|
1
|
Dasari BV, Thabut D, Allaire M, Berzigotti A, Blasi A, Line PD, Mandorfer M, Mazzafero V, Hernandez-Gea V. EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines on extrahepatic abdominal surgery in patients with cirrhosis and advanced chronic liver disease. J Hepatol 2025:S0168-8278(25)00235-1. [PMID: 40348682 DOI: 10.1016/j.jhep.2025.04.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/10/2025] [Accepted: 04/10/2025] [Indexed: 05/14/2025]
Abstract
Extrahepatic surgery in patients with cirrhosis of the liver represents a growing clinical challenge due to the increasing prevalence of chronic liver disease and improved long-term survival of these patients. The presence of cirrhosis significantly increases the risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality following abdominal surgery. Advances in preoperative risk stratification, surgical techniques, and perioperative care have led to better outcomes, yet integration of these improvements into routine clinical practice is needed. These clinical practice guidelines provide comprehensive recommendations for the assessment and perioperative management of patients with cirrhosis undergoing extrahepatic surgery. An individualised patient-centred risk assessment by a multidisciplinary team including hepatologists, surgeons, anaesthesiologists, and other support teams is essential.
Collapse
|
|
2
|
Wehrmann T, Riphaus A, Eckardt AJ, Klare P, Kopp I, von Delius S, Rosien U, Tonner PH. Updated S3 Guideline "Sedation for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy" of the German Society of Gastroenterology, Digestive and Metabolic Diseases (DGVS) - June 2023 - AWMF-Register-No. 021/014. ZEITSCHRIFT FUR GASTROENTEROLOGIE 2023; 61:e654-e705. [PMID: 37813354 DOI: 10.1055/a-2165-6388] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/11/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Till Wehrmann
- Clinic for Gastroenterology, DKD Helios Clinic Wiesbaden, Wiesbaden, Germany
| | - Andrea Riphaus
- Internal Medicine, St. Elisabethen Hospital Frankfurt Artemed SE, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Alexander J Eckardt
- Clinic for Gastroenterology, DKD Helios Clinic Wiesbaden, Wiesbaden, Germany
| | - Peter Klare
- Department Internal Medicine - Gastroenterology, Diabetology, and Hematology/Oncology, Hospital Agatharied, Hausham, Germany
| | - Ina Kopp
- Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany e.V. (AWMF), Berlin, Germany
| | - Stefan von Delius
- Medical Clinic II - Internal Medicine - Gastroenterology, Hepatology, Endocrinology, Hematology, and Oncology, RoMed Clinic Rosenheim, Rosenheim, Germany
| | - Ulrich Rosien
- Medical Clinic, Israelite Hospital, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Peter H Tonner
- Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Clinic Leer, Leer, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
|
3
|
Chen Y, Chen J, Wang Q, Lyu H, Chen X, Liu R, Wang T, Dan L, Huang H, Duan G. Safety and tolerability of esketamine in propofol based sedation for endoscopic variceal ligation with or without injection sclerotherapy: Randomized controlled trial. Dig Endosc 2023; 35:845-854. [PMID: 36808150 DOI: 10.1111/den.14539] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/01/2022] [Accepted: 02/17/2023] [Indexed: 02/23/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Esketamine is an S (+) enantiomer of ketamine with greater potency and similar psychomimetic effects compared to racemic ketamine. We aimed to explore the safety of esketamine in different doses as an adjuvant to propofol in patients undergoing endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) with or without injection sclerotherapy. METHODS One hundred patients were randomized to receive sedation with propofol 1.5 mg/kg in combination with sufentanil 0.1 μg/kg (group S), esketamine 0.2 mg/kg (group E0.2), esketamine 0.3 mg/kg (group E0.3), or esketamine 0.4 mg/kg (group E0.4) for EVL (n = 25 each). Hemodynamic and respiratory parameters were recorded during the procedure. The primary outcome was the incidence of hypotension; secondary outcomes included the incidence of desaturation, positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS) after the procedure, pain score after the procedure, and secretion volume. RESULTS The incidence of hypotension was significantly lower in groups E0.2 (36%), E0.3 (20%), and E0.4 (24%) than in group S (72%). The incidence of SpO2 ≤94% was significantly lower in group E0.4 (4%) than in group S (32%). No significant intergroup difference was found in the PANSS assessment. CONCLUSIONS Combining 0.4 mg/kg esketamine with propofol sedation was optimal to facilitate EVL with stable hemodynamic status and better respiratory function during the procedure, without significant psychomimetic side-effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (Trial ID: ChiCTR2100047033, http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=127518).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yuanjing Chen
- Department of Anesthesiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Jie Chen
- Department of Anesthesiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Quankai Wang
- Department of Anesthesiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Hongyao Lyu
- Department of Preventive Medicine, West China School of Public Health, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Xuehan Chen
- Department of Anesthesiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Rui Liu
- Department of Anesthesiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Ting Wang
- Department of Psychology, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Ling Dan
- Department of Anesthesiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - He Huang
- Department of Anesthesiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Guangyou Duan
- Department of Anesthesiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| |
Collapse
|
|
4
|
Ichijima R. What is the best sedation method for high-risk patients such as those with cirrhosis? Dig Endosc 2023; 35:855-856. [PMID: 37469283 DOI: 10.1111/den.14625] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2023] [Accepted: 06/27/2023] [Indexed: 07/21/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Ryoji Ichijima
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Nihon University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
|
5
|
Wehrmann T, Riphaus A, Eckardt AJ, Klare P, Kopp I, von Delius S, Rosien U, Tonner PH. Aktualisierte S3-Leitlinie „Sedierung in der gastrointestinalen Endoskopie“ der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Gastroenterologie, Verdauungs- und Stoffwechselkrankheiten (DGVS). ZEITSCHRIFT FUR GASTROENTEROLOGIE 2023; 61:1246-1301. [PMID: 37678315 DOI: 10.1055/a-2124-5333] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/09/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Till Wehrmann
- Klinik für Gastroenterologie, DKD Helios Klinik Wiesbaden, Wiesbaden, Deutschland
| | - Andrea Riphaus
- Innere Medizin, St. Elisabethen Krankenhaus Frankfurt Artemed SE, Frankfurt, Deutschland
| | - Alexander J Eckardt
- Klinik für Gastroenterologie, DKD Helios Klinik Wiesbaden, Wiesbaden, Deutschland
| | - Peter Klare
- Abteilung Innere Medizin - Gastroenterologie, Diabetologie und Hämato-/Onkologie, Krankenhaus Agatharied, Hausham, Deutschland
| | - Ina Kopp
- Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften e. V. (AWMF), Berlin, Deutschland
| | - Stefan von Delius
- Medizinische Klinik II - Innere Medizin - Gastroenterologie, Hepatologie, Endokrinologie, Hämatologie und Onkologie, RoMed Klinikum Rosenheim, Rosenheim, Deutschland
| | - Ulrich Rosien
- Medizinische Klinik, Israelitisches Krankenhaus, Hamburg, Deutschland
| | - Peter H Tonner
- Anästhesie- und Intensivmedizin, Klinikum Leer, Leer, Deutschland
| |
Collapse
|
|
6
|
Fung BM, Leon DJ, Beck LN, Tabibian JH. Pre-procedural Preparation and Sedation for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy in Patients with Advanced Liver Disease. Dig Dis Sci 2022; 67:2739-2753. [PMID: 34169430 DOI: 10.1007/s10620-021-07111-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/26/2021] [Accepted: 06/10/2021] [Indexed: 12/09/2022]
Abstract
Gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients with advanced liver disease poses various challenges, a major one being procedural sedation and its associated considerations. While sedation during endoscopy can improve patient comfort, decrease anxiety, and facilitate procedural completion, in patients with advanced liver disease, it is also associated with substantial and unique risks due to alterations in drug metabolism and other factors. As such, the choice of sedative agent(s) and related logistics may require careful inter-disciplinary planning and individualized considerations. Furthermore, a large proportion of agents require dose reductions and particular monitoring of the vital signs, level of consciousness, and other indices. In the present review, we provide a contemporary overview of procedural sedation considerations, commonly used intravenous sedatives, and second-line as well as novel sedatives for gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients with advanced liver disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brian M Fung
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Arizona College of Medicine - Phoenix, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
- Banner - University Medical Center Phoenix, Internal Medicine, LL2, 1111 E McDowell Road, Phoenix, AZ, 85006, USA.
| | - Deanna J Leon
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Lauren N Beck
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - James H Tabibian
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Olive View-UCLA Medical Center, Sylmar, CA, USA
- David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
7
|
Edalatkhah S, Hazrati E, Hashemi M, Golaghaei A, Kheradmand B, Rafiei M. Evaluation of anesthesia quality with three methods: "propofol + fentanyl" vs. "propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine" vs. "propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine + ketamine" in patients referred to the scoping ward. J Family Med Prim Care 2022; 11:672-676. [PMID: 35360792 PMCID: PMC8963641 DOI: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_1387_21] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/12/2021] [Revised: 10/25/2021] [Accepted: 12/13/2021] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction: Toleration of the complexity and pain of interventions such as endoscopy and colonoscopy is highly difficult for patients. Considering the disagreement on the method of injection of propofol, this study was performed to evaluate the quality of anesthesia using the three methods of propofol + fentanyl, propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine, and propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine + ketamine. Methods: This one-way blind clinical trial study included 99 patients who were admitted in three groups by block randomization method. In a group of patients that were sedated with propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine + ketamine, the dose of all drugs is reduced by half the amount of the other groups. Variables included age, sex, frequency of cough, apnea, need for jaw thrust maneuver, O2 saturation, duration of recovery, and procedural satisfaction. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 20.0. P value of < 0.05 was considered to be significant. Results: The three groups were similar in terms of demographic characteristics. The effects of the three sedation protocols on the variables showed that patient’s apnea, cough, O2 saturation, and also proceduralist satisfaction in the group of the patient that sedated with four drugs was significantly higher (P < 0.05) than other groups. But there was no significant difference between the three groups when comparing the recovery time and need for jaw thrust during the procedure. Conclusion: The findings of the present study showed that the use of combination of “propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine + ketamine” with lower doses, significantly results in higher quality sedation compared with higher doses of “propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine” or “propofol + fentanyl” for scoping procedures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sepehr Edalatkhah
- Research Center of Surgery and Trauma, AJA University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Ebrahim Hazrati
- Research Center of Surgery and Trauma, AJA University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Mahmoodreza Hashemi
- Research Center of Surgery and Trauma, AJA University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Alireza Golaghaei
- Research Center of Surgery and Trauma, AJA University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Behroz Kheradmand
- Research Center of Surgery and Trauma, AJA University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Mohamadreza Rafiei
- Research Center of Surgery and Trauma, AJA University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| |
Collapse
|
|
8
|
Ang TL, Seet E, Goh YC, Ng WK, Koh CJ, Lui HF, Li JW, Oo AM, Lim KBL, Ho KS, Chew MH, Quan WL, Tan DMY, Ng KH, Goh HS, Cheong WK, Tseng P, Ling KL. Academy of Medicine, Singapore clinical guideline on the use of sedation by non-anaesthesiologists during gastrointestinal endoscopy in the hospital setting. ANNALS OF THE ACADEMY OF MEDICINE, SINGAPORE 2022; 51:24-39. [PMID: 35091728 DOI: 10.47102/annals-acadmedsg.2021306] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/14/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION In Singapore, non-anaesthesiologists generally administer sedation during gastrointestinal endoscopy. The drugs used for sedation in hospital endoscopy centres now include propofol in addition to benzodiazepines and opiates. The requirements for peri-procedural monitoring and discharge protocols have also evolved. There is a need to develop an evidence-based clinical guideline on the safe and effective use of sedation by non-anaesthesiologists during gastrointestinal endoscopy in the hospital setting. METHODS The Academy of Medicine, Singapore appointed an expert workgroup comprising 18 gastroenterologists, general surgeons and anaesthesiologists to develop guidelines on the use of sedation during gastrointestinal endoscopy. The workgroup formulated clinical questions related to different aspects of endoscopic sedation, conducted a relevant literature search, adopted Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology and developed recommendations by consensus using a modified Delphi process. RESULTS The workgroup made 16 recommendations encompassing 7 areas: (1) purpose of sedation, benefits and disadvantages of sedation during gastrointestinal endoscopy; (2) pre-procedural assessment, preparation and consent taking for sedation; (3) Efficacy and safety of drugs used in sedation; (4) the role of anaesthesiologist administered sedation during gastrointestinal endoscopy; (5) performance of sedation; (6) post-sedation care and discharge after sedation; and (7) training in sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy for non-anaesthesiologists. CONCLUSION These recommendations serve to guide clinical practice during sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy by non-anaesthesiologists in the hospital setting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tiing Leong Ang
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Changi General Hospital, Singapore
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
9
|
Grassi G, Lenci I, Signorello A, Milana M, Baiocchi L. Gastrointestinal endoscopy in cirrhotic patient: Issues on the table. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 13:210-220. [PMID: 34326942 PMCID: PMC8311468 DOI: 10.4253/wjge.v13.i7.210] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/29/2021] [Revised: 06/22/2021] [Accepted: 06/28/2021] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Patients with liver cirrhosis are fragile and present specific clinical hallmarks. When undergoing to gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy, these subjects require an individual pre evaluation, taking into account: Level of haemostasis impairment, the individual risk of infection, the impact of sedation on hepatic encephalopathy and other factors. The overall assessment of liver function, employing common scoring systems, should be also assessed in the preprocedural phase. Beside some common general problems, regarding GI endoscopy in cirrhotic subjects, also specific issues are present for some frequent indications or procedures. For instance, despite an increased incidence of adenomas in cirrhosis, colon cancer screening remains suboptimal in subjects with this disease. Several studies in fact demonstrated liver cirrhosis as a negative factor for an adequate colon cleansing before colonoscopy. On the other hand, also the routine assessment of gastroesophageal varices during upper GI endoscopy presents some concern, since important inter-observer variability or incomplete description of endoscopic findings has been reported in some studies. In this review we discussed in details the most relevant issues that may be considered while performing general GI endoscopic practice, in patient with cirrhosis. For most of these issues there are no guidelines or clear indications. Moreover until now, few studies focused on these aspects. We believe that targeting these issues with corrective measures may be helpful to develop a tailored endoscopic approach for cirrhosis, in the future.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giuseppe Grassi
- Hepatology Unit, University of Tor Vergata, Rome 00100, Italy
| | - Ilaria Lenci
- Hepatology Unit, University of Tor Vergata, Rome 00100, Italy
| | | | - Martina Milana
- Hepatology Unit, University of Tor Vergata, Rome 00100, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
|
10
|
Kanogawa N, Ogasawara S, Ooka Y, Inoue M, Wakamatsu T, Yokoyama M, Maruta S, Unozawa H, Iwanaga T, Sakuma T, Fujita N, Koroki K, Kanzaki H, Maeda T, Kobayashi K, Kiyono S, Nakamura M, Kondo T, Saito T, Motoyama T, Suzuki E, Nakamoto S, Tawada A, Chiba T, Arai M, Kanda T, Maruyama H, Kato J, Takemura R, Nozaki‐Taguchi N, Shiroh I, Yokosuka O, Kato N. Propofol versus midazolam for sedation during radiofrequency ablation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. JGH Open 2021; 5:273-279. [PMID: 33553667 PMCID: PMC7857294 DOI: 10.1002/jgh3.12483] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/02/2020] [Revised: 12/10/2020] [Accepted: 12/11/2020] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Naoya Kanogawa
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Sadahisa Ogasawara
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
- Translational Research and Development CenterChiba University HospitalChibaJapan
| | - Yoshihiko Ooka
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Masanori Inoue
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Toru Wakamatsu
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Masayuki Yokoyama
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Susumu Maruta
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Hidemi Unozawa
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Terunao Iwanaga
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Takafumi Sakuma
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Naoto Fujita
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Keisuke Koroki
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Hiroaki Kanzaki
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Takahiro Maeda
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Kazufumi Kobayashi
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Soichiro Kiyono
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Masato Nakamura
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Takayuki Kondo
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Tomoko Saito
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Tenyu Motoyama
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Eiichiro Suzuki
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Shingo Nakamoto
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Akinobu Tawada
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
- Department of Medical Oncology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Tetsuhiro Chiba
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Makoto Arai
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
- Department of Medical Oncology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Tatsuo Kanda
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of MedicineNihon University School of MedicineTokyoJapan
| | - Hitoshi Maruyama
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
- Department of GastroenterologyJuntendo University School of MedicineTokyoJapan
| | - Jun Kato
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Ryo Takemura
- Clinical and Translational Research CenterKeio University HospitalTokyoJapan
| | | | - Isono Shiroh
- Departmetn of Anesthesiology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Osamu Yokosuka
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| | - Naoya Kato
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineChiba UniversityChibaJapan
| |
Collapse
|
|
11
|
Lieber SR, Heller BJ, Howard CW, Sandler RS, Crockett S, Barritt AS. Complications Associated With Anesthesia Services in Endoscopic Procedures Among Patients With Cirrhosis. Hepatology 2020; 72:2109-2118. [PMID: 32153048 PMCID: PMC7483314 DOI: 10.1002/hep.31224] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/15/2019] [Revised: 02/10/2020] [Accepted: 03/05/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Anesthesia services for endoscopic procedures have proliferated with the promise of increased comfort and safety. Cirrhosis patients are higher risk for sedation, yet limited data are available describing anesthesia complications in this population. APPROACH AND RESULTS This cross-sectional study utilized the National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry, a multicenter quality-improvement database from 2010 to 2015. Patients with cirrhosis undergoing an endoscopy were identified by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9)/Current Procedures Terminology (CPT) codes. The outcome of interest was serious anesthesia-related complication defined as cardiovascular, respiratory, neurological, drug related, patient injury, death, or unexpected admission. A mixed-effects multivariate logistic regression model determined odds ratios (ORs) between variables and serious complications, adjusting for potential confounders. In total, 9,007 endoscopic procedures were performed among patients with cirrhosis; 92% were esophagogastroduodenoscopies. The majority (81%) were American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class ≥3, and 72% had a history of hepatic encephalopathy, ascites, varices, hepatorenal syndrome, or spontaneous bacterial peritonitis identified by ICD-9/CPT codes. In total, 87 complications were reported, 33 of which were serious. Frequency of serious complications was 0.4% or 378.6 per 100,000 procedures (95% confidence interval [CI], 260.8, 531.3). The majority of serious complications were cardiovascular (21 of 33), including 15 cardiac arrests. Serious complications were significantly associated with ASA 4/5 (OR, 3.84; 95% CI, 1.09, 13.57) and general anesthesia (OR, 4.71; 95% CI, 1.20, 18.50), adjusting for age, sex, ASA class, anesthesia type, inpatient status, portal hypertension history, and variable complication reporting practices. CONCLUSIONS Anesthesia complications among endoscopic procedures in cirrhosis are rare overall. Serious complications were predominantly cardiac and associated with sicker patients undergoing general anesthesia. The complexity of end-stage liver disease may warrant more intensive care during endoscopic procedures, including anesthesia monitoring.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah R. Lieber
- Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of North Carolina (UNC) Health Care, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Benjamin J. Heller
- Department of Anesthesiology, University of North Carolina (UNC) Health Care, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Christopher W. Howard
- Department of Anesthesiology, University of North Carolina (UNC) Health Care, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Robert S. Sandler
- Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of North Carolina (UNC) Health Care, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | | | - A. Sidney Barritt
- Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of North Carolina (UNC) Health Care, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| |
Collapse
|
|
12
|
Park CH, Park SW, Jung JH, Kim GG, Choi SY, Kim ES, In DH, Kim HD. Clinical outcomes of sedation during emergency endoscopic band ligation for variceal bleeding: Multicenter cohort study. Dig Endosc 2020; 32:894-903. [PMID: 31858649 DOI: 10.1111/den.13610] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/29/2019] [Accepted: 12/15/2019] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Few studies have directly compared the efficacy of sedated- and un-sedated endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) for acute variceal bleeding. We aimed to determine whether sedation during EVL in patients with variceal bleeding is safe and effective. METHODS We analyzed data from patients who underwent EVL for acute variceal bleeding according to sedation in six hospitals of Hallym University Medical Center. The primary endpoint was treatment failure, defined as a failure to control bleeding, death during EVL, or rebleeding within 5 days. Secondary endpoints included the procedure time, adverse events, and 30-day mortality. RESULTS Of 1,300 patients who were included, only 430 (33.1%) received sedation during EVL. Propofol alone was used for sedation in 85% of sedated-EVLs. The mean procedure time in the sedation group was shorter than that of the non-sedation group (12.4 ± 9.5 min versus 13.8 ± 9.4 min, P = 0.010). The proportion of treatment failure did not differ between the groups (7.4% versus 9.1%, P = 0.374). In the multivariable analysis, an AIMS65 score ≥2 and blood transfusion within 72 hours were associated with treatment failure of EVL; however, the use of sedation was not (odds ratio [95% confidence interval (CI)] = 0.96 [0.60-1.51]). Adverse events during EVL and hepatic encephalopathy did not differ between the two groups. Sedation also did not affect the 30-day mortality (hazard ratio [95% CI] = 0.99 [0.66-1.47]). CONCLUSION Sedation reduced the procedure time of EVL. Sedation is safe to use during EVL for variceal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chan Hyuk Park
- Department of Internal Medicine, Hanyang University Guri Hospital, Hanyang University College of Medicine, Gyeonggi-do, Korea
| | - Se Woo Park
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Gyeonggi-do, Korea
| | - Jang Han Jung
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Gyeonggi-do, Korea
| | - Gyeong Guk Kim
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Gyeonggi-do, Korea
| | - Se Young Choi
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Gyeonggi-do, Korea
| | - Eun Sun Kim
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Gyeonggi-do, Korea
| | - Dong Hyun In
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Gyeonggi-do, Korea
| | - Hong Deok Kim
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Gyeonggi-do, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
|
13
|
Guacho JAL, de Moura DTH, Ribeiro IB, da Ponte Neto AM, Singh S, Tucci MGB, Bernardo WM, de Moura EGH. Propofol vs midazolam sedation for elective endoscopy in patients with cirrhosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 12:241-255. [PMID: 32879659 PMCID: PMC7443824 DOI: 10.4253/wjge.v12.i8.241] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2020] [Revised: 06/12/2020] [Accepted: 07/18/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patients with cirrhosis frequently require sedation for elective endoscopic procedures. Several sedation protocols are available, but choosing an appropriate sedative in patients with cirrhosis is challenging. AIM To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare propofol and midazolam for sedation in patients with cirrhosis during elective endoscopic procedures in an attempt to understand the best approach. METHODS This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using the PRISMA guidelines. Electronic searches were performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Central Cochrane, LILACS databases. Only randomized control trials (RCTs) were included. The outcomes studied were procedure time, recovery time, discharge time, and adverse events (bradycardia, hypotension, and hypoxemia). The risk of bias assessment was performed using the Revised Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool for randomized trials (RoB-2). Quality of evidence was evaluated by GRADEpro. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager. RESULTS The search yielded 3,576 records. Out of these, 8 RCTs with a total of 596 patients (302 in the propofol group and 294 in the midazolam group) were included for the final analysis. Procedure time was similar between midazolam and propofol groups (MD: 0.25, 95%CI: -0.64 to 1.13, P = 0.59). Recovery time (MD: -8.19, 95%CI: -10.59 to -5.79, P < 0.00001). and discharge time were significantly less in the propofol group (MD: -12.98, 95%CI: -18.46 to -7.50, P < 0.00001). Adverse events were similar in both groups (RD: 0.02, 95%CI: 0-0.04, P = 0.58). Moreover, no significant difference was found for bradycardia (RD: 0.03, 95%CI: -0.01 to 0.07, P = 0.16), hypotension (RD: 0.03, 95%CI: -0.01 to 0.07, P = 0.17), and hypoxemia (RD: 0.00, 95%CI: -0.04 to 0.04, P = 0.93). Five studies had low risk of bias, two demonstrated some concerns, and one presented high risk. The quality of the evidence was very low for procedure time, recovery time, and adverse events; while low for discharge time. CONCLUSION This systematic review and meta-analysis based on RCTs show that propofol has shorter recovery and patient discharge time as compared to midazolam with a similar rate of adverse events. These results suggest that propofol should be the preferred agent for sedation in patients with cirrhosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- John Alexander Lata Guacho
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo 05403-010, Brazil
| | - Diogo Turiani Hourneaux de Moura
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo 05403-010, Brazil
| | - Igor Braga Ribeiro
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo 05403-010, Brazil
| | - Alberto Machado da Ponte Neto
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo 05403-010, Brazil
| | - Shailendra Singh
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, West Virginia University, Charleston, WV 25304, United States
| | - Marina Gammaro Baldavira Tucci
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo 05403-010, Brazil
| | - Wanderley Marques Bernardo
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo 05403-010, Brazil
| | | |
Collapse
|
|
14
|
Jung JH, Hyun B, Lee J, Koh DH, Kim JH, Park SW. Neurologic Safety of Etomidate-Based Sedation during Upper Endoscopy in Patients with Liver Cirrhosis Compared with Propofol: A Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial. J Clin Med 2020; 9:jcm9082424. [PMID: 32751161 PMCID: PMC7466000 DOI: 10.3390/jcm9082424] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/22/2020] [Revised: 07/17/2020] [Accepted: 07/24/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
(1) Background: Although etomidate-based sedation is an effective and safe protocol in endoscopic procedures, there is a lack of evidence regarding the safety of etomidate in patients with liver cirrhosis (LC). This study aimed to compare the neurologic safety and efficacy of etomidate and propofol for endoscopic sedation in patients with LC. (2) Methods: From December 2017 to December 2019, consecutive cirrhotic patients who underwent sedative endoscopy using either etomidate or propofol were randomly recruited. The primary endpoint was the number connection test (NCT), and the secondary endpoints included factors for the safety of sedatives during endoscopy. (3) Results: 63 patients were enrolled in each of the etomidate and propofol groups. The NCT times were significantly lower in the etomidate group than in the propofol group. Furthermore, severe or very severe degree of encephalopathy was higher in the propofol group but was not significantly different. Pharmacological properties and the overall incidence of respiratory and cardiovascular events did not differ significantly between the groups. (4) Conclusion: Etomidate-based sedation exacerbates neither subclinical nor overt hepatic encephalopathy. It guarantees efficacies similar to those of propofol regarding rapid sedation, fast recovery, and early discharge, with no increased risk of adverse respiratory or cardiovascular events in patients with LC.
Collapse
|
|
15
|
Edelson J, Suarez AL, Zhang J, Rockey DC. Sedation During Endoscopy in Patients with Cirrhosis: Safety and Predictors of Adverse Events. Dig Dis Sci 2020; 65:1258-1265. [PMID: 31605279 DOI: 10.1007/s10620-019-05845-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/08/2018] [Accepted: 09/13/2019] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Sedation during endoscopy in cirrhotic patients is typically via moderate sedation, most commonly using a combination of a benzodiazepine (i.e., midazolam) and narcotic (i.e., fentanyl) or with propofol using monitored anesthesia care (MAC). Here, we examined the safety of moderate sedation and MAC in patients with cirrhosis. METHODS This retrospective cohort study of cirrhotic patients undergoing endoscopy from a large academic medical center between 2010 and 2014 examined extensive clinical data including the following: past history, physical findings, laboratory results, and procedural adverse events. Adverse events were defined a priori and included hypoxia, hypotension, bleeding, and death. RESULTS We identified 2618 patients with cirrhosis who underwent endoscopic procedures; the mean age was 56 years, 36% were female, the mean Child-Pugh score was 9.3 (IQR: 8, 11), and Charlson Comorbidity Index score was 3.2 (IQR: 1, 4); 1157 had MAC; and 1461 had moderate sedation. There was no difference in the frequency of adverse events in MAC and moderate sedation groups, with a total of 15 adverse events (7/1157 MAC and 8/1461 moderate sedation). The most common procedure performed was esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD, n = 1667) and was associated with 10 adverse events. Overall, adverse events included bradycardia (1), hypoxia (7), bleeding (5), laryngospasm (1), and perforation (1). The frequency was similar for EGD, ERCP, and colonoscopy-each at a rate of 0.6%. CONCLUSIONS Adverse events in cirrhotic patients undergoing endoscopy appeared to be similar with moderate sedation or MAC, and the frequency was the same for different types of procedures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jerome Edelson
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, 96 Jonathan Lucas Street, Suite 803, Charleston, SC, 29425, USA
| | - Alejandro L Suarez
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, 96 Jonathan Lucas Street, Suite 803, Charleston, SC, 29425, USA
| | - Jingwen Zhang
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA
| | - Don C Rockey
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, 96 Jonathan Lucas Street, Suite 803, Charleston, SC, 29425, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
|
16
|
Seleem WM, El Hossieny KM, Abd-Elsalam S. Evaluation of Different Sedatives for Colonoscopy. Curr Drug Saf 2020; 15:20-24. [PMID: 31362661 DOI: 10.2174/1574886314666190726154238] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/01/2019] [Revised: 07/12/2019] [Accepted: 07/15/2019] [Indexed: 01/25/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Sedation and analgesia are important elements of endoscopic examinations; sedation for colonoscopy aims to relieve patient discomfort and anxiety, improve the outcome of the examination, diminish the patient's memory of the event and achieve comfortable and technically successful endoscopic procedure. METHODS Our prospective study was carried out on 150 patients who were referred for colonoscopy; they were divided into two groups based on the pre-endoscopic sedation given for them: propofol fentanyl or propofol ketamine. Detailed histories, thorough physical examinations, and routine laboratory investigations were performed for all patients, along with monitoring of their vital signs and oxygen saturation levels (before, during and after colonoscopy), to assess safety, efficacy, recovery times, complications of the sedative drugs, comfort of the patients and endoscopists. RESULTS There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of age, sex and Body Mass Indexes (BMI). With respect to their Mean Arterial Blood Pressures (MAPs) and heart rates, there was high hemodynamic stability in the propofol ketamine group, and both the groups were efficacious, although the propofol fentanyl group had shorter recovery times than the propofol ketamine group (3±1.7 minutes and 4±2.8 minutes, respectively). However, nausea, vomiting and hypoxia were common in the propofol fentanyl group, while hallucinations were common in the propofol ketamine group. In propofol fentanyl group; there was a significant decrease in the heart rate more common in females (with age range 39-58 years) during and after colonoscopy [p value 0.01]. CONCLUSION Sedation with propofol ketamine during colonoscopy was found to be safe and efficacious to achieve hemodynamic stability with fewer complications than propofol fentanyl.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Waseem M Seleem
- Gastroenterology Unit, Internal Medicine Department, Faculty of Medicine, Zagazig University, Zagazig, Egypt
| | - Khadeja M El Hossieny
- Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Department, Faculty of Medicine, Zagazig University, Zagazig, Egypt
| | - Sherief Abd-Elsalam
- Tropical Medicine Department, Faculty of Medicine, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt
| |
Collapse
|
|
17
|
Dong TS, Kalani A, Aby ES, Le L, Luu K, Hauer M, Kamath R, Lindor KD, Tabibian JH. Machine Learning-based Development and Validation of a Scoring System for Screening High-Risk Esophageal Varices. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019; 17:1894-1901.e1. [PMID: 30708109 DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2019.01.025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 48] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/29/2018] [Revised: 01/10/2019] [Accepted: 01/12/2019] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS Many patients with cirrhosis who undergo esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) screening for esophageal varices (EVs) are found to have no or only small EVs. Endoscopic screening for EVs is therefore a potentially deferrable procedure that increases patient risk and healthcare cost. We developed and validated a scoring system, based on readily-available data, to reliably identify patients with EVs that need treatment. METHODS We collected data from 238 patients with cirrhosis undergoing screening EGD from January 2016 through December 2017 at 3 separate hospitals in Los Angeles (training cohort). We abstracted data on patient sex, age, race/ethnicity, platelet counts, and levels of hemoglobin, serum sodium, aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, total bilirubin, international normalized ratio, albumin, urea nitrogen, and creatinine. We also included etiology of cirrhosis, presence of ascites, and presence of hepatic encephalopathy. We used a random forest algorithm to identify factors significantly associated with the presence of EVs and varices needing treatment (VNT) and calculated area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). We called the resulting formula the EVendo score. We tested the accuracy of EVendo in a prospective study of 109 patients undergoing screening EGDs at the same medical centers from January 2018 through December 2018 (validation cohort). RESULTS We developed an algorithm that identified patients with EVs and VNT based on international normalized ratio, level of aspartate aminotransferase, platelet counts, urea nitrogen, hemoglobin, and presence of ascites. The EVendo score identified patients with EVs in the training set with an AUROC of 0.84, patients with EVs in the validation set with and AUROC of 0.82, and EVs in patients with cirrhosis Child-Turcotte-Pugh class A (n = 235) with an AUROC of 0.81. The score identified patients with VNT in the training set with an AUROC of 0.74, VNT in the validation set with and AUROC of 0.75, and VNT in patients with cirrhosis Child-Turcotte-Pugh class A with and AUROC of 0.75. An EVendo score below 3.90 would have spared 30.5% patients from EGDs, missing only 2.8% of VNT. The same cutoff would have spared 40.0% of patients with Child-Turcotte-Pugh class A cirrhosis from EGDs, missing only 1.1% of VNT. CONCLUSIONS We algorithmically developed a formula, called the EVendo score, that can be used to predict EVs and VNT based on readily available data in patients with cirrhosis. This score could help patients at low risk for VNT avoid unnecessary EGDs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tien S Dong
- The Vatche and Tamar Manoukian Division of Digestive Diseases, Department of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California
| | - Amir Kalani
- The Vatche and Tamar Manoukian Division of Digestive Diseases, Department of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California
| | - Elizabeth S Aby
- The Vatche and Tamar Manoukian Division of Digestive Diseases, Department of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California
| | - Long Le
- UCLA-Olive View Internal Medicine Residency Program, Sylmar, California
| | - Kayti Luu
- The Vatche and Tamar Manoukian Division of Digestive Diseases, Department of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California
| | - Meg Hauer
- The Vatche and Tamar Manoukian Division of Digestive Diseases, Department of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California
| | - Rahul Kamath
- The Vatche and Tamar Manoukian Division of Digestive Diseases, Department of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California
| | - Keith D Lindor
- College of Health Solutions, Arizona State University, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - James H Tabibian
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Olive View-UCLA Medical Center, Sylmar, California.
| |
Collapse
|
|
18
|
Jo HB, Lee JK, Jang DK, Kang HW, Kim JH, Lim YJ, Koh MS, Lee JH. Safety and effectiveness of midazolam for cirrhotic patients undergoing endoscopic variceal ligation. TURKISH JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY 2019; 29:448-455. [PMID: 30249560 DOI: 10.5152/tjg.2018.17589] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS Endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) is an established treatment for esophageal variceal bleeding. Midazolam (MDZ) is most commonly used for sedation during endoscopic procedures. However, adverse events (AEs) may occur more frequently in patients with cirrhosis due to altered MDZ metabolism. MATERIALS AND METHODS We retrospectively reviewed the records of 325 patients with cirrhosis who received EVL. RESULTS No significant differences were found in treatment outcome and procedure time among 151 patients in the MDZ group and 169 patients in the non-MDZ group. Desaturation (23.2% vs. 7.7%, p<0.01), bradycardia (22.5% vs. 17.2%, p=0.03), and hepatic encephalopathy (HE) (6.6% vs. 0.6%, p<0.01) were more common in the MDZ group than in the non-MDZ group. Logistic regression analyses revealed that an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score of ≥2 (p<0.01) and the use of MDZ (p<0.01) were associated with the development of overall AEs. An ECOG score of ≥2 (p=0.01), high serum creatinine level (p=0.02), and the use of MDZ (p<0.01) were significant risk factors for HE. CONCLUSION Extreme caution should be taken when sedating patients with cirrhosis receiving EVL due to the AEs associated with the use of MDZ.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hee Bum Jo
- Department of Internal Medicine, Dongguk University Ilsan Hospital, Dongguk University School of Medicine, Goyang, Korea
| | - Jun Kyu Lee
- Department of Internal Medicine, Dongguk University Ilsan Hospital, Dongguk University School of Medicine, Goyang, Korea
| | - Dong Kee Jang
- Department of Internal Medicine, Dongguk University Ilsan Hospital, Dongguk University School of Medicine, Goyang, Korea
| | - Hyoun Woo Kang
- Department of Internal Medicine, Dongguk University Ilsan Hospital, Dongguk University School of Medicine, Goyang, Korea
| | - Jae Hak Kim
- Department of Internal Medicine, Dongguk University Ilsan Hospital, Dongguk University School of Medicine, Goyang, Korea
| | - Yun Jeong Lim
- Department of Internal Medicine, Dongguk University Ilsan Hospital, Dongguk University School of Medicine, Goyang, Korea
| | - Moon-Soo Koh
- Department of Internal Medicine, Dongguk University Ilsan Hospital, Dongguk University School of Medicine, Goyang, Korea
| | - Jin Ho Lee
- Department of Internal Medicine, Dongguk University Ilsan Hospital, Dongguk University School of Medicine, Goyang, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
|
19
|
Wahab EA, Hamed EF, Ahmad HS, Abdel Monem SM, Fathy T. Conscious sedation using propofol versus midazolam in cirrhotic patients during upper GI endoscopy: A comparative study. JGH Open 2019; 3:25-31. [PMID: 30834337 PMCID: PMC6386741 DOI: 10.1002/jgh3.12098] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/27/2018] [Revised: 08/05/2018] [Accepted: 08/31/2018] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
AIM We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of propofol versus midazolam in cirrhotic patients undergoing upper GI endoscopy. METHODS Ninety compensated cirrhotic patients (all met class I-III criteria according to the American Society of Anesthesia) were enrolled in this comparative study. They were classified into three groups according to scheduled pre-endoscopy sedation drugs; the midazolam group, which included 30 patients who received IV weight-dependent midazolam (0.05 mg/kg with additional doses of 1 mg every 2 min when necessary, up to a maximum dose of 0.1 mg/kg or 10 mg); the propofol group, which included 30 patients who received a propofol bolus dose according to age and weight (0.25 mg/kg with additional doses of 20-30 mg every 30-60 s when necessary, up to a maximum dose of 400 mg); and the combined group, which included 30 patients who received half a dose of midazolam and of propofol. RESULTS Prolonged postendoscopy recovery times were reported in the midazolam group, while shorter recovery times were reported in the propofol and combined groups. All patients in the propofol and combined groups gained consciousness shortly postendoscopy; however, only half of the midazolam group's patients gained consciousness after the standard recovery time (10-30 min). Highly significant differences were found among the three groups regarding consciousness level according to the Glasgow coma scale, as well as regarding the occurrence of hypoxia during endoscopy. CONCLUSION Considering safety and efficacy issues, propofol is better than midazolam in gastrointestinal endoscopy, especially in patients with liver cirrhosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Talaat Fathy
- Department of Tropical MedicineZagazig University HospitalsZagazigEgypt
| |
Collapse
|
|
20
|
Edelson JC, Rockey DC. Endoscopic Sedation of the Patient With Cirrhosis. Clin Liver Dis (Hoboken) 2018; 12:165-169. [PMID: 30988936 PMCID: PMC6446456 DOI: 10.1002/cld.762] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/07/2018] [Revised: 09/10/2018] [Accepted: 09/11/2018] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Jerome C. Edelson
- Department of MedicineBrooke Army Medical CenterFort Sam HoustonSan AntonioTX
| | - Don C. Rockey
- Department of MedicineMedical University of South CarolinaCharlestonSC
| |
Collapse
|
|
21
|
Castro Filho EC, Perazzo H, Guimaraes RAP, Machado L, Fernandes FF, Perez RM. Reliability and safety of transnasal compared to conventional endoscopy for detecting oesophageal varices in cirrhotic patients. Liver Int 2018; 38:1418-1426. [PMID: 29323459 DOI: 10.1111/liv.13692] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/07/2017] [Accepted: 01/01/2018] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS Unsedated transnasal endoscopy may be used for detecting oesophageal varices. However, few studies evaluated feasibility and accuracy of this technique. We aimed to evaluate accuracy, interobserver agreement and safety of the transnasal ultrathin compared to conventional endoscopy in patients with cirrhosis. METHODS This cross-sectional study included consecutive patients referred for screening or surveillance of oesophageal varices. Patients underwent unsedated transnasal and sedated conventional endoscopies at the same day, which were recorded in a digital video file and randomly analysed by two double-blinded endoscopists. High-risk varices were defined by the presence of large calibre or red wale marks. Accuracy, interobserver agreement and safety of transnasal were compared to conventional endoscopy. RESULTS One hundred and thirty-three cirrhotic patients (48% male, aged of 60 ± 5, 34% Child-Pugh B/C and 71% of cases for variceal screening) were included in the study. The prevalence of oesophageal varices and high-risk oesophageal varices were 59% (n = 79) and 29% (n = 39) respectively. For the presence of oesophageal varices, transnasal GIE yielded sensitivity of 94% [95% Confidence Interval, CI 88-99], specificity of 89% [81-97] as well as positive and negative predictive value of 93% and 91% respectively. A satisfactory interobserver agreement was observed for the presence of oesophageal varices (κ = 0.89) and high-risk varices (κ = 0.65). No serious adverse events were recorded; transnasal GIE was safe and significantly associated with lower rates of hypoxaemia (P < .0001) and hypotension (P < .0001) compared to conventional endoscopy. CONCLUSIONS Unsedated transnasal endoscopy was safe and had an excellent accuracy and high interobserver agreement for detecting oesophageal varices and for identifying high-risk varices in cirrhotic patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elio C Castro Filho
- Gastroenterology Department, University of the State of Rio de Janeiro (UERJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
| | - Hugo Perazzo
- Laboratory of clinical research on STD/AIDS, Evandro Chagas National Institute of Infectious Disease (INI) - Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (FIOCRUZ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
| | - Raquel A P Guimaraes
- Gastroenterology Department, University of the State of Rio de Janeiro (UERJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
| | - Lilian Machado
- Gastroenterology Department, University of the State of Rio de Janeiro (UERJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
| | - Flavia F Fernandes
- Gastroenterology Department, Bonsucesso Federal Hospital, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
| | - Renata M Perez
- Gastroenterology Department, University of the State of Rio de Janeiro (UERJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.,Internal Medicine Department, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.,D'Or Institute for Research and Education (IDOR), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
| |
Collapse
|
|
22
|
Abstract
Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.
