Colonoscopy quality with Entonox®vs intravenous conscious sedation: 18608 colonoscopy retrospective study
- PMID: 28979712
- PMCID: PMC5605347
- DOI: 10.4253/wjge.v9.i9.471
Colonoscopy quality with Entonox®vs intravenous conscious sedation: 18608 colonoscopy retrospective study
Abstract
Aim: To compare colonoscopy quality with nitrous oxide gas (Entonox®) against intravenous conscious sedation using midazolam plus opioid.
Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on a prospectively held database of 18608 colonoscopies carried out in Lothian health board hospitals between July 2013 and January 2016. The quality of colonoscopies performed with Entonox was compared to intravenous conscious sedation (abbreviated in this article as IVM). Furthermore, the quality of colonoscopies performed with an unmedicated group was compared to IVM. The study used the following key markers of colonoscopy quality: (1) patient comfort scores; (2) caecal intubation rates (CIRs); and (3) polyp detection rates (PDRs). We used binary logistic regression to model the data.
Results: There was no difference in the rate of moderate-to-extreme discomfort between the Entonox and IVM groups (17.9% vs 18.8%; OR = 1.06, 95%CI: 0.95-1.18, P = 0.27). Patients in the unmedicated group were less likely to experience moderate-to-extreme discomfort than those in the IVM group (11.4% vs 18.8%; OR = 0.71, 95%CI: 0.60-0.83, P < 0.001). There was no difference in caecal intubation between the Entonox and IVM groups (94.4% vs 93.7%; OR = 1.08, 95%CI: 0.92-1.28, P = 0.34). There was no difference in caecal intubation between the unmedicated and IVM groups (94.2% vs 93.7%; OR = 0.98, 95%CI: 0.79-1.22, P = 0.87). Polyp detection in the Entonox group was not different from IVM group (35.0% vs 33.1%; OR = 1.01, 95%CI: 0.93-1.10, P = 0.79). Polyp detection in the unmedicated group was not significantly different from the IVM group (37.4% vs 33.1%; OR = 0.97, 95%CI: 0.87-1.08, P = 0.60).
Conclusion: The use of Entonox was not associated with lower colonoscopy quality when compared to intravenous conscious sedation using midazolam plus opioid.
Keywords: Benzodiazepine; Caecal intubation; Colonoscopy; Entonox; Gastrointestinal endoscopy; Midazolam; Nitrous oxide; Polyp detection; Sedation; Unsedated.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflict-of-interest statement: None declared.
Figures
References
-
- Sanders RD, Weimann J, Maze M. Biologic effects of nitrous oxide: a mechanistic and toxicologic review. Anesthesiology. 2008;109:707–722. - PubMed
-
- Duarte R, McNeill A, Drummond G, Tiplady B. Comparison of the sedative, cognitive, and analgesic effects of nitrous oxide, sevoflurane, and ethanol. Br J Anaesth. 2008;100:203–210. - PubMed
-
- European Society of Anaesthesiology task force on use of nitrous oxide in clinical anaesthetic practice. The current place of nitrous oxide in clinical practice: An expert opinion-based task force consensus statement of the European Society of Anaesthesiology. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2015;32:517–520. - PubMed
-
- Fukagawa H, Koyama T, Fukuda K. κ-Opioid receptor mediates the antinociceptive effect of nitrous oxide in mice. Br J Anaesth. 2014;113:1032–1038. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
