Sedative and Analgesic Effects of Propofol-Fentanyl Versus Propofol-Ketamine During Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography: A Double-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial

Comparison of the Effect of Adding Low-dose Ketamine to Dexmedetomidine and Propofol on the Quality of Sedation and Hemodynamic Response in Children During Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Double-blind Randomized Clinical Trial

Background: As endoscopy is an invasive and painful procedure, it is necessary to use a suitable sedative with a minimum dose, especially in children. Objectives: This study aimed to compare the effect of adding low-dose ketamine to dexmedetomidine and propofol on the quality of sedation and hemodynamic response in children during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Methods: This double-blind, randomized clinical trial was conducted on 52 children who were candidates for endoscopy in 2 groups, each consisting of 26 patients. In the first group (Ketadex group), infusion of dexmedetomidine (0.7 - 1 μg/kg) for 10 minutes and ketamine bolus (0.4 mg/kg) for anesthesia induction was prescribed. In the second group (Ketofol group), infusion of propofol (50 - 100 μg/kg) for 10 minutes and ketamine bolus (0.4 mg/kg) for anesthesia induction was prescribed. Results: The mean blood pressure of children decreased slightly during and after the endoscopic procedure in the Ketadex group than in the Ketofol group (P < 0.05). The recovery time was significantly less in the Ketofol group (41.85 ± 7.03 minutes) than in the Ketadex group (55.12 ± 7.55 minutes; P < 0.001). Conclusions: The addition of the low-dose ketamine to propofol and dexmedetomidine did not result in any significant changes in the level of sedation, the incidence of adverse effects, and the endoscopist’s satisfaction; however, the recovery time was shorter in the propofol-ketamine combination than in the dexmedetomidine-ketamine combination.

Effective dose of propofol combined with a low-dose esketamine for gastroscopy in elderly patients: A dose finding study using dixon’s up-and-down method

Objective: This study aimed to determine the optimal dose of propofol combined with esketamine to inhibit the response to gastroscope insertion in elderly patients.

Methods: This is a prospective, non-controlled, non-randomized, single-center study. Elderly patients aged 65–80 years were enrolled in the study with the American society of anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I or II undergoing elective gastroscopy. All patients were administered propofol after an intravenous esketamine at the dosage of 0.3 mg/kg 30 s, the subsequent dose of propofol was determined by the response of the previous patient to gastroscope insertion (choking, body movement, etc.) using Dixon’s up-and-down method. The initial dose of propofol administered to the first elderly patient was 3.0 mg/kg, and the standard ratio of propofol dose in adjacent patients was 0.9. At least six crossover points were obtained before the conclusion of the study. By using Probit analysis the median effective dose (ED₅₀), 95% effective dose (ED₉₅), and the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) for propofol were determined.

Results: The study continued until we obtained seven crossover points and 32 elderly patients (17 males and 15 females) were collected. The ED₅₀ of propofol combined with esketamine inhibiting response to gastroscope insertion in elderly patients were found to be 1.479 mg/kg (95% CI 1.331–1.592 mg/kg), and ED₉₅ was found to be 1.738 mg/kg (95% CI 1.614–2.487 mg/kg).

Conclusion: According to the present study, propofol combined with 0.3 mg/kg esketamine is safe and effective for elderly patients undergoing gastroscopy. The ED₅₀ and ED₉₅ doses of propofol inhibiting response to gastroscope insertion in elderly patients when combined with 0.3 mg/kg esketamine were 1.479 and 1.738 mg/kg, respectively, without apparent adverse effects.

A comparison of ventilation with a non-invasive ventilator versus standard O2 with a nasal cannula for colonoscopy with moderate sedation using propofol

