...
首页> 外文期刊>World journal of gastroenterology : >Deep sedation during gastrointestinal endoscopy: Propofolfentanyl and midazolam-fentanyl regimens
【24h】

Deep sedation during gastrointestinal endoscopy: Propofolfentanyl and midazolam-fentanyl regimens

机译:胃肠道内窥镜检查期间的深度镇静:丙泊芬太尼和咪达唑仑-芬太尼疗法

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

AIM: To compare deep sedation with propofol-fentanyl and midazolam-fentanyl regimens during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. METHODS: After obtaining approval of the research ethics committee and informed consent, 200 patients were evaluated and referred for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Patients were randomized to receive propofol-fentanyl or midazolam-fentanyl (n = 100/group). We assessed the level of sedation using the observer's assessment of alertness/sedation (OAA/S) score and bispectral index (BIS). We evaluated patient and physician satisfaction, as well as the recovery time and complication rates. The statistical analysis was performed using SPSS statistical software and included the Mann-Whitney test, χ 2 test, measurement of analysis of variance, and the κ statistic. RESULTS: The times to induction of sedation, recovery, and discharge were shorter in the propofolfentanyl group than the midazolam-fentanyl group. According to the OAA/S score, deep sedation events occurred in 25% of the propofol-fentanyl group and 11% of the midazolam-fentanyl group (P = 0.014). Additionally, deep sedation events occurred in 19% of the propofol-fentanyl group and 7% of the midazolamfentanyl group according to the BIS scale (P = 0.039). There was good concordance between the OAA/S score and BIS for both groups (κ = 0.71 and κ = 0.63, respectively). Oxygen supplementation was required in 42% of the propofol-fentanyl group and 26% of the midazolam-fentanyl group (P = 0.025). The mean time to recovery was 28.82 and 44.13 min in the propofolfentanyl and midazolam-fentanyl groups, respectively (P < 0.001). There were no severe complications in either group. Although patients were equally satisfied with both drug combinations, physicians were more satisfied with the propofol-fentanyl combination. CONCLUSION: Deep sedation occurred with propofolfentanyl and midazolam-fentanyl, but was more frequent in the former. Recovery was faster in the propofol-fentanyl group.
机译:目的:比较上消化道内窥镜检查中丙泊酚-芬太尼和咪达唑仑-芬太尼方案的深度镇静作用。方法:在获得研究伦理委员会的批准并获得知情同意后,对200例患者进行了评估并转诊接受上消化道内镜检查。患者随机接受丙泊酚-芬太尼或咪达唑仑-芬太尼(n = 100 /组)。我们使用观察者的警觉性/镇静性评估(OAA / S)评分和双光谱指数(BIS)评估镇静水平。我们评估了患者和医师的满意度,以及恢复时间和并发症发生率。使用SPSS统计软件进行统计分析,包括Mann-Whitney检验,χ2检验,方差分析的度量和κ统计。结果:丙泊芬太尼组的镇静,恢复和排出的诱导时间比咪达唑仑-芬太尼组的要短。根据OAA / S评分,丙泊酚-芬太尼组的25%和咪达唑仑-芬太尼组的11%发生了深度镇静事件(P = 0.014)。此外,根据BIS量表,深镇静事件发生在19%的异丙酚-芬太尼基团和7%的咪达唑仑芬太尼基团中(P = 0.039)。两组的OAA / S评分和BIS均具有良好的一致性(分别为κ= 0.71和κ= 0.63)。丙泊酚-芬太尼基团的42%和咪达唑仑-芬太尼基团的26%需要氧补充(P = 0.025)。丙泊芬太尼和咪达唑仑-芬太尼组的平均恢复时间分别为28.82分钟和44.13分钟(P <0.001)。两组均无严重并发症。尽管患者对两种药物组合均满意,但医生对丙泊酚-芬太尼组合更满意。结论:丙泊酚芬太尼和咪达唑仑-芬太尼引起深层镇静,但前者更为频繁。异丙酚-芬太尼组的恢复更快。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号