A comparison of sedation with midazolam-ketamine versus propofol-fentanyl during endoscopy in children: a randomized trial

Evaluating Sedation Strategies for Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Comprehensive Review of Intravenous Fentanyl, Butorphanol, and Midazolam in Adult and Pediatric Populations

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a critical diagnostic tool that often requires patient sedation to ensure optimal image quality and patient comfort, particularly in those with anxiety or an inability to remain still. This comprehensive review examines the efficacy, safety, and practical considerations of three commonly used intravenous sedatives, namely, fentanyl, butorphanol, and midazolam, in adult populations undergoing MRI procedures. This review highlights the pharmacological profiles, advantages, and limitations associated with each sedative agent through a detailed analysis of current literature, clinical guidelines, and practice-based evidence. Fentanyl is noted for its potent analgesic properties and rapid onset of action, making it suitable for painful procedures. Butorphanol, with its unique opioid agonist-antagonist activity, presents an alternative with a balance between analgesia and sedation, potentially offering a safer profile for certain patient populations. Midazolam, widely recognized for its anxiolytic and amnestic effects, remains a staple in managing procedure-related anxiety. The review further discusses patient selection criteria, dosing strategies, and the importance of individualized sedation planning to enhance patient experience and procedural outcomes. Future directions highlight the potential of emerging sedation agents and non-pharmacological approaches to improve patient comfort and compliance. The findings underscore the necessity for healthcare providers to adapt sedation practices to the specific needs of each patient, considering both the clinical context and the inherent characteristics of the sedative agents. This review aims to guide clinicians in selecting the most appropriate sedation strategy for adult patients undergoing MRI, optimizing patient care and diagnostic efficacy.

Up-to-date literature review and issues of sedation during digestive endoscopy

Sedation is common during digestive endoscopy to provide comfort and pain relief for patients. However, the use of sedation in endoscopy also poses potential risks, and recent issues have been raised regarding its safety and administration. This literature review paper will discuss the most recent developments in the field of sedation in digestive endoscopy, including the adverse events that might be associated with sedation and how to manage it, the legal issues associated with administration, the impact of COVID-19 on sedation practices, and sedation in special situations. It will also touch upon the current guidelines and recommendations for sedation, including the importance of patient selection and monitoring and the need for training and certification for endoscopists administering sedation. The review will also analyse studies evaluating the safety and efficacy of various sedation techniques, including propofol, midazolam, and others. It will examine the benefits and drawbacks of these agents.

Comparative Study of the Effect of Oral Chloral Hydrate and Intranasal Fentanyl on Sedation in Children for Electroencephalography

Objectives

Sedation and stability during electroencephalography (EEG) in pediatrics have high clinical importance. This study compares the sedative properties of oral chloral hydrate (OCH) and intranasal fentanyl (INF).

Materials & Methods

This study was a randomized clinical trial conducted in 2020 in Isfahan City on sixty-two pediatric candidates for EEG. Patients were randomized into two groups receiving 50 mg/kg OCH and 2 μg/kg INF thirty minutes before the process. The heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), respiratory rate (RR), and oxygen saturation (O2 sat) of patients, sedation, and physician's satisfaction were measured and compared between groups.

Results

The HR of patients decreased significantly in both groups (P< 0.001), and the patients that received INF had significantly lower HR 15, 30, 45, and 60 minutes after drug administrations (P< 0.05). RR evaluation indicated significantly decreased RR in both groups (P< 0.001), and patients receiving INF had lower RR 30, 45, and 60 per minutes after drug administrations (P< 0.001). Both groups showed significantly increased sedation levels during the study (P< 0.001), and patients treated with INF had higher sedation levels 15, 30, and 45 minutes after drug administration. Satisfaction rates were higher among the group that received INF (P= 0.020).

Conclusion

The use of INF had significant analgesic and sedative effects on pediatrics undergoing EEG.

