NAPS in 2016: why not everywhere?
- PMID: 28317019
- PMCID: PMC5352563
- DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-101689
NAPS in 2016: why not everywhere?
Conflict of interest statement
References
-
- McQuaid K R, Laine L. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials of moderate sedation for routine endoscopic procedures. Gastrointest Endosc. 2008;67:910–923. - PubMed
-
- Dewitt J, McGreevy K, Sherman S et al. Nurse-administered propofol sedation compared with midazolam and meperidine for EUS: a prospective, randomized trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2008;68:499–509. - PubMed
-
- Jung M, Hofmann C, Kiesslich R et al. Improvedsedationindiag- nostic and therapeutic ERCP: propofol is an alternative to midazolam. Endoscopy. 2000;32:233–238. - PubMed
-
- Meining A, Semmler V, Kassem A M et al. The effect of sedation on the quality of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: an investigator-blinded, randomized study comparing propofol with midazolam. Endoscopy. 2007;39:345–349. - PubMed
Publication types
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