Collapse
|
|
23
|
European Society of Anaesthesiology and European Board of Anaesthesiology guidelines for procedural sedation and analgesia in adults. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2018; 35:6-24. [PMID: 28877145 DOI: 10.1097/eja.0000000000000683] [Citation(s) in RCA: 127] [Impact Index Per Article: 18.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
|
|
24
|
Ahmed SA, Selim A, Hawash N, Tawfik AK, Yousef M, Kobtan A, Badawi R, Elnawasany S, Elkhouly RA, Hanafy AS, Rizk FH, Mansour L, Abd-Elsalam S. Randomized Controlled Study Comparing Use of Propofol Plus Fentanyl versus Midazolam Plus Fentanyl as Sedation in Diagnostic Endoscopy in Patients with Advanced Liver Disease. Int J Hepatol 2017; 2017:8462756. [PMID: 29312786 PMCID: PMC5634622 DOI: 10.1155/2017/8462756] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/08/2017] [Accepted: 08/08/2017] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES We aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of propofol plus fentanyl versus midazolam plus fentanyl as sedative for patients with advanced liver disease presented for gastrointestinal endoscopy. METHODS A total of 100 patients with liver cirrhosis referred for upper endoscopy were enrolled and divided equally in two groups, midazolam plus fentanyl group and propofol plus fentanyl group. All patients were subjected to history taking, estimation of level of sedation, endoscopist rating, and hemodynamic parameters including oxygen saturation, heart rate, mean arterial pressure, incidence of side effect as (bradycardia, hypotension, hypoxia, nausea and vomiting, cough, shivering, or diplopia), time needed for complete recovery, and time needed for discharge. RESULTS There was no statistical significant difference between the studied groups regarding age, sex, weight, Child-Pugh classification score, type and duration of endoscopic intervention, time needed for complete recovery, or time needed for discharge. Complication rates were similar in both groups except for mean arterial blood pressure which was significantly lower in group of patients receiving propofol and fentanyl (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION The use of either propofol or midazolam in combination to fentanyl is effective in sedation of patients with advanced liver diseases presented for upper GIT endoscope. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03063866.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Amal Selim
- Internal Medicine Department, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt
| | - Nehad Hawash
- Tropical Medicine Department, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt
| | | | - Mohamed Yousef
- Tropical Medicine Department, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt
| | | | - Rehab Badawi
- Tropical Medicine Department, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt
| | | | | | | | - Fatma H. Rizk
- Department of Physiology, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt
| | - Loai Mansour
- Tropical Medicine Department, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt
| | | |
Collapse
|
|
25
|
Huynh DK, Toscano L, Phan VA, Ow TW, Schoeman M, Nguyen NQ. Ultrathin disposable gastroscope for screening and surveillance of gastroesophageal varices in patients with liver cirrhosis: a prospective comparative study. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 85:1212-1217. [PMID: 27894929 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2016.11.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/19/2016] [Accepted: 11/16/2016] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS This study aims to evaluate the role of unsedated, ultrathin disposable gastroscopy (TDG) against conventional gastroscopy (CG) in the screening and surveillance of gastroesophageal varices (GEVs) in patients with liver cirrhosis. METHOD Forty-eight patients (56.4 ± 1.3 years; 38 male, 10 female) with liver cirrhosis referred for screening (n = 12) or surveillance (n = 36) of GEVs were prospectively enrolled. Unsedated gastroscopy was initially performed with TDG, followed by CG with conscious sedation. The 2 gastroscopies were performed by different endoscopists blinded to the results of the previous examination. Video recordings of both gastroscopies were validated by an independent investigator in a random, blinded fashion. Endpoints were accuracy and interobserver agreement of detecting GEVs, safety, and potential cost saving. RESULTS CG identified GEVs in 26 (54%) patients, 10 of whom (21%) had high-risk esophageal varices (HREV). Compared with CG, TDG had an accuracy of 92% for the detection of all GEVs, which increased to 100% for high-risk GEVs. The interobserver agreement for detecting all GEVs on TDG was 88% (κ = 0.74). This increased to 94% (κ = 0.82) for high-risk GEVs. There were no serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS Unsedated TDG is safe and has high diagnostic accuracy and interobserver reliability for the detection of GEVs. The use of clinic-based TDG would allow immediate determination of a follow-up plan, making it attractive for variceal screening and surveillance programs. (Clinical trial (ANZCTR) registration number: ACTRN12616001103459.).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dep K Huynh
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia; Discipline of Medicine, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Leanne Toscano
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Vinh-An Phan
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia; Discipline of Medicine, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Tsai-Wing Ow
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Mark Schoeman
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Nam Q Nguyen
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia; Discipline of Medicine, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
|
26
|
The Current Status of Nurse-Administered Propofol Sedation in Endoscopy: An Evidence-Based Practice Nurse Fellowship Project. Gastroenterol Nurs 2017; 38:297-304. [PMID: 25756320 DOI: 10.1097/sga.0000000000000099] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
The Society for Gastroenterology Nurses and Associates (SGNA) launched a nurse fellowship program in 2011 to promote evidence-based practice. Each accepted applicant was challenged to select a relevant topic, explore the current research, and translate this information to daily practice. The author, an SGNA Fellow, selected the topic, nurse-administered propofol sedation, that has been a prevailing subject in endoscopy for many years. A significant amount of literature has been written on the drug's safety and efficacy. This article explores a brief history of the practice and the future of this controversial drug for procedural sedation. A review of current literature is explored with an emphasis on the past 5 years as well as a discussion on regulatory limitations that have been placed on the practice of non-anesthesiologist-administered propofol sedation.
Collapse
|
|
27
|
Gouda B, Gouda G, Borle A, Singh A, Sinha A, Singh PM. Safety of non-anesthesia provider administered propofol sedation in non-advanced gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures: A meta-analysis. Saudi J Gastroenterol 2017; 23:133-143. [PMID: 28611336 PMCID: PMC5470372 DOI: 10.4103/sjg.sjg_501_16] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS The aim of the study was to evaluate the safety of non-anesthesia provider (NAPP) administered propofol sedation in patients undergoing non-advanced gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopic procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane central register of controlled trials, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched for prospective observational trials involving non-advanced endoscopic procedures. From a total of 608 publications, 25 [colonoscopy (9), upper GI endoscopy (5), and combined procedures (11)] were identified to meet inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Data was analyzed for hypoxia rates, airway intervention rates, and airway complication rates. RESULTS A total of 137,087 patients were involved. A total of 2931 hypoxia episodes (defined as an oxygen saturation below 90%) were reported with a pooled hypoxia rate of 0.014 (95% CI being 0.008-0.023). Similarly, pooled airway intervention rates and pooled airway complication rates were 0.002 (95% CI being 0.006-0.001) and 0.001 (95% CI being 0.000-0.001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS The rates of adverse events in patients undergoing non-advanced GI endoscopic procedures with NAPP sedation are extremely small. Similar data for anesthesia providers is not available. It is prudent for anesthesia providers to demonstrate their superiority in prospective randomized controlled trials, if they like to retain exclusive ownership over propofol sedation in patients undergoing GI endoscopy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Basavana Gouda
- Department of Anesthesia, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA,Address for correspondence: Dr. Basavana Gouda, Department of Anesthesia, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. E-mail:
| | - Gowri Gouda
- Department of Anesthesia, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Anuradha Borle
- Department of Anesthesia, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
| | - Akash Singh
- Department of Anesthesia, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Ashish Sinha
- Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Lewis Katz School of Medicine, Medicine Education and Research, Philadelphia, PA 19140, USA
| | - Preet M. Singh
- Department of Anesthesia, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
| |
Collapse
|
|
28
|
Abstract
As advances in liver disease continue, including the increasing use of liver transplantation, the endoscopist needs to be familiar with the standards of care and potential complications in the management of the cirrhotic population. This includes both elective endoscopic procedures, such as screening colonoscopies and variceal banding, as well as the acutely bleeding cirrhotic patient. Peri-procedural management and standards of care for acute gastrointestinal hemorrhaging of cirrhotic patients will be emphasized. This article will focus on the plethora of data available to highlight the benefits of endoscopic intervention in the care of patients with liver disease and outline the areas of future emphasis.
