Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2010 Aug;45(8):831-7.
doi: 10.1007/s00535-010-0222-8. Epub 2010 Mar 13.

Safe and effective sedation in endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer: a randomized comparison between propofol continuous infusion and intermittent midazolam injection

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Safe and effective sedation in endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer: a randomized comparison between propofol continuous infusion and intermittent midazolam injection

Shinsuke Kiriyama et al. J Gastroenterol. 2010 Aug.

Abstract

Purpose: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for early gastric cancer (EGC) generally takes longer to perform than conventional endoscopy and usually requires moderate/deep sedation with close surveillance for patient safety. The aim of this study was to compare the safety profiles and recovery scores propofol continuous infusion and intermittent midazolam (MDZ) injection as sedation for ESD.

Methods: Sixty EGC patients scheduled for ESDs between August and November 2008 were included in this prospective study and randomly divided into a propofol (P-group, 28 patients) and an MDZ (M-group, 32 patients) group using an odd-even system. The P-group received a 0.8 mg/kg induction dose and a 3 mg/kg/h maintenance dose of 1% propofol using an infusion pump. All patients received 15 mg pentazocine at the start of the ESD and at 60-min intervals thereafter. We recorded and analyzed blood pressure, oxygen saturation and heart rate during and following the procedure and evaluated post-anesthetic recovery scores (PARS) and subsequent alertness scores.

Results: The propofol maintenance and total dose amounts were (mean +/- standard deviation) 3.7 +/- 0.6 mg/kg/h and 395 +/- 202 mg, respectively. The mean total dose of MDZ was 10.3 +/- 4.5 mg. There were no cases of de-saturation <90% or hypotension <80 mmHg in either group. Alertness scores 15 and 60 min after the procedures were significantly higher in the P-group (4.9/4.9) than in the M-group (4.6/4.5; p < 0.05). The mean PARS 15 and 30 min after the ESDs were significantly higher in the P-group (9.6/9.9) than in the M-group (8.6/9.2; p < 0.01).

Conclusion: Based on our results, the ESDs for EGC performed under sedation using propofol continuous infusion were as safe as those performed using intermittent MDZ injection. Propofol-treated patients had a quicker recovery profile than those treated with MDZ. We therefore recommend the use of continuous propofol sedation for ESD, but sedation guidelines for the use of propofol are necessary.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Anesthesiology. 2002 Apr;96(4):1004-17 - PubMed
    1. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis. 2008 Sep;17(3):291-7 - PubMed
    1. Gastrointest Endosc. 2001 Jul;54(1):8-13 - PubMed
    1. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 1998 Sep;15(5):535-43 - PubMed
    1. J Perianesth Nurs. 1998 Jun;13(3):148-55 - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources