Dreaming and recall during sedation for colonoscopy

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.

Influences of Propofol, Ciprofol and Remimazolam on Dreaming During Anesthesia for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Randomized Double-Blind Parallel-Design Trial

Purpose

To compare the influences of propofol, ciprofol and remimazolam on dreaming during painless gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Methods

This study was a single-center, prospective, parallel-design, double-blind, randomized clinical trial. Between May 2023 and October 2023, patients undergoing elective painless gastrointestinal endoscopy were recruited and randomly allocated into one of the three groups. Demographic data, intraoperative information, incidence of dreaming, insufficient anesthesia and intraoperative awareness, type of dream, patient satisfaction score, adverse events, and improvement of sleep quality were collected.

Results

The difference in incidence of dreaming among the three groups was not significant (33.33% vs 48.33% vs 41.67%, p=0.061). The number of patients with intraoperative hypotension in the propofol group was larger than that of the remimazolam group (32 vs 12, p=0.001). However, the cases of intraoperative hypotension between propofol group and ciprofol group or ciprofol group and remimazolam group were comparable (32 vs 22, p=0.122; 22 vs 12, p=0.064). The percentage of insufficient anesthesia between propofol group and remimazolam group was significant (13.33% vs 1.67%, p=0.001), while no statistical difference was detected between propofol group and remimazolam group or ciprofol group and remimazolam group (13.33% vs 5.00%, p=0.025; 5.00% vs 1.67%, p=0.150). The ability of propofol to improve sleep quality at 1st post-examination day was significantly better than that of remimazolam (86.21% vs 72.88%, p=0.015), while it was not significant between propofol group and ciprofol group or ciprofol group and remimazolam group (86.21% vs 80.36%, p=0.236; 72.88% vs. 72.88%, p=0.181). Incidence of intraoperative awareness, intraoperative hypoxia, type of dream, satisfaction score, adverse events during recovery, and sleep improvement on the 7th post-examination day was not significant among the groups.

Conclusion

Anesthesia with propofol, ciprofol and remimazolam, respectively, for gastrointestinal endoscopy did not induce statistical difference in the incidence of dreaming, despite that all of them are more likely to induce pleasant dreams.

Dreaming during gastrointestinal endoscopy under propofol, ciprofol, or remimazolam anesthesia: study protocol for a parallel-design double-blind, single-center trial

BACKGROUND

Dreaming sometimes occurs during sedation. It has been reported that factors such as different anesthetics, depth of anesthesia, age, sex, and preoperative psychological state may affect dreams. Ciprofol and remimazolam are novel choices for painless endoscopy. Herein, we aimed to investigate dreaming during gastrointestinal endoscopy under propofol, ciprofol, and remimazolam anesthesia respectively.

METHODS

This is a prospective, parallel-design double-blind, single-center clinical trial. Three hundred and sixty subjects undergoing elective painless gastroscopy, colonoscopy, or gastroenteroscopy will be enrolled. Eligible subjects will undergo propofol-, ciprofol-, or remimazolam-induced anesthesia to finish the examination. Interviews about the modified Brice questionnaire will be conducted in the recovery room. Incidence of dreaming is set as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes include type of dreams, improvement of sleep quality, evaluation of patients, incidence of insufficient anesthesia, and intraoperative awareness. Safety outcomes are the incidences of hypotension and hypoxia during examination and adverse events during recovery.

DISCUSSION

This study may observe different incidences of dreaming and diverse types of dreams, which might lead to different evaluations to the anesthesia procedure. Based on the coming results, anesthesiologists can make a better medication plan for patients who are going to undergo painless diagnosis and treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry on May 18, 2023 (registration number ChiCTR2300071565).

Impact of female sex on anaesthetic awareness, depth, and emergence: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Suggested anaesthetic dose ranges do not differ by sex, likely because of limited studies comparing sexes. Our objective was to systematically synthesise studies with outcomes of unintended anaesthesia awareness under anaesthesia, intraoperative connected consciousness, time to emergence from anaesthesia, and dosing to achieve adequate depth of anaesthesia, and to compare between females and males.

