated video-assisted thoracic surgery (NIVATS), and discusses advantages, indications, anesthetic techniques, and approaches to intraoperative crisis management.

RECENT FINDINGS

Advancements in endoscopic, endovascular, and robotic techniques have expanded the range of surgical procedures that can be performed in a minimally invasive fashion. For thoracic operations in particular, video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) has largely replaced traditional thoracotomy, and continued technical development has made surgical access into the pleural space even less disruptive. As a consequence, the need for general anesthesia and endotracheal intubation has been re-examined, such that regional or epidural analgesia may be sufficient for cases where lung collapse can be accomplished with spontaneous ventilation and an open hemithorax. This concept of NIVATS has gained popularity, and in some centers has now expanded to include procedures involving placement of multiple ports. Although still relatively uncommon at present, a small number of randomized trials and meta-analyses have indicated some advantages, suggesting that NIVATS may be a desirable alternative to general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation for specific indications.

SUMMARY

Although anesthesia for NIVATS is associated with some of the same risks as general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation, NIVATS can be successfully performed in carefully selected patients.

Dexmedetomidine and Midazolam Sedation Reduces Unexpected Patient Movement During Dental Surgery Compared With Propofol and Midazolam Sedation

PURPOSE

Owing to its unpredictability, unexpected patient movement is one of the most important problems during surgery while under monitored anesthesia care with sedation. The purpose of this study was to compare unexpected patient movement during dental surgery while under dexmedetomidine and propofol sedation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The authors designed and implemented a prospective randomized controlled trial. Patients undergoing dental surgery requiring intravenous sedation were randomly assigned to dexmedetomidine and midazolam (dexmedetomidine group) or propofol and midazolam (propofol group) sedation. In each group, midazolam 0.02 mg/kg was administered in conjunction with continuous administration of dexmedetomidine or propofol to maintain a bispectral index value of 70 to 80. Unexpected patient movement interfering with the procedure was defined as acceptable, defined as no body movement or only 1 controllable movement, or unacceptable, defined as at least 2 controllable movements or any uncontrollable movement. The primary outcome was unexpected patient movement, and the secondary outcome was defined as snoring and cough reflex. Other variables included demographic and procedural characteristics. Continuous or ordinal variables were analyzed using the Student t test or Mann-Whitney test. Dichotomous or categorical variables were analyzed using the χ² test or Fisher exact test. A P value less than.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Eighty-eight patients were enrolled in the study (dexmedetomidine group, n = 44; propofol group, n = 44). There were no relevant differences between groups for demographics and baseline variables. Intraoperative unacceptable patient movement occurred more commonly in the propofol group (n = 13; 30%) than in the dexmedetomidine group (n = 4; 9%; P = .015). Intraoperative snoring occurred more commonly in the dexmedetomidine than in the propofol group (P = .045). Incidence and number of cough reflexes were comparable between groups.

CONCLUSION

Dexmedetomidine and midazolam sedation decreases unexpected patient movement during dental surgery compared with propofol and midazolam sedation.

Nonintubated-Awake Anesthesia for Uniportal Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery Procedures

Nonintubated video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) strategies are gaining popularity. This review focuses on noninutbated VATS, and discusses advantages, indications, anesthetic techniques, and approaches to intraoperative crisis management. Advances in endoscopic, endovascular, and robotic techniques have expanded the range of surgical procedures that can be performed in a minimally invasive fashion. The nonintubated thoracoscopic approach has been adapted for use with major lung resections. The need for general anesthesia and endotracheal intubation has been reexamined, such that regional or epidural analgesia may be sufficient for cases where lung collapse can be accomplished with spontaneous ventilation and an open hemithorax.

Use of a home positive airway pressure device during intraoperative monitored anesthesia care for outpatient surgery

Perioperative positive airway pressure (PAP) is recommended by the American Society of Anesthesiologists for patients with obstructive sleep apnea, but a readily available and personalized intraoperative delivery system does not exist. We present the successful use of a patient's own nasal PAP machine in the operating room during outpatient foot surgery which required addition of a straight adaptor for oxygen delivery and careful positioning of the gas sampling line to permit end-tidal carbox dioxide monitoring. Home PAP machines may provide a potential alternative to more invasive methods of airway management for patients with obstructive sleep apnea under moderate sedation.