Endo-anesthesia: a primer

Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy has witnessed a Cambrian explosion of techniques, indications, and expanding target populations. GI endoscopy encompasses traditional domains that include preventive measures, palliation, as alternative therapies in patients with prohibitive risks of more invasive procedures, and indicated primary treatments. But, it has expanded to include therapeutic and diagnostic interventional endosonography, luminal endoscopic resection, third space endotherapy, endohepatology, and endobariatrics. The lines between surgery and endoscopy are blurred on many occasions within this paradigm. Moreover, patients with high degrees of co-morbidity and complex physiology require more nuanced peri-endoscopic management. The rising demand for endoscopy services has resulted in the development of endoscopy referral centers that offer these invasive procedures as directly booked referrals for regional and rural patients. This further necessitates specialized programs to ensure appropriate evaluation, risk stratification, and optimization for safe sedation and general anesthesia if needed. This landscape is conducive to the organic evolution of endo-anesthesia to meet the needs of these focused and evolving practices. In this primer, we delineate important aspects of endo-anesthesia care and provide relevant clinical and logistical considerations pertaining to the breadth of procedures.

Sedative effect and safety of different doses of S-ketamine in combination with propofol during gastro-duodenoscopy in school-aged children: a prospective, randomized study

Background

Propofol combined with opioids can reduce the dosage of propofol and improve the safety of endoscopy. However, there are few studies on propofol combined with S-ketamine in children undergoing gastro-duodenoscopy. We aim to determine the sedative effect and safety of different doses of S-ketamine in combination with propofol in school-aged children undergoing gastro-duodenoscopy.

Methods

This is a prospective, randomized trial. Totally, 120 school-aged children who underwent gastro-duodenoscopy were randomly allocated into Group P, Group S0.3, Group S0.5 and Group S0.7. During induction, children in Group P, Group S0.3, Group S0.5 and Group S0.7 received 0, 0.3 mg.kg−1, 0.5 mg.kg−1 and 0.7 mg.kg−1 S-ketamine, respectively, following 3 mg.kg−1 propofol injection. During gastro-duodenoscopy, 1 mg.kg−1 of propofol was added according to the condition of the children and the BIS (bispectral index) value. The primary outcome was smooth placement rate of the first endoscope insertion. The secondary outcome was the times of additional propofol, the total amount of propofol, adverse events, recovery time, length of PACU (post anesthesia care unit) stay and endoscopist satisfaction.

Results

The smooth placement rate of the first endoscope insertion in Group P, Group S0.3 and Group S0.5 was significantly lower than that in Group S0.7 (16.70%, 34.50%, 50.00% vs. 83.30%, respectively, P < 0.001). The times of additional propofol in Group S0.3 (P = 0.018), Group S0.5 (P = 0.014) and Group S0.7 (P = 0.001) were significantly less than Group P. The total amount of propofol in Group S0.7 was significantly less than Group P (P < 0.001). The incidence of intraoperative hypotension in Group S0.5 and Group S0.7 was low. Group S0.7 had significantly higher incidence of postoperative dizziness (P = 0.003), longer PACU stay (P = 0.018) and higher endoscopist satisfaction (P = 0.001) than Group P. There was no difference in the recovery time among groups.

Conclusion

S-ketamine (0.7 mg.kg−1) in combination with propofol can provide satisfactory sedative effect and reduce the dosage of propofol in school-aged children undergoing gastro-duodenoscopy, but there are higher incidence of postoperative dizziness and longer PACU stay.

New sedatives and analgesic drugs for gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures

Procedural sedation has become increasingly common in endoscopy. Sedatives and analgesics induce anxiolysis and amnesia. In addition, an appropriate level of sedation is necessary for safe procedures including therapeutic endoscopy. Midazolam and propofol are the most commonly used drugs in sedative endoscopy. In recent years, the need to ascertain the safety and effectiveness of sedation has increased in practice. Therefore, new sedatives and analgesic drugs for optimal sedative endoscopy, have recently emerged. This article reviews the characteristics of sedatives and analgesics, and describes their clinical use in gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Pre-procedural Preparation and Sedation for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy in Patients with Advanced Liver Disease

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.

Gastrointestinal endoscopy in children and adults: How do they differ?