METHODS

Studies were identified from MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane library databases until August 2, 2022. Controlled clinical trials (randomised/non-randomised) and prospective cohort studies that reported outcomes by sex were included. Results were synthesised by random effects meta-analysis where possible, or narrative form.

RESULTS

Of the 19 749 studies identified, 64 (98 243 participants; 53 143 females and 45 100 males) were eligible for inclusion, and 44 citations contributed to meta-analysis. Females had a higher incidence of awareness with postoperative recall (33 studies, odds ratio 1.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09-1.75) and connected consciousness during anaesthesia (three studies, OR 2.09, 95% CI 1.04-4.23) than males. Time to emergence was faster in females, including time to eye-opening (10 studies, mean difference -2.28 min, 95% CI -3.58 to -0.98), and time to response to command (six studies, mean difference -2.84 min, 95% CI -4.07 to -1.62). Data on depth of anaesthesia were heterogenous, limiting synthesis to a qualitative review which did not identify sex differences.

CONCLUSIONS

Female sex was associated with a greater incidence of awareness under general anaesthesia, and faster emergence from anaesthesia. These data suggest reappraisal of anaesthetic care, including whether similar drug dosing for females and males represents best care.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42022336087.

Subjective experiences during dexmedetomidine- or propofol-induced unresponsiveness and non-rapid eye movement sleep in healthy male subjects

BACKGROUND

Anaesthetic-induced unresponsiveness and non-rapid eye movement (NREM) sleep share common neural pathways and neurophysiological features. We hypothesised that these states bear resemblance also at the experiential level.

METHODS

We compared, in a within-subject design, the prevalence and content of experiences in reports obtained after anaesthetic-induced unresponsiveness and NREM sleep. Healthy males (N=39) received dexmedetomidine (n=20) or propofol (n=19) in stepwise doses to induce unresponsiveness. Those rousable were interviewed and left unstimulated, and the procedure was repeated. Finally, the anaesthetic dose was increased 50%, and the participants were interviewed after recovery. The same participants (N=37) were also later interviewed after NREM sleep awakenings.

RESULTS

Most subjects were rousable, with no difference between anaesthetic agents (P=0.480). Lower drug plasma concentrations were associated with being rousable for both dexmedetomidine (P=0.007) and propofol (P=0.002) but not with recall of experiences in either drug group (dexmedetomidine: P=0.543; propofol: P=0.460). Of the 76 and 73 interviews performed after anaesthetic-induced unresponsiveness and NREM sleep, 69.7% and 64.4% included experiences, respectively. Recall did not differ between anaesthetic-induced unresponsiveness and NREM sleep (P=0.581), or between dexmedetomidine and propofol in any of the three awakening rounds (P>0.05). Disconnected dream-like experiences (62.3% vs 51.1%; P=0.418) and memory incorporation of the research setting (88.7% vs 78.7%; P=0.204) were equally often present in anaesthesia and sleep interviews, respectively, whereas awareness, signifying connected consciousness, was rarely reported in either state.

CONCLUSIONS

Anaesthetic-induced unresponsiveness and NREM sleep are characterised by disconnected conscious experiences with corresponding recall frequencies and content.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical trial registration. This study was part of a larger study registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01889004).

Identifying Recall Under Sedation by a Novel EEG Based Index of Attention—A Pilot Study

Overview

Recall is an accepted consequence of sedation. But due to the very low prevalence of the more devastating awareness under anesthesia (AUA), it might be of value to assess first the efficacy of new markers for AUA by their efficacy in discovering the more prevalent recall under sedation (RUS). In this pilot study we assessed whether a novel index for attentional effort, the cognitive effort index (CEI), derived in real-time from one forehead EEG channel, could differentiate between patients with or without RUS.

Methods

EEG was sampled from 2 groups: (1) Patients who underwent deep sedation (n = 25) (using drugs according to the anesthesiologist preference, but generally combining either Midazolam or Propofol together with either Fentanyl or Remifentanil). (2) Patients who underwent general anesthesia (GA, n = 13, a negative control for recall). In recovery, recall was assessed using the BRICE questionnaire.

Results

Of the 25 sedated patients, 11 experienced recall. The CEI marker was high during significantly longer periods in patients with recall, compared to sedated patients, or patients under GA, without recall. Moreover, the increase in CEI was evident mainly toward the end of the procedure.

