Suppr超能文献

单独使用丙泊酚或与其他药物联合用于结肠镜检查镇静患者的安全性和有效性:更新的荟萃分析。

Safety and efficacy of propofol alone or in combination with other agents for sedation of patients undergoing colonoscopy: an updated meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Painless Endoscopy, People's Hospital of Linzi District, Zibo City, Shandong Province, China, Affiliated Hospital of Binzhou Medical University, Shandong Province, China.

出版信息

Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2020 Apr;24(8):4506-4518. doi: 10.26355/eurrev_202004_21033.

Abstract

The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy and safety of propofol sedation for colonoscopy in comparison with traditional sedative agents. We performed a systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and Google Scholar databases to identify eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published before November 2019, and compared the effect of traditional sedative agents (TA) with the effect of propofol/propofol combined with TAs for routine colonoscopy. We included 22 eligible trials in our analysis, with a total of 2575 participants. We found strong associations between propofol use and short recovery (SMD MD, -1.15 [-1.55, -0.75], p<0.00001), procedure duration (SMD -0.28 [-0.55, -0.02], p<0.05), discharge times (SMD= -0.71 [-1.06, -0.36], p<0.0001), and sedation scores (SMD 1.29 [0.36, 2.22], p<0.05). Propofol in combination with traditional agents led to a significant decrease in discharge time compared with the discharge times of traditional sedatives alone (SMD=-0.69 [-1.07, -0.31], p<0.0004). The effects of propofol on cecal intubation rates, and occurrences of hypotension and apnea were similar to those of TAs. Our results suggest that propofol can be used as a safe alternative to TAs, and can significantly shorten procedure duration, recovery and discharge times, and improve sedation depth.

摘要

本荟萃分析旨在评估与传统镇静剂相比,丙泊酚镇静在结肠镜检查中的疗效和安全性。我们对 PubMed、Embase、Scopus、Web of Science CENTRAL(Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库)和 Google Scholar 数据库进行了系统检索,以确定 2019 年 11 月之前发表的合格随机对照试验(RCT),并比较了传统镇静剂(TA)与丙泊酚/丙泊酚联合 TA 对常规结肠镜检查的效果。我们的分析纳入了 22 项合格试验,共 2575 名参与者。我们发现丙泊酚的使用与恢复时间短(SMD MD,-1.15[-1.55,-0.75],p<0.00001)、操作时间(SMD-0.28[-0.55,-0.02],p<0.05)、出院时间(SMD= -0.71[-1.06,-0.36],p<0.0001)和镇静评分(SMD 1.29[0.36,2.22],p<0.05)之间存在很强的关联。与单独使用传统镇静剂相比,丙泊酚联合传统药物可显著降低出院时间(SMD=-0.69[-1.07,-0.31],p<0.0004)。丙泊酚对盲肠插管率、低血压和呼吸暂停的影响与传统药物相似。我们的结果表明,丙泊酚可作为传统药物的安全替代物,可显著缩短操作时间、恢复时间和出院时间,并改善镇静深度。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验