Collapse
|
|
29
|
Girotra M, Soota K, Klair JS, Dang SM, Aduli F. Endoscopic management of post-liver transplant biliary complications. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 7:446-459. [PMID: 25992185 PMCID: PMC4436914 DOI: 10.4253/wjge.v7.i5.446] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/30/2014] [Revised: 11/15/2014] [Accepted: 02/04/2015] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Biliary complications are being increasingly encountered in post liver transplant patients because of increased volume of transplants and longer survival of these recipients. Overall management of these complications may be challenging, but with advances in endoscopic techniques, majority of such patients are being dealt with by endoscopists rather than the surgeons. Our review article discusses the recent advances in endoscopic tools and techniques that have proved endoscopic retrograde cholangiography with various interventions, like sphincterotomy, bile duct dilatation, and stent placement, to be the mainstay for management of most of these complications. We also discuss the management dilemmas in patients with surgically altered anatomy, where accessing the bile duct is challenging, and the recent strides towards making this prospect a reality.
Collapse
|
|
30
|
Tsai HC, Lin YC, Ko CL, Lou HY, Chen TL, Tam KW, Chen CY. Propofol versus midazolam for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in cirrhotic patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLoS One 2015; 10:e0117585. [PMID: 25646815 PMCID: PMC4315567 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0117585] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/06/2014] [Accepted: 12/28/2014] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Sedation during gastrointestinal endoscopy is often achieved using propofol or midazolam in general population. However, impaired protein synthesis, altered drug metabolism, and compromised hepatic blood flow in patients with liver cirrhosis might affect the pharmacokinetics of sedatives, placing cirrhotic patients undergoing endoscopy at a greater risk of adverse events. The objective of this study was to assess comparative efficacies and safety of propofol and midazolam in cirrhotic patients undergoing endoscopy. METHODS Randomized, controlled trials comparing propofol with midazolam in cirrhotic patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy were selected. We performed the meta-analysis, using a random-effect model, the Review Manager, Version 5.2, statistical software package (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK) according to the PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS Five studies between 2003 and 2012, including 433 patients, were included. Propofol provided a shorter time to sedation (weight mean difference: -2.76 min, 95% confidence interval: -3.00 to -2.51) and a shorter recovery time (weight mean difference -6.17 min, 95% confidence interval: -6.81 to -5.54) than midazolam did. No intergroup difference in the incidence of hypotension, bradycardia, or hypoxemia was observed. Midazolam was associated with the deterioration of psychometric scores for a longer period than propofol. CONCLUSION This meta-analysis suggests that Propofol sedation for endoscopy provides more rapid sedation and recovery than midazolam does. The risk of sedation-related side effects for propofol does not differ significantly from that of midazolam. The efficacy of propofol in cirrhotic patients undergoing endoscopy is superior to those of midazolam.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hsiao-Chien Tsai
- Department of Anesthesiology, Taipei Medical University Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Yu-Cih Lin
- Department of Anesthesiology, Taipei Medical University Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
- Graduate Institute of Nursing, College of Nursing, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Ching-Lung Ko
- Department of Anesthesiology, Taipei Medical University Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Horng-Yuan Lou
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Ta-Liang Chen
- Department of Anesthesiology, Taipei Medical University Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
- Department of Anesthesiology, School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Ka-Wai Tam
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Taipei Medical University—Shuang Ho Hospital, New Taipei City, Taiwan
- Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
- Center for Evidence-based Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
- Center for Evidence-based Health Care, Taipei Medical University-Shuang Ho Hospital, New Taipei City, Taiwan
| | - Chien-Yu Chen
- Department of Anesthesiology, Taipei Medical University Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
- Graduate Institute of Humanities in Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
| |
Collapse
|
|
31
|
Horiuchi A, Graham DY. Special topics in procedural sedation: clinical challenges and psychomotor recovery. Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 80:404-9. [PMID: 24981806 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.04.063] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/07/2013] [Accepted: 04/29/2014] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Akira Horiuchi
- Digestive Disease Center, Showa Inan General Hospital, Komagane, Japan
| | - David Y Graham
- Deparment of Internal Medicine, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center and Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
32
|
Yang Y, Wang YJ, Liang H, Deng SK, Zhang XF. Clinical effects of dezocine plus propofol vs fentanyl plus propofol in painless colonoscopy. Shijie Huaren Xiaohua Zazhi 2014; 22:3340-3343. [DOI: 10.11569/wcjd.v22.i22.3340] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
AIM: To compare the clinical effects of dezocine plus propofol vs fentanyl plus propofol in painless colonoscopy.
METHODS: One hundred and sixty-two patients who would undergo painless colonoscopy were divided into either a dezocine + propofol group (n = 83) or a fentanyl + propofol group (n = 79). They were anesthetized with dezocine plus propofol and fentanyl plus propofol, respectively. The heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), respiratory rate (RR), oxygen saturation (SPO2), the total dosage of propofol, wake-up time, observation time, visual analogue scale (VAS) and adverse reactions were compared between the two groups.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences in HR, MAP, RR or SPO2 between the two groups (P > 0.05). The wake-up time and observation time in the dezocine + propofol group were significantly shorter than those in the fentanyl + propofol group (38.53 s ± 21.35 s vs 53.56 s ± 24.84 s, 16.08 min ± 9.22 min vs 22.55 min ± 12.60 min, P < 0.05). The rates of apnea, postoperative nausea, vomiting and dizziness in the dezocine + propofol group were significantly lower than those in the fentanyl + propofol group (2.41% vs 15.19%, 2.41% vs 17.72%, 7.23% vs 15.19%, P < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: Dezocine plus propofol could achieve satisfactory anesthesia effects in painless colonoscopy and has less adverse reactions and high safety, representing a preferred way for anesthesia in painless colonoscopy.
Collapse
|
|
33
|
Miyoshi H, Shimatani M, Kato K, Sumimoto K, Kurishima A, Kusuda T, Fukata N, Ikeura T, Takaoka M, Okazaki K. Transcutaneous monitoring of partial pressure of carbon dioxide during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography using a double-balloon endoscope with carbon dioxide insufflation under conscious sedation. Dig Endosc 2014; 26:436-41. [PMID: 23941285 DOI: 10.1111/den.12155] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2013] [Accepted: 07/05/2013] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM A double-balloon (DB) endoscope can be selectively inserted into the afferent loop to carry out endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in patients with surgically altered anatomy, allowing various types of endoscopic treatments for pancreaticobiliary diseases to be successfully carried out. In order to make such a lengthy procedure more comfortable and safe, sedatives and carbon dioxide (CO2 ) insufflation are widely used for gastrointestinal endoscopy. However, these techniques can increase the risk of CO2 retention. Recently, a new sensor for transcutaneous measurement of partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PCO2 ) has been introduced. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the changes in transcutaneous PCO2 (PtcCO2 ) during DB-ERCP with CO2 insufflation under conscious sedation and assess any complications related to sedation and CO2 insufflation. METHODS A total of 312 patients underwent DB-ERCP with CO2 insufflation at our hospital between March 2009 and December 2012. The patients were moderately sedated using midazolam with or without pentazocine. PtcCO2 was measured by a non-invasive sensor throughout DB-ERCP in all patients. RESULTS The mean peak PtcCO2 during the procedure was significantly higher than the mean PtcCO2 value before and after DB-ERCP. Body mass index, procedure time and dose of pentazocine were significantly higher in the CO2 retention group (peak PtcCO2 ≥ 50 mmHg). CO2 narcosis was observed in one case. CONCLUSIONS DB-ERCP with CO2 insufflation under conscious sedation might have the potential to increase the risk of CO2 retention. Hence, non-invasive and continuous PtcCO2 measurement is useful for early detection of hypercapnia.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hideaki Miyoshi
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Kansai Medical University, Osaka, Japan
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
34
|
Mao W, Wei XQ, Tao J, Zhen FP, Wen ZF, Wu B. The safety of combined sedation with propofol plus fentanyl for endoscopy screening and endoscopic variceal ligation in cirrhotic patients. J Dig Dis 2014; 15:124-30. [PMID: 24224839 DOI: 10.1111/1751-2980.12115] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE We aimed to investigate the safety of combined sedation with propofol plus fentanyl in patients with liver cirrhosis during screening esophagogastroduodenoscopy (SEGD) and a secondary prophylaxis for esophageal varices, endoscopic gastrointestinal ligation (EVL). METHODS A total of 309 patients with liver cirrhosis were enrolled and divided into the sedated SEGD group (n = 83), the sedated EVL group (n = 137) and the conscious EVL group (n = 89), respectively, and 100 participants with no liver diseases who underwent endoscopy for gastritis were regarded as the sedated control group. Patients in the sedated groups were administrated with propofol plus fentanyl during the endoscopic procedures and their minimal hepatic encephalopathy and sedation-related complications, including aspiration, hypoxia, hypotension and bradycardia, were evaluated and compared. The assessments of patient satisfaction and patient cooperation in the sedated and the conscious EVL groups were conducted. RESULTS The incidences of complications during the endoscopic procedures were not significantly different among the sedated groups (20.5% in the sedated SEGD group, 22.6% in the sedated EVL group and 19.0% in the sedated control group). No minimal hepatic encephalopathy was induced in the sedated groups. More patients in the sedated EVL group were satisfactory with the procedure compared with the conscious EVL group, as evaluated by both endoscopists and the cirrhotic patients. CONCLUSIONS A combined sedation with propofol plus fentanyl is safe for EVL as well as for SEGD in cirrhotic patients. Sedation might make it easier for endoscopists to perform procedures and might be more acceptable for cirrhotic patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wei Mao
- Department of Gastroenterology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
35
|
Hasanin AS, Sira AM. Dexmedetomidine versus propofol for sedation during gastrointestinal endoscopy in pediatric patients. EGYPTIAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA 2014; 30:21-26. [DOI: 10.1016/j.egja.2013.09.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/29/2013] [Revised: 09/18/2013] [Accepted: 09/26/2013] [Indexed: 01/18/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Ashraf S. Hasanin