Gastrointestinal endoscopy has grown dramatically over the past century, and with subsequent improvements in technology and anaesthesia, it has become a safe and useful tool for evaluation of GI pathology in children. There are substantial differences between paediatric and adult endoscopy beyond size, including: age-related patho-physiology and the different spectrum of diseases in children. Literature on endoscopic procedures in children is sparse but significant. The present review aims at describing the current knowledges on paediatric endoscopy practice and highlights the main areas of differences between paediatric and adult practice.

Propofol versus midazolam for sedation during radiofrequency ablation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

Background and Aim

Standardization of the sedation protocol during radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is needed. This randomized, single‐blind, investigator‐initiated trial compared clinical outcomes during and after RFA using propofol and midazolam, respectively, in patients with HCC.

Methods

Few‐ and small‐nodule HCC patients (≤3 nodules and ≤3 cm) were randomly assigned to either propofol or midazolam. Patient satisfaction was assessed using a 100‐mm visual analog scale (VAS) (1 mm = not at all satisfied, 100 mm = completely satisfied). Sedation recovery rates 1, 2, 3, and 4 h after RFA were evaluated based on Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (MOAA/S) scores; full recovery was defined as a MOAA/S score of 5.

Results

Between July 2013 and September 2017, 143 patients with HCC were enrolled, and 135 patients were randomly assigned to the treatment group. Compared with midazolam, propofol exhibited similar median procedural satisfaction (propofol: 73.1 mm, midazolam: 76.9 mm, P = 0.574). Recovery rates 1 and 2 h after RFA were higher in the propofol group than in the midazolam group. Meanwhile, recovery rates observed 3 and 4 h after RFA were similar in the two groups. The safety profiles during and after RFA were almost identical in the two groups.

Conclusion

Patient satisfaction was almost identical in patients receiving propofol and midazolam sedation during RFA. Propofol sedation resulted in reduced recovery time compared with midazolam sedation in patients with HCC. The safety profiles of both propofol and midazolam sedation during and after RFA were acceptable.

Deep Sedation for Pediatric Parotid Sialendoscopy in Juvenile Recurrent Parotitis

Sialendoscopy is a minimally invasive diagnostic and therapeutic tool for juvenile recurrent parotitis (JRP); the procedure is under general anesthesia, but local anesthesia has been used for sialendoscopy in children >8 years. Based on the experience in children with sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy, we investigated the reliability and safety of deep sedation for sialendoscopy in JRP. Six children (3 females, 6-13 years) with episodes of parotid swelling underwent interventional (duct dilation and steroid irrigation) sialendoscopy with intravenous bolus of 1 mg/kg propofol and 1 mcg/kg fentanyl, and continuous infusion of 2 mg/kg/h propofol. Sialendoscopy under deep sedation was successfully performed in all the patients; the procedure was well tolerated, without any adverse effects. One event of full awakening was registered and promptly solved without needing to interrupt the procedure. Effectiveness of sialendoscopy under deep sedation was subjectively attested by high positive scores obtained at post-operative standardized questionnaires administered to the patients and their parents, and objectively by the lack of clinical recurrences during the follow-up. The combination of propofol and fentanyl seems to be a reliable and safe means of sedating children with JRP undergoing sialendoscopy.

A comparison of ketamine-midazolam combination and propofol-fentanyl combination on procedure comfort and recovery process in pediatric colonoscopy procedures

Objective

To compare the efficacy and safety of midazolam-ketamine combination versus fentanyl-propofol combination in pediatric diagnostic colonoscopy.

Methods

This is a retrospective study of 68 children undergoing diagnostic gastroenterology with midazolam-ketamine combination (Group-K) or with fentanyl-propofol combination (Group-P) in the pediatric gastroentology department at a Turkish tertiary hospital between January 2015 and June 2017. An intravenous midazolam was administered one minute before ketamine administration in Group K. Intravenous fentanyl was given to Group P, followed by intravenous propofol.

Results

There were statistically no significant differences between the groups as for age, gender, weight, duration of colonoscopy and complications observed during procedure. Ramsay sedation score was significantly higher in Group K. Recovery time and the rate of complications during the recovery of Group-K (23 patients, 65.7%) was significantly higher than that of Group P (8 patients, 24.2%) (p= 0.001).

