Lim Jae Woong, Kim Min Jae, Lee Gang Han, Kim Dae Sol, Jung Sang Hyuk, Kim Yu Yeon, Kim Jin Won, Lee Yohan, Kim Hyun Soo, Park Seon Young, Kim Dong Hyun
Division of gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Chonnam National University Hospital and Medical School, Gwangju, Korea.
Chonnam Med J. 2024 Sep;60(3):192-197. doi: 10.4068/cmj.2024.60.3.192. Epub 2024 Sep 25.
Colonoscopy is a key procedure for the early detection of colorectal cancer. Despite its importance, the discomfort associated with colonoscopy often requires sedation, and the ideal sedation regimen remains to be determined. In this prospective randomized controlled trial, patients scheduled for colonoscopy were randomly assigned to two different sedation protocols. Group A received a combination of midazolam and propofol, while group B was given midazolam and pethidine. The study analyzed data from 51 patients, with 23 in group A and 28 in group B. The incidence of adverse events was similar across both groups. Additionally, no significant differences were observed in cecal intubation times or total procedure durations. Notably, group A had a lower frequency of required postural changes (1.0±.7 vs. 1.5±0.7, p=0.02) and a reduced rate of manual compression (52.2% vs. 82.1%, p=0.02). There were no significant differences between the groups regarding subjective pain or overall satisfaction. Both sedation regimens were found to be safe and effective. The midazolam and propofol combination was associated with a smoother procedure, evidenced by fewer postural adjustments and less manual compression needed during colonoscopy.
结肠镜检查是早期发现结直肠癌的关键程序。尽管其很重要,但结肠镜检查带来的不适通常需要镇静,而理想的镇静方案仍有待确定。在这项前瞻性随机对照试验中,计划进行结肠镜检查的患者被随机分配到两种不同的镇静方案。A组接受咪达唑仑和丙泊酚联合使用,而B组给予咪达唑仑和哌替啶。该研究分析了51例患者的数据,其中A组23例,B组28例。两组不良事件的发生率相似。此外,在盲肠插管时间或总操作时间方面未观察到显著差异。值得注意的是,A组所需体位改变的频率较低(1.0±0.7对1.5±0.7,p=0.02),手动按压率降低(52.2%对82.1%,p=0.02)。两组在主观疼痛或总体满意度方面无显著差异。两种镇静方案均被证明是安全有效的。咪达唑仑和丙泊酚联合使用与操作更顺畅相关,这在结肠镜检查期间需要的体位调整较少和手动按压较少方面得到了证明。