Conclusion

RUS seems to associate with higher level of attention, which is identified in real-time by the easy-to-extract CEI marker.

Bispectral Index Monitoring and Observer Rating Scale Correlate with Dreaming during Propofol Anesthesia for Gastrointestinal Endoscopies

Background and objectives: Dreaming is a commonly reported side effect of propofol anesthesia. Materials and Methods: We investigated the inci-dence and character of dreams in patients undergoing intravenous propofol anesthesia and cor-related it with an observer rating scale of facial expression on the seven-point scale from pain to smile. A total of 124 patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy were recruited in the pro-spective observational study. Bispectral index (BIS), blood pressure (BP), and pulse were moni-tored. Upon emergence from anesthesia, the patient’s facial expression was rated numerically. Thereafter, patients were asked whether they had dreams and to rate their dreams as pleasant or unpleasant. The mean age of participants was 53; body mass index, 26.17; duration of procedure, 20 min; and average propofol dose, 265 mg. Results: Dreaming was reported by 43% of patients. Dreams were pleasant in all but one patient. There was a significant correlation of the observer’s rating of facial expression with dreaming (r = 0.260; p = 0.004). Dreamers had higher scores of observer rating of facial expression (1 (0–2) vs. 0.5 (0–1), p = 0.006). Conclusions: BIS values were lower in the dreamers vs. non-dreamers 2 min after the endoscopy started (48 (43–62) vs. 59 (45–71), p = 0.038). Both BIS and observer ratings correlate with dreaming in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endos-copy. Trial registration number: NCT04235894.

The Impact of Endoscopy Sedation Information Sheets on the Level of Concern Regarding Possible Awareness in Patients Undergoing Endoscopy Sedation

Sedation encompasses a continuum from complete unconsciousness to drowsiness and anxiolysis where some awareness might be expected. Most patients undergoing endoscopy sedation expect to be completely unconscious during the procedure and thus have unmet expectations regarding their state of consciousness. This study aimed to evaluate whether endoscopy sedation information sheets reduce the level of concern regarding possible awareness during endoscopy sedation at a major regional hospital. Our findings were that 28.8% of patients who received the endoscopy sedation information sheet (n = 82) were concerned about awareness during the procedure, compared to 36.5% of patients in the control group (n = 105). However, the difference was not statistically significant. We also found that the incidence of awareness was higher (13.9%) in the intervention group compared to 8.8% in the control group but, again, not statistically different. This study allowed us to elucidate the level of concern regarding possible awareness during sedation and the incidence of awareness during endoscopy sedation. This will enable future work investigating the role of endoscopy sedation information methods involving written and video material in assisting pre-procedure patient counselling.

On no man's land: Subjective experiences during unresponsive and responsive sedative states induced by four different anesthetic agents

To understand how anesthetics with different molecular mechanisms affect consciousness, we explored subjective experiences recalled after responsive and unresponsive sedation induced with equisedative doses of dexmedetomidine, propofol, sevoflurane, and S-ketamine in healthy male participants (N = 140). The anesthetics were administered in experimental setting using target-controlled infusion or vapouriser for one hour. Interviews conducted after anesthetic administration revealed that 46.9% (n = 46) of arousable participants (n = 98) reported experiences, most frequently dreaming or memory incorporation of the setting. Participants receiving dexmedetomidine reported experiences most often while S-ketamine induced the most multimodal experiences. Responsiveness at the end of anesthetic administration did not affect the prevalence or content of reported experiences. These results demonstrate that subjective experiences during responsive and unresponsive sedation are common and anesthetic agents with different molecular mechanisms of action may have different effects on the prevalence and complexity of the experiences, albeit in the present sample the differences between drugs were minute.