- Department of Anesthesia & ICU, National Liver Institute, Menoufia University, Egypt
| | - Ahmad M. Sira
- Department of Pediatric Hepatology, National Liver Institute, Menoufia University, Egypt
| |
Collapse
|
|
36
|
Suh SJ, Yim HJ, Yoon EL, Lee BJ, Hyun JJ, Jung SW, Koo JS, Kim JH, Kim KJ, Choung RS, Seo YS, Yeon JE, Um SH, Byun KS, Lee SW, Choi JH, Ryu HS. Is propofol safe when administered to cirrhotic patients during sedative endoscopy? Korean J Intern Med 2014; 29:57-65. [PMID: 24574834 PMCID: PMC3932396 DOI: 10.3904/kjim.2014.29.1.57] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/05/2013] [Revised: 06/18/2013] [Accepted: 07/18/2013] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS In patients with liver cirrhosis, drugs acting on the central nervous system can lead to hepatic encephalopathy and the effects may be prolonged. Recently, misuse of propofol has been reported and the associated risk of death have become an issue. Propofol is commonly used during sedative endoscopy; therefore, its safety in high-risk groups must be further investigated. We performed a pilot study of the safety and efficacy of propofol during endoscopy in Korean patients with cirrhosis. METHODS Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy was performed under sedation with propofol along with careful monitoring in 20 patients with liver cirrhosis and 20 control subjects. The presence or development of hepatic encephalopathy was assessed using the number connection test and neurologic examination. RESULTS Neither respiratory depression nor clinically significant hypotension were observed. Immediate postanesthetic recovery at 5 and 10 minutes after the procedure was delayed in the cirrhotic patients compared with the control group; however, at 30 minutes, the postanesthetic recovery was similar in both groups. Baseline psychomotor performance was more impaired in cirrhotic patients, but propofol was not associated with deteriorated psychomotor function even in cirrhotic patients with a minimal hepatic encephalopathy. CONCLUSIONS Sedation with propofol was well tolerated in cirrhotic patients. No newly developed hepatic encephalopathy was observed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sang Jun Suh
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Ansan, Korea
| | - Hyung Joon Yim
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Ansan, Korea
| | - Eileen L. Yoon
- Division of Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Guro Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Beom Jae Lee
- Division of Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Guro Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jong Jin Hyun
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Ansan, Korea
| | - Sung Woo Jung
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Ansan, Korea
| | - Ja Seol Koo
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Ansan, Korea
| | - Ji Hoon Kim
- Division of Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Guro Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Kyung Jin Kim
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Ansan, Korea
| | - Rok Son Choung
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Ansan, Korea
| | - Yeon Seok Seo
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Anam Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jong Eun Yeon
- Division of Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Guro Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Soon Ho Um
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Anam Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Kwan Soo Byun
- Division of Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Guro Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Sang Woo Lee
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Ansan, Korea
| | - Jai Hyun Choi
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Ansan, Korea
| | - Ho Sang Ryu
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Anam Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
|
37
|
Flockton E, Leuwer M. General anesthetics and therapeutic gases. SIDE EFFECTS OF DRUGS ANNUAL 2014:217-232. [DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-444-62635-6.00010-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/02/2025]
|
|
38
|
Clinical practice guidelines for evidence-based management of sedoanalgesia in critically ill adult patients. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2013. [DOI: 10.1016/j.medine.2013.04.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/18/2023]
|
|
39
|
Celis-Rodríguez E, Birchenall C, de la Cal M, Castorena Arellano G, Hernández A, Ceraso D, Díaz Cortés J, Dueñas Castell C, Jimenez E, Meza J, Muñoz Martínez T, Sosa García J, Pacheco Tovar C, Pálizas F, Pardo Oviedo J, Pinilla DI, Raffán-Sanabria F, Raimondi N, Righy Shinotsuka C, Suárez M, Ugarte S, Rubiano S. Guía de práctica clínica basada en la evidencia para el manejo de la sedoanalgesia en el paciente adulto críticamente enfermo. Med Intensiva 2013; 37:519-74. [DOI: 10.1016/j.medin.2013.04.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 73] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2013] [Accepted: 04/16/2013] [Indexed: 01/18/2023]
|
|
40
|
Xu CX, Chen X, Jia Y, Xiao DH, Zou HF, Guo Q, Wang F, Wang XY, Shen SR, Tong LL, Cao K, Liu XM. Stepwise sedation for elderly patients with mild/moderate COPD during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. World J Gastroenterol 2013; 19:4791-8. [PMID: 23922479 PMCID: PMC3732854 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i29.4791] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/28/2013] [Revised: 07/02/2013] [Accepted: 07/09/2013] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
AIM To investigate stepwise sedation for elderly patients with mild/moderate chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) during upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy. METHODS Eighty-six elderly patients with mild/moderate COPD and 82 elderly patients without COPD scheduled for upper GI endoscopy were randomly assigned to receive one of the following two sedation methods: stepwise sedation involving three-stage administration of propofol combined with midazolam [COPD with stepwise sedation (group Cs), and non-COPD with stepwise sedation (group Ns)] or continuous sedation involving continuous administration of propofol combined with midazolam [COPD with continuous sedation (group Cc), and non-COPD with continuous sedation (group Nc)]. Saturation of peripheral oxygen (SpO2), blood pressure, and pulse rate were monitored, and patient discomfort, adverse events, drugs dosage, and recovery time were recorded. RESULTS All endoscopies were completed successfully. The occurrences of hypoxemia in groups Cs, Cc, Ns, and Nc were 4 (9.3%), 12 (27.9%), 3 (7.3%), and 5 (12.2%), respectively. The occurrence of hypoxemia in group Cs was significantly lower than that in group Cc (P < 0.05). The average decreases in value of SpO2, systolic blood pressure, and diastolic blood pressure in group Cs were significantly lower than those in group Cc. Additionally, propofol dosage and overall rate of adverse events in group Cs were lower than those in group Cc. Finally, the recovery time in group Cs was significantly shorter than that in group Cc, and that in group Ns was significantly shorter than that in group Nc (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION The stepwise sedation method is effective and safer than the continuous sedation method for elderly patients with mild/moderate COPD during upper GI endoscopy.
Collapse
|
|
41
|
Santos MELD, Maluf-Filho F, Chaves DM, Matuguma SE, Ide E, Luz GDO, Souza TFD, Pessorrusso FCS, Moura EGHD, Sakai P. Deep sedation during gastrointestinal endoscopy: propofol-fentanyl and midazolam-fentanyl regimens. World J Gastroenterol 2013; 19:3439-46. [PMID: 23801836 PMCID: PMC3683682 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i22.3439] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/03/2012] [Revised: 12/22/2012] [Accepted: 01/11/2013] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
AIM To compare deep sedation with propofol-fentanyl and midazolam-fentanyl regimens during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. METHODS After obtaining approval of the research ethics committee and informed consent, 200 patients were evaluated and referred for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Patients were randomized to receive propofol-fentanyl or midazolam-fentanyl (n = 100/group). We assessed the level of sedation using the observer's assessment of alertness/sedation (OAA/S) score and bispectral index (BIS). We evaluated patient and physician satisfaction, as well as the recovery time and complication rates. The statistical analysis was performed using SPSS statistical software and included the Mann-Whitney test, χ² test, measurement of analysis of variance, and the κ statistic. RESULTS The times to induction of sedation, recovery, and discharge were shorter in the propofol-fentanyl group than the midazolam-fentanyl group. According to the OAA/S score, deep sedation events occurred in 25% of the propofol-fentanyl group and 11% of the midazolam-fentanyl group (P = 0.014). Additionally, deep sedation events occurred in 19% of the propofol-fentanyl group and 7% of the midazolam-fentanyl group according to the BIS scale (P = 0.039). There was good concordance between the OAA/S score and BIS for both groups (κ = 0.71 and κ = 0.63, respectively). Oxygen supplementation was required in 42% of the propofol-fentanyl group and 26% of the midazolam-fentanyl group (P = 0.025). The mean time to recovery was 28.82 and 44.13 min in the propofol-fentanyl and midazolam-fentanyl groups, respectively (P < 0.001). There were no severe complications in either group. Although patients were equally satisfied with both drug combinations, physicians were more satisfied with the propofol-fentanyl combination. CONCLUSION Deep sedation occurred with propofol-fentanyl and midazolam-fentanyl, but was more frequent in the former. Recovery was faster in the propofol-fentanyl group.
Collapse
|
|
42
|
Triantafillidis JK, Merikas E, Nikolakis D, Papalois AE. Sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy: current issues. World J Gastroenterol 2013; 19:463-481. [PMID: 23382625 PMCID: PMC3558570 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i4.463] [Citation(s) in RCA: 167] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/16/2012] [Revised: 11/11/2012] [Accepted: 12/25/2012] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopy can successfully be performed by applying moderate (conscious) sedation. Moderate sedation, using midazolam and an opioid, is the standard method of sedation, although propofol is increasingly being used in many countries because the satisfaction of endoscopists with propofol sedation is greater compared with their satisfaction with conventional sedation. Moreover, the use of propofol is currently preferred for the endoscopic sedation of patients with advanced liver disease due to its short biologic half-life and, consequently, its low risk of inducing hepatic encephalopathy. In the future, propofol could become the preferred sedation agent, especially for routine colonoscopy. Midazolam is the benzodiazepine of choice because of its shorter duration of action and better pharmacokinetic profile compared with diazepam. Among opioids, pethidine and fentanyl are the most popular. A number of other substances have been tested in several clinical trials with promising results. Among them, newer opioids, such as remifentanil, enable a faster recovery. The controversy regarding the administration of sedation by an endoscopist or an experienced nurse, as well as the optimal staffing of endoscopy units, continues to be a matter of discussion. Safe sedation in special clinical circumstances, such as in the cases of obese, pregnant, and elderly individuals, as well as patients with chronic lung, renal or liver disease, requires modification of the dose of the drugs used for sedation. In the great majority of patients, sedation under the supervision of a properly trained endoscopist remains the standard practice worldwide. In this review, an overview of the current knowledge concerning sedation during digestive endoscopy will be provided based on the data in the current literature.
