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
. 2012 Nov;63(5):431-5.
doi: 10.4097/kjae.2012.63.5.431. Epub 2012 Nov 16.

The comparison of sedation quality, side effect and recovery profiles on different dosage of remifentanil patient-controlled sedation during breast biopsy surgery

Affiliations

The comparison of sedation quality, side effect and recovery profiles on different dosage of remifentanil patient-controlled sedation during breast biopsy surgery

Jin-Deok Joo et al. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2012 Nov.

Abstract

Background: The patient-controlled sedation (PCS) allows for rapid individualized titration of sedative drugs. Propofol has been the most widely used IV adjuvant, during the monitored anesthesia care (MAC). This study was designed to compare the sedation quality, side effect and recovery of the propofol alone, and propofol-remifentanil combination, using PCS for breast biopsy.

Methods: Seventy five outpatients, undergoing breast biopsy procedures with local anesthesia, were randomly assigned to receive propofol alone (group P), propofol-25 ug/ml of remifentanil (group PR25), and propofol-50 ug/ml of remifentanil (group PR50), using PCS. Pain visual analogue scores (VAS) and digit symbol substitution test (DSST), Vital signs, bi-spectral index (BIS) and observer assessment of alertness and sedation (OAA/S) score were recorded.

Results: Apply/Demand ratio in the group PR50 had a significant increase over the other groups (P < 0.05). The incidence of excessive sedation and dizziness were significantly more frequent in the group PR50 (P < 0.05). BIS and OAA/S score significantly decreased in the group PR25, PR50 at 15 min after the operation, the end of surgery (P < 0.05). At 5 min after the start of PCS, patients in the group PR25 and PR50 gave significantly less correct responses on the DSST than that of the group P (P < 0.05).

Conclusions: Compared with the propofol alone, intermittent bolus injection of propofol-remifentanil mixture could be used, appropriately, for the sedation and analgesia during MAC. The group PR25 in a low dose of remifentanil has more advantages in terms of sedation and satisfaction because of the group PR50's side effects.

Keywords: Monitored anesthesia care; Patient-controlled sedation; Propofol; Remifentanil.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Changes in pain visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, bispectral (BIS) values, observer assessment of alertness/sedation (OAA/S) scores for the three PCS group. P group: propofol alone group, PR25 group: propofol-remifentanil (25 ug/ml) group, PR50 group: propofol-remifentanil (50 ug/ml) group. B: baseline, PCS5: 5 min after PCS start, Inc: just after incision, OP15: 15 min after incision, OPend: the end of surgery, R0: just after arrival at recovery room, R15: 15 min after arrival at recovery room, R30: 30 min after arrival at recovery room. *P < 0.05, significantly different from P group value alone. P < 0.05, significantly different from other groups value. Data are expressed as mean ± SD.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
The number of symbols correctly dawn on the digit symbol substitution test (DSST) for the three PCS group. P group: propofol alone group, PR25 group: propofol-remifentanil (25 ug/ml) group, PR50 group: propofol-remifentanil (50 ug/ml) group. B: baseline, PCS5: 5 min after PCS start, R0: just after arrival at recovery room, R15: 15 min after arrival at recovery room, R30: 30 min after arrival at recovery room.*P < 0.05, significantly different from P group value. P < 0.05, significantly different from other groups value. Data are expressed as mean ± SD.

References

    1. Smith I, White PF, Nathanson M, Gouldson R. Propofol. An update on its clinical use. Anesthesiology. 1994;81:1005–1043. - PubMed
    1. Cok OY, Ertan A, Bahadir M. Comparison of midazolam sedation with or without fentanyl in cataract surgery. Acta Anaesthesiol Belg. 2008;59:27–32. - PubMed
    1. Celiker V, Basgul E, Sahin A, Uzun S, Bahadir B, Aypar U. Comparison of midazolam, propofol and fentanyl combinations for sedation and hemodynamic parameters in cataract extraction. Saudi Med J. 2007;28:1198–1203. - PubMed
    1. Joo HS, Perks WJ, Kataoka MT, Errett L, Pace K, Honey RJ. A comparison of patient-controlled sedation using either remifentanil or remifentanil-propofol for shock wave lithotripsy. Anesth Analg. 2001;93:1227–1232. - PubMed
    1. Sá Rêgo MM, Inagaki Y, White PF. Remifentanil administration during monitored anesthesia care: are intermittent boluses an effective alternative to a continuous infusion? Anesth Analg. 1999;88:518–522. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources