Efficacy and safety of analgosedation with fentanyl compared with traditional sedation with propofol.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of analgosedation with fentanyl versus traditional sedation with propofol in critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation.

METHODS

Retrospective, observational study evaluating adult critically ill patients on mechanical ventilation at a community teaching hospital who received continuous infusion fentanyl (n=50) or propofol (n=50) from September 2011-March 2013.

RESULTS

Median duration of mechanical ventilation was similar between patients receiving propofol and fentanyl infusions (46.7 hr vs 46.0 hr, p=0.19). No difference was noted in median intensive care unit length of stay between groups (p=0.42). A larger percentage of patients receiving propofol required rescue opioids compared with patients receiving fentanyl (56% vs 34%, p=0.04). Furthermore, patients receiving propofol required significantly more rescue opioid therapy during the course of mechanical ventilation as calculated by fentanyl equivalents (150 μg vs 100 μg, p=0.03). No difference in the rate of intensive care unit delirium was noted between groups (fentanyl 23% vs propofol 27%, p=0.80).

CONCLUSION

Analgosedation with fentanyl appears to be a safe and effective strategy to facilitate mechanical ventilation. This regimen does not appear to affect duration of mechanical ventilation when compared with propofol, but may allow for more optimal pain management in critically ill patients.