Dreams, Sleep, and Psychotropic Drugs

Over the past 60 years, the impact of psychotropic drugs on dream recall and content has been scarcely explored. A review of the few existing experimental results on the topic leads us to the following conclusions. For antidepressant drugs, in the great majority, they reduce dream recall frequency (DRF), and the improvement of depressive symptoms is associated with an increase of positive emotion in dream content. For sedative psychotropic drugs, their improvement of sleep quality is associated with a reduction of DRF, but the effect on dream content is less clear. Few occurrences of nightmare frequency increase have been reported, with intake of molecules disturbing sleep or with the withdrawal of some psychotropic drugs. Importantly, the impact of psychotropic drugs on rapid eye movement (REM) sleep does not explain DRF modulations. The reduction of intra-sleep awakenings seems to be the parameter explaining best the modulation of DRF by psychotropic drugs. Indeed, molecules that improve sleep continuity by reducing intra-sleep awakenings also reduce the frequency of dream recall, which is coherent with the “arousal-retrieval model” stating that nighttime awakenings enable dreams to be encoded into long-term memory and therefore facilitate dream recall. DRF is nonetheless influenced by several other factors (e.g., interest in dreams, the method of awakening, and personality traits), which may explain a large part of the variability of results observed and cited in this article.

Feasibility of measuring memory response to increasing dexmedetomidine sedation in children

BACKGROUND

The memory effect of dexmedetomidine has not been prospectively evaluated in children. We evaluated the feasibility of measuring memory and sedation responses in children during dexmedetomidine sedation for non-painful radiological imaging studies. Secondarily, we quantified changes in memory in relation to the onset of sedation.

METHODS

A 10 min bolus of dexmedetomidine (2 mcg kg^-1) was given to children as they named simple line drawings every five s. The absence of sedation was identified as any verbal response, regardless of correctness. After recovery, recognition memory was tested with correct Yes/No recognitions (50% novel pictures) and was matched to sedation responses during the bolus period (subsequent memory paradigm).

RESULTS

Of 64 accruals, 30 children (mean [SD]6.1 (1.2) yr, eight male) received dexmedetomidine and completed all study tasks. Individual responses were able to be modelled successfully in the 30 children completing all the study tasks, demonstrating feasibility of this approach. Children had 50% probability of verbal response at five min 40 s after infusion start, whereas 50% probability of subsequent recognition memory occurred sooner at four min five s.

CONCLUSIONS

Quantifying memory and sedation effects during dexmedetomidine infusion in verbal children was possible and demonstrated that memory function was present until shortly before verbal unresponsiveness occurred. This is the first study to investigate the effect of dexmedetomidine on memory in children.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT 02354378.

Anesthetic dreaming, anesthesia awareness and patient satisfaction after deep sedation with propofol target controlled infusion: A prospective cohort study of patients undergoing day case breast surgery

Background

Anesthetic dreaming and anesthesia awareness are well distinct phenomena. Although the incidence of intraoperative awareness is more common among patients who reported a dream after surgery, the exact correlation between the two phenomena remains an unsolved rebus. The main purpose of this study was to investigate anesthetic dreaming, anesthesia awareness and psychological consequences eventually occurred under deep sedation. Intraoperative dreaming experiences were correlated with dream features in natural sleep.

Methods

Fifty-one patients, undergoing surgical excision of fibroadenomas under a Bispectral index-guided deep sedation anesthesia with propofol target controlled infusion, were enrolled into this prospective study. Psychological assessment was performed through the State Trait Anxiety Inventory. A questionnaire was adopted to register dreaming and anesthesia awareness. Data were collected after emergence (t0), 24 hours (t1), 1 month (t2), 6 months (t3).

Results

Six patients (12%) reported anesthetic dreaming at t0 confirming the response at each subsequent evaluation. One patient (2%) confirmed dreaming during anesthesia in all, but denied it at t0. There was a high correlation between the intraoperative dream contents and the features of dreams in natural sleep. No cases of anesthesia awareness were detected. A similar level of satisfaction was observed in dreaming and no-dreaming patients.

Conclusions

Anesthetic dreaming does not seem to influence satisfaction of patients undergoing deep sedation with propofol target controlled infusion. A psychological assessment would seem to improve the evaluation of possible psychological consequences in dreamer patient.

A randomized controlled trial of light versus deep propofol sedation for elective outpatient colonoscopy: recall, procedural conditions, and recovery

PURPOSE

This study aimed to determine if the incidence of recall was equivalent between light and deep sedation for colonoscopy. Secondary analysis included complications, patient clinical recovery, and post-procedure cognitive impairment.

