Luo Hui-Rong, Chen An-Di, Lin Jing-Fang, Ye Peng, Chen Ying-Jie, Lin Ming-Xue, Chen Pin-Zhong, Chen Xiao-Hui, Zheng Xiao-Chun
Department of Anesthesiology, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou 350000, Fujian Province, China.
Department of Anesthesiology, Shengli Clinical Medical College of Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou 350000, Fujian Province, China.
World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2025 Feb 16;17(2):100722. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v17.i2.100722.
Propofol has been widely used in bidirectional gastrointestinal endoscopy sedation; however, it frequently leads to cardiovascular adverse events and respiratory depression. Propofol target-controlled infusion (TCI) can provide safe sedation but may require higher dosages of propofol. On the contrary, etomidate offers hemodynamic stability.
To evaluate the effect of different dose etomidate added to propofol TCI sedation during same-visit bidirectional endoscopy.
A total of 330 patients from Fujian Provincial Hospital were randomly divided into three groups: P, 0.1EP, and 0.15EP. Patients in the P group received propofol TCI only, with an initial effect-site concentration of the propofol TCI system of 3.0 mg/mL. Patients in the 0.1EP and 0.15EP groups received 0.1 and 0.15 mg/kg etomidate intravenous injection, respectively, followed by propofol TCI.
Patients in the 0.15EP group had higher mean blood pressure after induction than the other groups (P group: 78 mmHg, 0.1EP group: 82 mmHg, 0.15EP group: 88 mmHg; < 0.05). Total doses of propofol consumption significantly decreased in the 0.15EP group compared with that in the other groups (P group: 260.6 mg, 0.1EP group: 228.1 mg, 0.15EP group: 201.2 mg; < 0.05). The induction time was longer in the P group than in the other groups (P group: 1.9 ± 0.7 minutes, 0.1EP group: 1.2 ± 0.4 minutes, 0.15EP group: 1.1 ± 0.3 minutes; < 0.01). The recovery time was shorter in the 0.15EP group than in the other groups (P group: 4.8 ± 2.1 minutes, 0.1EP group: 4.5 ± 1.6 minutes, 0.15EP group: 3.9 ± 1.4 minutes; < 0.01). The incidence of hypotension (P group: 36.4%, 0.1EP group: 29.1%, 0.15EP group: 11.8%; < 0.01) and injection pain was lower in the 0.15EP group than in the other groups ( < 0.05). Furthermore, the incidence of respiratory depression was lower in the 0.15EP group than in the P group ( < 0.05). Additionally, the satisfaction of the patient, endoscopist, and anesthesiologist was higher in the 0.15EP group than in the other groups ( < 0.05).
Our findings suggest that 0.15 mg/kg etomidate plus propofol TCI can significantly reduce propofol consumption, which is followed by fewer cardiovascular adverse events and respiratory depression, along with higher patient, endoscopist, and anesthesiologist satisfaction.
丙泊酚已广泛用于双向胃肠内镜检查镇静;然而,它经常导致心血管不良事件和呼吸抑制。丙泊酚靶控输注(TCI)可提供安全的镇静效果,但可能需要更高剂量的丙泊酚。相反,依托咪酯具有血流动力学稳定性。
评估在同期双向内镜检查期间,不同剂量依托咪酯添加到丙泊酚TCI镇静中的效果。
福建省立医院的330例患者被随机分为三组:P组、0.1EP组和0.15EP组。P组患者仅接受丙泊酚TCI,丙泊酚TCI系统的初始效应室浓度为3.0mg/mL。0.1EP组和0.15EP组患者分别静脉注射0.1和0.15mg/kg依托咪酯,随后进行丙泊酚TCI。
0.15EP组诱导后平均血压高于其他组(P组:78mmHg,0.1EP组:82mmHg,0.15EP组:88mmHg;P<0.05)。与其他组相比,0.15EP组丙泊酚总消耗量显著降低(P组:260.6mg,0.1EP组:228.1mg,0.15EP组:201.2mg;P<0.05)。P组诱导时间长于其他组(P组:1.9±0.7分钟,0.1EP组:1.2±0.4分钟,0.15EP组:1.1±0.3分钟;P<0.01)。0.15EP组苏醒时间短于其他组(P组:4.8±2.1分钟,0.1EP组:4.5±1.6分钟,0.15EP组:3.9±1.4分钟;P<0.01)。0.15EP组低血压发生率(P组:36.4%,0.1EP组:29.1%,0.15EP组:11.8%;P<0.01)和注射痛低于其他组(P<0.05)。此外,0.15EP组呼吸抑制发生率低于P组(P<0.05)。另外,0.15EP组患者、内镜医师和麻醉医师的满意度高于其他组(P<0.05)。
我们的研究结果表明,0.15mg/kg依托咪酯加丙泊酚TCI可显著减少丙泊酚用量,随后心血管不良事件和呼吸抑制较少,患者、内镜医师和麻醉医师的满意度更高。