Conclusions

Colonoscopy procedures can be quite comfortable in children when using the midazolam-ketamine combination. However, adverse effects related to ketamine were observed during recovery.

Recent Developments in Drugs for GI Endoscopy Sedation

Providing sedation for patients undergoing gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy continues to be a debated topic in both anesthesia and gastroenterology circles. Sedation approaches are widely varied across the globe. While propofol administration is embraced by more endoscopists and patients, its administration evolves controversy. Whereas trained nurses and gastroenterologists are allowed to administer propofol for GI endoscopy sedation in Europe and Asia, it is the sole privilege of anesthesia providers in the USA. However, the costs of anesthesia providers are significant and threaten to derail the screening colonoscopy practice. Efforts were made by both drug and device manufacturers to find alternatives. Fospropofol was one such effort that did not live up to the expectations due to respiratory depressant properties that were similar to propofol. Use of a new tool to administer propofol in the form of Sedasys® was the next experiment that tried to find alternative to anesthesia providers. The device did not succeed due to inadequate sedation. The latest effort is remimazolam, a new benzodiazepine that has quicker recovery profile. In the interim, many drug combinations such as propofol-dexmedetomidine and propofol-ketamine are improving the safety without compromising the quality of sedation. This review attempts to discuss the new drug innovations and drug combinations of existing sedatives for the benefit of readers.

Etomidate plus fentanyl for anesthesia in pediatric strabotomy

Considering the side effects of etomidate, it requires additional anesthetics to reduce the side effects and improve efficacy. Ketamine is often used as an adjunct anesthetic. We hypothesized that etomidate combined with fentanyl was more effective than etomidate combined with ketamine in the anesthesia of pediatric strabotomy. To prove our hypothesis, a prospective randomized controlled clinical study was performed, in which 35 children with strabotomy received etomidate plus ketamine (group A) for anesthesia induction and maintenance and 35 children with strabotomy received etomidate combined with fentanyl (group B). Mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), bispectral index (BIS), anesthesia effect, and emergence agitation and pain were observed before anesthesia induction (T1), after anesthesia induction (T2), at the beginning of the operation (T3), after 10-min operation (T4), and at the end of the operation (T5). Children in group B had significantly lower MAP and HR from T3 to T5, decreased BIS from T2 to T4, better anesthesia effect, and smaller emergence agitation and pain scores at 10 min after entering into postanesthesia care unit (PACU) compared with group A (p < 0.05). The mean emergence agitation score in group B was significantly lower than that in group A when the maximum emergence in group B was at 20 min after entering into PACU (p < 0.05). In conclusion, etomidate combined with fentanyl plays a good efficacy in anesthesia of pediatric strabotomy compared with etomidate plus ketamine.

Comparison of the Analgesic and Sedative Effects of Midazolam-Ketamine and Propofol-Sufentanil Combinations in Painful Procedures of Children with Haematologic Malignancy

Objective

Bone marrow aspiration and lumbar puncture play essential roles in the diagnosis and treatment of haematological disorders. These repeated invasive procedures lead to considerable pain and stress in children, which is emotionally stressful for their parents. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness and outcomes of two combinations of midazolam-ketamine (MK) and propofol-sufentanil (PS) in painful procedures of children with haematologic malignancy.

Methods

In this prospective, randomised, double-blind clinical trial, we enrolled 80 eligible patients with haematologic malignancy aged 2–14 years. We randomly allocated them to the MK and PS groups. We recorded and compared the level of sedation, pain severity, hemodynamic indices, the onset of effect, duration of recovery and complications during and after procedure in the two groups. We analysed the data using the SPSS software. We used Mann–Whitney U, independent t-test, chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests to compare continuous and categorical variables.

Results

From initially enrolled patients, 68 patients completed the study (38 in PS and 30 in MK group). The levels of sedation and the mean score of pain intensity were significantly lower in the MK group than those in the PS group (p<0.05). Movements and the needs to repeat the dose were significantly lower in the MK group than those in the PS group (p<0.05).

Conclusion

During bone marrow aspiration and lumbar puncture procedures in children with haematologic malignancy, the findings of this trial suggest that MK combination therapy provides better sedation and analgesia than PS.