Collapse
|
|
43
|
Agrawal A, Sharma BC, Sharma P, Uppal R, Sarin SK. Randomized controlled trial for endoscopy with propofol versus midazolam on psychometric tests and critical flicker frequency in people with cirrhosis. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2012; 27:1726-32. [PMID: 22861074 DOI: 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2012.07231.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM People with cirrhosis are at increased risk of development of complications related to sedation. The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of sedation for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (UGIE) with propofol and midazolam on psychometric tests and critical flicker frequency (CFF) in people with cirrhosis. METHODS A total of 127 people with cirrhosis were randomized into three groups: propofol group (n = 40), midazolam group (n = 42) and no sedation (n = 45). All patients underwent CFF test and combination of psychometry (number connection test-A and B [NCT-A,B]; digit symbol test [DST], line tracing test [LTT] and serial dotting test [SDT]) at baseline and at 2 h post-endoscopy. CFF was done at 30 min and repeated every 30 min for 2 h. RESULTS In the propofol group there was no deterioration in psychometry (NCT-A [55.6 ± 18.7 vs 56.4 ± 19.0 s], NCT-B [98.2 ± 35.1 vs 97.8 ± 34.6 s], DST [26.7 ± 5.7 vs 26.3 ± 5.3], LTT [112.9 ± 35.7 vs 113.7 ± 36.6 s], SDT [94.6 ± 34.1 vs 95.2 ± 34.5 s]). Significant deterioration from baseline (39.8 ± 2.9 Hz) was seen in CFF at 30 min (38.8 ± 2.3 Hz) and 1 h (39.2 ± 2.4 Hz), P = 0.01 but no difference thereafter. In the midazolam group, significant deterioration was observed on psychometry (NCT-A [56.0 ± 18.5 vs 60.4 ± 19.8 s], NCT-B [99.9 ± 29.1 vs 105.9.6 ± 30.3 s], DST [26.1 ± 4.7 vs 25.2 ± 4.3], LTT [129.1 ± 34.5 vs 132.9 ± 35.4 s], SDT [95.6 ± 34.2]). No deterioration was observed in psychometry and CFF in people with cirrhosis without sedation. CONCLUSIONS Propofol sedation for UGIE was associated with earlier recovery compared with midazolam, which causes deterioration of psychometric tests and CFF for a longer time in comparison with propofol.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amit Agrawal
- Department of Gastroenterology, GB Pant Hospital, New Delhi, India
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
44
|
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW An increasing number of patients requiring surgery are presenting with chronic or end stage liver disease. The management of these patients demands anesthesiologists with in-depth knowledge of the consequences of hepatic dysfunction, the effects on other organs, the risk of surgery, and the impact of anesthesia. RECENT FINDINGS Chronic or end stage liver disease is associated with an increased risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality. It is essential to preoperatively assess possible hepatic encephalopathy, pleural effusions, hepatopulmonary syndrome, hepatopulmonary hypertension, hepatorenal syndrome, cirrhotic cardiomyopathy, and coagulation disorders. The application of two scoring systems, that is, Child-Turcotte-Pugh and model for end stage liver disease, helps to estimate the risk of surgery. The use of propofol is superior to benzodiazepines as intravenous narcotics. Although enflurane and halothane are discouraged for maintenance of anesthesia, all modern volatile anesthetics appear comparable with respect to outcome. Fentanyl, sufentanil, and remifentanil as opioids and cis-atracurium for relaxation may be the best choices in liver insufficency. Regional anesthesia is valuable for postoperative pain management. SUMMARY Current studies have employed different anesthetic approaches in the preoperative and intraoperative management in order to improve outcomes of patients with liver disease.
Collapse
|
|
45
|
Angsuwatcharakon P, Rerknimitr R, Ridtitid W, Kongkam P, Poonyathawon S, Ponauthai Y, Sumdin S, Kullavanijaya P. Cocktail sedation containing propofol versus conventional sedation for ERCP: a prospective, randomized controlled study. BMC Anesthesiol 2012; 12:20. [PMID: 22873637 PMCID: PMC3434082 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2253-12-20] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/26/2011] [Accepted: 08/03/2012] [Indexed: 03/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Background ERCP practically requires moderate to deep sedation controlled by a combination of benzodiazepine and opiod. Propofol as a sole agent may cause oversedation. A combination (cocktail) of infused propofol, meperidine, and midazolam can reduce the dosage of propofol and we hypothesized that it might decrease the risk of oversedation. We prospectively compare the efficacy, recovery time, patient satisfactory, and side effects between cocktail and conventional sedations in patients undergoing ERCP. Methods ERCP patients were randomized into 2 groups; the cocktail group (n = 103) and the controls (n = 102). For induction, a combination of 25 mg of meperidine and 2.5 mg of midazolam were administered in both groups. In the cocktail group, a bolus dose of propofol 1 mg/kg was administered and continuously infused. In the controls, 25 mg of meperidine or 2.5 mg/kg of midazolam were titrated to maintain the level of sedation. Results In the cocktail group, the average administration rate of propofol was 6.2 mg/kg/hr. In the control group; average weight base dosage of meperidine and midazolam were 1.03 mg/kg and 0.12 mg/kg, respectively. Recovery times and patients’ satisfaction scores in the cocktail and control groups were 9.67 minutes and 12.89 minutes (P = 0.045), 93.1and 87.6 (P <0.001), respectively. Desaturation rates in the cocktail and conventional groups were 58.3% and 31.4% (P <0.001), respectively. All desaturations were corrected with temporary oxygen supplementation without the need for scope removal. Conclusions Cocktail sedation containing propofol provides faster recovery time and better patients’ satisfaction for patients undergoing ERCP. However, mild degree of desaturation may still develop. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01540084
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Phonthep Angsuwatcharakon
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, 10310, Thailand.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
46
|
Chen PH, Wu TC, Chiu CY. Pediatric gastrointestinal endoscopic sedation: a 2010 nationwide survey in Taiwan. Pediatr Neonatol 2012; 53:188-92. [PMID: 22770108 DOI: 10.1016/j.pedneo.2012.04.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/09/2011] [Revised: 09/08/2011] [Accepted: 09/22/2011] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND There is insufficient data on pediatric endoscopic sedation practices worldwide. This study aimed to assess nationwide data on the current pediatric endoscopic sedation practices in Taiwan. METHODS Members of the Taiwan Society of Pediatric Gastroenterology Hepatology and Nutrition in 2010 were asked to participate in an 18-item questionnaire survey regarding current sedation practices for diagnostic esophagogastric-duodenoscopy (EGD). RESULTS A total of 22 of 32 questionnaires were returned for a response rate of 68.8%. A majority (86.4%) of the respondents practiced in a medical center hospital setting, and 72.7% preferred sedation during EGD. The proportions of respondents applying sedative methods in cases aged < 1, 1∼12, and > 12 years old were 85.7%, 100%, and 23.7% respectively. Ketamine (27.8%) and midazolam with meperidine (22.2%) were the most commonly applied sedation agents, while the percentage of respondents using regimens that included propofol was 11.2%. Comparing complications between EGD with and without sedation, only hypoxia (Wilcoxon statistics=347.00, p=0.003) was significantly more common in sedated patients. The endoscopists' satisfaction rating was greater among respondents using sedation compared to those without (visual analog scale 9 vs. 7; p=0.0001). CONCLUSION A majority of pediatric EGD in Taiwan was performed under sedation and applied more often to younger children. Endoscopists were more satisfied during EGD when practicing sedation. This survey should help formulate updated practice guidelines and policies regarding endoscopic sedation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Po-Hon Chen
- Children's Medical Center, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
47
|
Fagà E, De Cento M, Giordanino C, Barletti C, Bruno M, Carucci P, De Angelis C, Venon WD, Musso A, Reggio D, Fagoonee S, Pellicano R, Ceretto S, Ciccone G, Rizzetto M, Saracco G. Safety of propofol in cirrhotic patients undergoing colonoscopy and endoscopic retrograde cholangiography: results of a prospective controlled study. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2012; 24:70-76. [PMID: 21941187 DOI: 10.1097/meg.0b013e32834c16ab] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Safety of propofol sedation in patients with liver cirrhosis undergoing colonoscopy or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) remains to be studied. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the use of propofol is safe for endoscopic procedures more complex than gastroscopy in patients with liver cirrhosis in a prospective controlled study. METHODS Two hundred and fourteen consecutive patients, with or without cirrhosis, who underwent colonoscopy or ERCP with propofol sedation were recruited between January and June 2009. Administration of sedation was performed by anesthesiologists and outcome measures were recorded. Main outcomes were complication rates and recovery times. RESULTS Sixty-one (28.5%) cirrhotic patients and 153 (71.5%) noncirrhotic patients were included. The incidence of sedation-related complications did not significantly differ between the two populations (11.5 vs. 17.0%, respectively, P=0.31). The mean (±SD) dose of propofol administered (213±86 vs. 239±100 mg, P=0.07), the mean time to achieve adequate sedation (3.3±1.1 vs. 3.0±1.2 min, P=0.21), the mean total duration of the endoscopic procedure (24.5±10.6 vs. 27.4±11.8 min, P=0.08), the mean time to reach Observer's Assessment of Alertness and Sedation Scale 5 (17.2±4.4 vs. 18.4±5.6 min, P=0.15), the mean time from completion of the procedure to release (9.0±2.5 vs. 9.1±3.2 min, P=0.86), and the mean time to full recovery (42.2±7.3 vs. 42.3±7.8 min, P=0.88) were very similar between the two groups. The limitation of this study was lack of randomization, and a control group of cirrhotic patients using standard sedation with benzodiazepines and opioids. CONCLUSION Propofol deep sedation administered by an anesthesiologist with appropriate monitorings seems to be a safe procedure during colonoscopy or ERCP in cirrhotic patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emanuela Fagà
- Department of Internal Medicine, Savigliano Hospital, Savigliano (CN), Italy
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
48
|
Propofol in upper GI endoscopy in patients with cirrhosis. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73:1328; author reply 1328-9. [PMID: 21628022 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.01.020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/09/2011] [Accepted: 01/10/2011] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
|