Conscious Sedation Failure During Procedure
Conditions
Keywords
sedation, benzodiazepine, opioid, propofol
Brief summary
Based on previous results, the investigators considered that sedation quality, complications, and procedure outcomes may not be different, however, propofol alone titration may have a fast recovery time than BPS and cost-effectiveness than balanced propofol sedation (BPS). In present study, the investigators therefore evaluate the time and sedation quality of patient recovery, cost-effectiveness, complication, and procedure outcomes between propofol alone and BPS in therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP).
Detailed description
Previous studies have shown that propofol is superior to traditional sedation regimens with benzodiazepines plus opioids in ERCP procedures. Propofol is a potent hypnotic drug with a short duration of action and consequently a more rapid recovery time for the patients compared with the available Benzodiazepines. Several prospective studies have shown that balanced propofol sedation (BPS) can be used safely and effectively for diagnostic endoscopy under the direction of a gastroenterologist. BPS which was originally described by Cohen et al, combines small incremental doses of propofol with single induction doses of benzodiazepines and opioids under the direction of a physician that is not an anesthesiologist. Because BPS usually targets moderate sedation, adequate amnesia and analgesia can be achieved with concomitant administration of benzodiazepines and opioids. It may cause synergism between propofol and midazolam and reduce dose of propofol. However, there was no proven benefit between propofol alone titrated to moderate level of sedation and BPS; propofol titration combination with benzodiazepines and fentanyl.
Interventions
propofol (0.5 mg/kg body weight; 10 mg if age \> 70 or ASA class III-IV)
midazolam (0.05 mg/kg body weight; 1 mg if age \> 70 or ASA class III-IV) fentanyl (50 µg; 25 µg if age \> 70 or ASA class III-IV) propofol (0.5 mg/kg body weight)
Sponsors
Study design
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
* candidates for therapeutic ERCP
Exclusion criteria
* patient age \< 18 years * pregnant women * inability to provide informed consent * patients with total gastrectomy * American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) Class V patients * patients with known respiratory disease, patients with neurologic impairment * patients with known allergy to the drugs used, history of complications with previous sedation
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Recovery time and cost-effectiveness | SIX MONTH | Following therapeutic ERCP,full recovery time scoring by Aldrete scoring system and cost measured. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Sedation efficacy, procedure-related outcomes, and complications. | SIX MONTH | Sedation efficacy parameters was defined as follows; Onset of effective sedation, Patient cooperation (endoscopist, observer-nurse), recovery time, and Patient tolerance (rated by the patients 4hr after procedure). Quality of procedure was assessed by procedure outcomes and procedure related complications. |