Evaluation of the safety of using propofol for paediatric procedural sedation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Propofol is one of the most widely used drugs for paediatric procedural sedation owing to its known advantages, but some concerns remain regarding respiratory and/or cardiac complications in patients receiving propofol. Although a considerable number of randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) have been conducted to compare it with other sedative agents or opioids for children undergoing various procedures, propofol is still being used off-label for this indication in many countries. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of those RCTs to provide an overall summation of evidence that can potentially be considered for further regulatory decisions, including reimbursement policies. We searched for RCTs in MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from their inception to January 31, 2018. Our meta-analysis of 30 RCTs confirmed that propofol sedation had advantages in recovery time when compared with other drugs, without excessive concerns for cardiovascular or respiratory adverse events. Its safety profile regarding coughing, nausea or vomiting, and emergence delirium was also similar to that of other drugs. The overall evidence suggests that propofol sedation for paediatric procedures should be considered more positively in the context of regulatory decisions.

Propofol with and without Midazolam for Diagnostic Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopies in Children

PURPOSE

Various publications on the use of sedation and anesthesia for diagnostic procedures in children have demonstrated that no ideal agent is available. Although propofol has been widely used for sedation during esophagogastroduodenoscopy in children, adverse events including hypoxia and hypotension, are concerns in propofol-based sedation. Propofol is used in combination with other sedatives in order to reduce potential complications. We aimed to analyze whether the administration of midazolam would improve the safety and efficacy of propofol-based sedation in diagnostic esophagogastroduodenoscopies in children.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the hospital records of children who underwent diagnostic esophagogastroduodenoscopies during a 30-month period. Demographic characteristics, vital signs, medication dosages, induction times, sedation times, recovery times, and any complications observed, were examined.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics did not differ between the midazolam-propofol and propofol alone groups. No differences were observed between the two groups in terms of induction times, sedation times, recovery times, or the proportion of satisfactory endoscopist responses. No major procedural complications, such as cardiac arrest, apnea, or laryngospasm, occurred in any case. However, minor complications developed in 22 patients (10.7%), 17 (16.2%) in the midazolam-propofol group and five (5.0%) in the propofol alone group (p=0.010).

CONCLUSION

The sedation protocol with propofol was safe and efficient. The administration of midazolam provided no additional benefit in propofol-based sedation.

Effect of dexmedetomidine anesthesia on respiratory function in pediatric patients undergoing retinoblastoma resection

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of dexmedetomidine (Dex) on the respiratory function during anesthesia induction in pediatric patients undergoing retinoblastoma (RB) resection. A total of 87 pediatric patients who underwent RB resection in Yidu Central Hospital of Weifang were recruited into this study. General anesthesia was first induced for all patients, of which 45 were randomly assigned to the experimental group and received Dex through an intravenous infusion pump to maintain general anesthesia. The remaining 42 patients were assigned to the control group and received saline through an intravenous infusion pump. Respiratory function and hemodynamic indexes at five time-points, i.e., before anesthesia induction (T0), 5 min after injection of anesthetic agents (T1), before intubation (T2), 15 min after intubation (T3), and 30 min after extubation (T4), were recorded and compared. Incidence of perioperative cardiac and respiratory adverse events was counted in both groups, and post-anesthesia resuscitation was evaluated and compared. Compared with T0, the respiratory rate (R) of the experimental group was lower at T1-T4, but there was no statistical difference (P<0.05). Compared with T0, the control group had a higher R at T2, lower R at T3 and T4 (P<0.05), and there was no significant difference in R between T0 and T1 (P>0.05). At the same time-point, compared with the experimental group, the R was higher at T2, and lower at T3 and T4 in the control group (P<0.05), and no significant difference was found at T1. Blood oxygen saturation (SpO₂) of the experimental group was slightly lower than that of T0 at T1-T4 (P>0.05). In the control group, the levels of SpO₂ were significantly lower at T1-T4 than those at T0 (P<0.05). Compared with the experimental group at the same time-point, SpO₂ of the control group at T1-T4 decreased significantly (P<0.05). The heart rate (HR) of the experimental and control groups was lower at T1-T4 than that at T0 (P<0.05). The HR of the experimental group was higher than that of the control group at T1-T4 (P<0.05). Mean arterial pressure (MAP) of the experimental and control groups was lower at T1-T4 than that at T0 (P<0.05). MAP of the control group was higher than that of the experimental group at T2 but lower than that at T0 of the control group. MAP of the control group was lower than that of the experimental group at T1-T4. There was no significant difference in incidence of tachycardia, bradycardia, vomiting, hypoxia and laryngism between the two groups (P>0.05). There was no difference in resuscitation and extubation time between the two groups (P>0.05). Finally, agitation of the control group was more severe than that of the experimental group (P<0.05). Therefore, Dex can improve the respiratory function and hemodynamic stability during anesthesia induction in children with RB resection.