METHODS

Two hundred patients undergoing elective outpatient colonoscopy were randomized to light (bispectral index [BIS] 70-80) or deep (BIS < 60) sedation with propofol and fentanyl. Recall was assessed by the modified Brice questionnaire, and cognition at baseline and discharge was assessed using a Cogstate test battery.

RESULTS

The median (interquartile range [IQR]) BIS values were different in the two groups (69 [65-74] light sedation vs 53 [46-59] deep sedation; P < 0.0001). The incidence of recall was 12% in the light sedation group and 1% in the deep sedation group. The risk difference for recall was 0.11 (90% confidence interval, 0.05 to 0.17) in the intention-to-treat analysis, thus refuting equivalence in recall between light and deep sedation (0.05 significance level; 10% equivalence margin). Overall sedation-related complications were more frequent with deep sedation than with light sedation (66% vs 47%, respectively; P = 0.008). Recovery was more rapid with light sedation than with deep sedation as determined by the mean (SD) time to reach a score of 5 on the Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale [3 (4) min vs 7 (4) min, respectively; P < 0.001] and by the median [IQR] time to readiness for hospital discharge (65 [57-80] min vs 74 [63-86] min, respectively; P = 0.001). The incidence of post-procedural cognitive impairment was similar in those randomized to light (19%) vs deep (16%) sedation (P = 0.554).

CONCLUSION

Light sedation was not equivalent to deep sedation for procedural recall, the spectrum of complications, or recovery times. This study provides evidence to inform discussions with patients about sedation for colonoscopy. This trial was registered at the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number 12611000320954.

Sex differences in dreaming during short propofol sedation for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy

Previous reports suggest that sex differences may exist in dreaming under anesthesia, but their results were inconclusive. The current study explored sex differences in the incidence and content of dreams during short propofol sedation for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and investigated whether sex differences or dream content affect patient satisfaction with sedation. A total of 200 patients (100 men and 100 women) undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy participated in this study. Patients were interviewed with the modified Brice questionnaire about the incidence and the content of dreams, and satisfaction with sedation was assessed. The results showed that the incidence of dreaming was significantly higher in men (31%) than in women (17%) (P=0.02), but recovery time was similar. In men, 45% (14/31) of dreamers reported positive emotional content and only 6% (2/31) reported negative emotional content. In contrast, in women, 18% (3/17) reported positive and 29% (5/17) reported negative content (P=0.04). Men reported dreams that were more vivid, meaningful, familiar, and memorable (P<0.01). No significant sex differences were observed in the emotional intensity of dreams, and emotional content did not influence patients' satisfaction. In sum, sex differences existed in dreaming during short propofol sedation despite similar recovery time and matching in terms of age. Men reported dreaming more frequently and had a higher incidence of recall for their dream narratives. In particular, men reported significantly more positive emotional content, less negative emotional content, and more meaningful content. Dreamer satisfaction with sedation was not influenced by sex or dream content.

Propofol dose and incidence of dreaming during sedation

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Dreaming is commonly reported after propofol-based sedation. We measured the incidence of dreaming and bispectral index (BIS) values in colonoscopy patients sedated with combinations of propofol, midazolam and fentanyl.

METHODS

Two hundred patients presenting for elective outpatient colonoscopy were sedated with combinations of propofol, midazolam and fentanyl. BIS was monitored throughout the procedure. Patients were interviewed immediately after they emerged from sedation. The primary end point was a report of dreaming during sedation.

RESULTS

Ninety-seven patients were administered propofol alone, 44 were administered propofol and fentanyl, 16 were administered propofol and midazolam and 43 were administered propofol, midazolam and fentanyl. Dreaming was reported by 19% of patients. Dreamers received higher doses of propofol and had lower BIS values during sedation. Age of 50 years or less, preoperative quality of recovery score of less than 14, higher home dream recall, propofol dose of more than 300 mg and time to Observers' Assessment of Alertness/Sedation score equalling 5 of 8 min or less were independent predictors of dreaming.

CONCLUSION

Dreaming during sedation is associated with higher propofol dose and lower BIS values.