Suppr超能文献

常规内镜检查中的丙泊酚镇静:一项比较靶控输注与手动控制推注概念的病例系列研究。

Propofol sedation in routine endoscopy: A case series comparing target controlled infusion manually controlled bolus concept.

作者信息

Sarraj Riad, Theiler Lorenz, Vakilzadeh Nima, Krupka Niklas, Wiest Reiner

机构信息

Department of Visceral Surgery and Medicine, Inselspital University Hospital, Bern 3010, Switzerland.

Clinic for Anesthesia, Perioperative, Emergency & Intensive Care Medicine, Kantonsspital Aarau, Aarau 5001, Switzerland.

出版信息

World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2024 Jan 16;16(1):11-17. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v16.i1.11.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Many studies have addressed safety and effectiveness of non-anaesthesiologist propofol sedation (NAPS) for gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy Target controlled infusion (TCI) is claimed to provide an optimal sedation regimen by avoiding under- or oversedation.

AIM

To assess safety and performance of propofol TCI sedation in comparison with nurse-administered bolus-sedation.

METHODS

Fouty-five patients undergoing endoscopy under TCI propofol sedation were prospectively included from November 2016 to May 2017 and compared to 87 patients retrospectively included that underwent endoscopy with NAPS. Patients were matched for age and endoscopic procedure. We recorded time of sedation and endoscopy, dosage of medication and adverse events.

RESULTS

There was a significant reduction in dose per time of propofol administered in the TCI group, compared to the NAPS group (8.2 ± 2.7 mg/min 9.3 ± 3.4 mg/min; = 0.046). The time needed to provide adequate sedation levels was slightly but significantly lower in the control group (5.3 ± 2.7 min 7.7 ± 3.3 min; < 0.001), nonetheless the total endoscopy time was similar in both groups. No differences between TCI and bolus-sedation was observed for mean total-dosage of propofol rate as well as adverse events.

CONCLUSION

This study indicates that sedation using TCI for GI endoscopy reduces the dose of propofol necessary per minute of endoscopy. This may translate into less adverse events. However, further and randomized trials need to confirm this trend.

摘要

背景

许多研究探讨了非麻醉医生丙泊酚镇静(NAPS)用于胃肠(GI)内镜检查的安全性和有效性。靶控输注(TCI)据称可通过避免镇静不足或过度来提供最佳的镇静方案。

目的

评估丙泊酚TCI镇静与护士给予的推注镇静相比的安全性和效果。

方法

前瞻性纳入2016年11月至2017年5月期间接受TCI丙泊酚镇静下内镜检查的45例患者,并与回顾性纳入的87例接受NAPS内镜检查的患者进行比较。患者按年龄和内镜检查程序进行匹配。我们记录了镇静和内镜检查时间、药物剂量和不良事件。

结果

与NAPS组相比,TCI组每次给予丙泊酚的剂量显著降低(8.2±2.7mg/min对9.3±3.4mg/min;P=0.046)。对照组达到足够镇静水平所需的时间略短但显著更短(5.3±2.7分钟对7.7±3.3分钟;P<0.001),尽管两组的总内镜检查时间相似。TCI和推注镇静在丙泊酚平均总剂量率以及不良事件方面未观察到差异。

结论

本研究表明,GI内镜检查使用TCI镇静可降低内镜检查每分钟所需的丙泊酚剂量。这可能转化为更少的不良事件。然而,需要进一步的随机试验来证实这一趋势。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cf5d/10835478/08f78e40496a/WJGE-16-11-g001.jpg

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