Topical Pharyngeal Lidocaine Reduces Respiratory Adverse Events During Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopies Under Ketamine Sedation in Children

BACKGROUND

Upper gastrointestinal endoscopies (UGEs) performed under ketamine sedation may increase the risk of respiratory adverse events (RAEs) due to pharyngeal stimulation. Topical lidocaine prevents general anesthesia-induced laryngospasm.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to determine whether topical lidocaine may reduce the incidence of RAEs induced by pharyngeal stimulation in UGEs performed on children sedated with ketamine.

METHODS

We conducted a single-center prospective study. We included every patient admitted for an elective diagnostic UGE under ketamine sedation who received lidocaine prior to the technique. Patients requiring any other medication were excluded. Our main outcome measure was the number of desaturation episodes. We then compared these results with those obtained in an historic group who did not receive topical lidocaine, in which we registered a total of 54 desaturation episodes.

RESULTS

In total, 88 children (52.3% boys) were included. The median age was 7 years [interquartile range (IQR) 3-11]. The mean duration of the procedure was 6.5 ± 2.4 min, and the median initial ketamine dose was 1.76 mg/kg (IQR 1.56-2.03). The total number of desaturation episodes was 3 (3.4%), and two of these occurred prior to the introduction of the endoscope. This result represents a lower incidence than in previously reported series, and a significant decrease (p < 0.0001) with respect to the 54 RAEs registered in the historic group of 87 children.

CONCLUSIONS

Topical lidocaine premedication significantly reduced the incidence of RAEs in children during UGEs under ketamine sedation. Our findings should be confirmed by a double-blind randomized controlled trial.

Effect of the midazolam added with propofol-based sedation in esophagogastroduodenoscopy: A randomized trial

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Although propofol has been widely used for sedation during esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), adverse events including hypoxia and hypotension may be a concern in the propofol-based sedation. We aimed to analyze whether administration of midazolam would improve safety and efficacy of propofol-based sedation in EGD.

METHODS

One hundred twenty patients who were scheduled to undergo diagnostic EGD were randomly assigned to either midazolam plus propofol (MP) or propofol alone groups. In the MP group, 2 mg of midazolam and 10 mg of propofol were given initially. In the propofol alone group, 40-60 mg of propofol was given initially. In both groups, 20 mg of propofol was given repeatedly to maintain moderate sedation as needed. Vital signs including oxygen saturation were monitored every 2 min. After the patients fully recovered, satisfaction score was investigated from endoscopists, nurses, and patients, respectively.

RESULTS

The baseline characteristics did not differ between the MP and propofol alone groups. The mean required doses of propofol was (mean ± standard deviation) 0.3 ± 0.3 and 0.8 ± 0.2 mg/kg in the MP and propofol alone groups, respectively (P < 0.001). In addition, sedation-related adverse events and recovery time did not differ between the two groups. The proportion of satisfactory did not differ between the two groups (MP vs propofol alone; proportion; patient, 95.0% vs 93.3%, P > 0.999; endoscopist, 73.3% vs 80.0%, P = 0.064; nurse, 73.3% vs 76.7%, P = 0.551).

CONCLUSION

Adding midazolam to propofol did not reduced the safety and efficacy, and sedation using propofol alone could be suitable for sedation during diagnostic EGD.