The aim of this study was to test the effects of CPAP on moderately sedated patients undergoing colonoscopy. Our hypothesis was that CPAP can reduce the incidence and duration of obstructive apnea and hemoglobin oxygen desaturation in patients undergoing procedural sedation for colonoscopy. Two groups of consenting adult patients scheduled to undergo routine colonoscopy procedures and sedated with propofol and fentanyl were monitored in this study: control and intervention. Patients in the intervention group were connected via a facemask to a ventilator that delivered supplemental oxygen (100%) through a standard air-cushion mask. The mask had a built-in leak to facilitate CO₂ clearance during CPAP. Patients in the control group received 2-10 L/min of oxygen via nasal cannula or non-rebreather mask. Subjects in the control group were collected in a prior study and used as historical controls. The primary outcome measures were the number of apneic events and the cumulative duration of apneic events. An apneic event was defined as a period longer than 10 s without respiration. The secondary outcome was the area under the curve (AUC) for the arterial oxygen saturation less than 90% versus time during sedative and analgesic administration (time (s) below threshold multiplied by percent below threshold). A desaturation event was defined as a period of time during which arterial oxygen saturation was less than 90%. 29 patients were enrolled in the intervention group and 156 patients were previously enrolled in the control group as part of an earlier study. The median number of apneic events in the control group was 7 compared to 0 in the intervention group. The intervention group experienced apnea less than 1% of the total procedure time compared to 17% in the control group (p < 0.001). There were no desaturation events observed in the 29 patients in the intervention group. In contrast, 27 out of 156 patients in the control group experienced a desaturation event. Average AUC of patients in the control group was 70%-s (time (s) * oxygen saturation below < 90%) (95% CI 32.34-108.60%) whereas the average AUC in intervention group patients was 0%-s (% time (s) * oxygen saturation < 90%) (95% CI 0-0%), p = 0.01. This preliminary study found that CPAP via a tight-fitting mask may be an effective tool to reduce the incidence and duration of obstructive apneic events as well as hemoglobin oxygen desaturation during lower endoscopy procedures that use propofol and fentanyl for sedation.Clinical Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02623270. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02623270 .

Prevalence of Anesthetic and Gastrointestinal Complications of Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is an endoscopic method for treatment of many biliary diseases. With respect to rapid recovery and more patient comfort, this procedure is currently performed under light general anesthesia (GA) or conscious sedation.

OBJECTIVES

The current study aimed to clarify that intravenous sedation or light general anesthesia can be performed without great fear of anesthesia related complications in ERCP patients and sedative doses of propofol can be used safely in outpatient settings under the supervision of an expert anesthesiologist.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional study on 1023 ERCP patients under light GA during 2014 - 2018 in Qom, Shahid Beheshti Hospital. Data were collected by a checklist and were analyzed by using chi-square test in SPSS V.22.

RESULTS

From 1023 patients, 501 (48.97 %) were male and 522 (51.03 %) were female with a mean age of 47.2 ± 6.7 years. The most common finding in ERCP was choledocholithiasis (76.15 %). The most common complication was hemodynamic instability (37.01 %) followed by desaturation (11.65 %) both of them ware anesthesia related. Prevalence of GI (gastrointestinal) related complications was 13.39 %. The most common GI related complications were pancreatitis (7.92 %) and bleeding (3.32 %). Total mortality rate was 0.88 %.

CONCLUSIONS

ERCP-related complications are inevitable but can be controlled by early diagnosis and clinical experience. Severe complications and high risk patients may increase the mortality and morbidity of the procedure. Anesthesia related complications are more frequent than GI related unwanted events. Fortunately, the most common anesthesia related complications are readily manageable and are minor in nature when an expert anesthesiologist is present in the scene. Close monitoring of the patient's vital signs should be the mainstay of the safe procedure.

Analgesic Effect and Hemodynamic Changes Due to Dexmedetomidine Versus Fentanyl During Elective Colonoscopy: A Double-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial

Background

There are different methods used for anesthesia during a colonoscopy procedure.

Objectives

The aim of this study was to compare the analgesic effect and hemodynamic changes due to dexmedetomidine and fentanyl during elective colonoscopy.

Methods

This double-blind clinical trial was conducted on 80 patients aged 20 - 70 years, candidates for elective colonoscopy, who were randomly divided into two equal groups. In the intervention group (group D), dexmedetomidine 1 mcg/kg was given 10 minutes before starting the colonoscopy and then, 0.5 mcg/kg/hour during colonoscopy was prescribed. In the control group (group F), fentanyl 0.5 mcg/kg was prescribed three minutes before starting the colonoscopy and then, the normal saline infusion was used as maintenance. Propofol 20 mg was prescribed as the rescue dose if needed (pain or severe discomfort during colonoscopy) during the procedure. Demographic and basic clinical data and blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO₂), and pain score (based on the visual analogue scale) were recorded from the start of the colonoscopy (time 0) and every 5 minutes until the recovery.

Results

The two groups had no significant difference in the duration of colonoscopy, colonoscopist's satisfaction, and patients' satisfaction (P > 0.05). The mean pain score during colonoscopy was lower in the dexmedetomidine group (P = 0.039). Heart rate was less in the dexmedetomidine group than in the fentanyl group and this difference was statistically significant. The mean arterial pressure had no difference between the two groups.

Conclusions

The results of the present study showed pain score was lower in the dexmedetomidine group than in the fentanyl group.