Sethi Priyanka, Mohammed Sadik, Bhatia Pradeep Kumar, Gupta Neeraj
Department of Anaesthesiology, Dr. S N Medical College, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India.
Department of Anaesthesiology, Dr. S N Medical College, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India ; Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India.
Indian J Anaesth. 2014 Jan;58(1):18-24. doi: 10.4103/0019-5049.126782.
Traditionally, midazolam has been used for providing conscious sedation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Recently, dexmedetomidine has been tried, but very little evidence exists to support its use.
The primary objective was to compare haemodynamic, respiratory and recovery profile of both drugs. Secondary objective was to compare the degree of comfort experienced by patients and the usefulness of the drug to endoscopist.
Open-label Randomised Controlled Trial.
Subjects between 18 and 60 years of age with American Society of Anaesthesiologist Grade I-II requiring ERCP were enrolled in two groups (30 each). Both groups received fentanyl 1 μg/kg IV at the beginning of ERCP. Group M received IV midazolam (0.04 mg/kg) and additional 0.5 mg doses until Ramsay Sedation Scale (RSS) score reached 3-4. Group D received dexmedetomidine at loading dose of 1 μg/kg over 10 min followed by 0.5 μg/kg/h infusion until RSS reached 3-4. The vital parameters (heart rate (HR), blood pressure (BP), respiration rate, SpO2), time to achieve RSS 3-4 and facial pain score (FPS) were compared during and after the procedure. In the recovery room, time to reach modified Aldrete score (MAS) 9-10 and patient and surgeon's satisfaction scores was also recorded and compared. Any complication during or after the procedure were also noted.
In Group D, patients had lower HR and FPS at 5, 10 and 15 min following the initiation of sedation (P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in BP and respiratory rate. The procedure elicited a gag response in 29 (97%) and 7 (23%) subjects in Group M and Group D respectively (P<0.05). MAS of 9-10 at 5 min during recovery was achieved in 27 (90%) subjects in Group D in contrast to 5 (17%) in Group M (P<0.05). Dexmedetomidine showed higher patient and surgeon satisfaction scores (P<0.05).
Dexmedetomidine can be a superior alternative to midazolam for conscious sedation in ERCP.
传统上,咪达唑仑一直用于在内镜逆行胰胆管造影术(ERCP)中提供清醒镇静。最近,右美托咪定也被尝试使用,但支持其使用的证据非常少。
主要目的是比较两种药物的血流动力学、呼吸和恢复情况。次要目的是比较患者体验到的舒适程度以及该药物对内镜医师的有用性。
开放标签随机对照试验。
年龄在18至60岁之间、美国麻醉医师协会分级为I-II级且需要进行ERCP的受试者被分为两组(每组30人)。两组在ERCP开始时均静脉注射芬太尼1μg/kg。M组静脉注射咪达唑仑(0.04mg/kg),并额外给予0.5mg剂量,直至 Ramsay 镇静评分(RSS)达到3-4分。D组在10分钟内静脉注射负荷剂量为1μg/kg的右美托咪定,随后以0.5μg/kg/h的速度输注,直至RSS达到3-4分。在操作过程中和操作后,比较生命体征参数(心率(HR)、血压(BP)、呼吸频率、脉搏血氧饱和度(SpO2))、达到RSS 3-4分的时间和面部疼痛评分(FPS)。在恢复室,记录并比较达到改良Aldrete评分(MAS)9-10分的时间以及患者和外科医生的满意度评分。还记录操作过程中或操作后的任何并发症。
在D组中,患者在镇静开始后5、10和15分钟时的HR和FPS较低(P<0.05)。BP和呼吸频率无统计学显著差异。操作分别在M组的29名(97%)和D组的7名(23%)受试者中引发了 gag 反应(P<0.05)。在恢复过程中,D组有27名(90%)受试者在5分钟时达到MAS 9-10分,而M组为5名(17%)(P<0.05)。右美托咪定显示出更高的患者和外科医生满意度评分(P<0.05)。
在ERCP清醒镇静中,右美托咪定可能是比咪达唑仑更好的选择。