Comparison of Meperidine Versus Hyoscine During Colonoscopy in the Elderly: A Prospective Randomized Study

被引:4
作者
Sulu, Barlas [1 ]
Yildiz, Baris Dogu [2 ]
Buyukuysal, Cagatay [3 ]
Demir, Elif [1 ]
Gunerhan, Yusuf [1 ]
机构
[1] Kafkas Univ, Fac Med, Dept Gen Surg, TR-36100 Pasacayiri, Kars, Turkey
[2] Ankara Numune Teaching Hosp, Gen Surg Clin, Ankara, Turkey
[3] Zonguldak Karaelmas Univ, Fac Med, Dept Biostat, Zonguldak, Turkey
来源
JOURNAL OF LAPAROENDOSCOPIC & ADVANCED SURGICAL TECHNIQUES | 2012年 / 22卷 / 07期
关键词
N-BUTYL BROMIDE; CONTROLLED-TRIAL; SEDATION; PREMEDICATION; REMIFENTANIL; ENDOSCOPY; PROPOFOL; OLDER;
D O I
10.1089/lap.2012.0117
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Colonoscopy is the gold standard in diagnosis of diseases of the colon. Sedation and antispasmodic agents are recommended during colonoscopy. Age is a limiting factor when the surgeon is deciding whether to use these medications or not. Subjects and Methods: One hundred twenty patients older than 65 years of age were randomized into two groups. The first group (n = 60) received 2 mg of midazolam and 25 mg of meperidine intravenously. The second group (n = 60) received 2 mg of midazolam and 20 mg of hyoscine N-butylbromide intravenously. The data collected were colonoscopy procedure time, time to cecum, visual analog pain scale, systolic blood pressure before and after the procedure, pulse, partial oxygen pressure, comfort of the endoscopist, the modified observer's assessment of alertness/sedation scale, and morbidity. Results: Total colonoscopy and cecal reach times were shorter in Group 2 (19.58 +/- 4.82 minutes and 10.57 +/- 2.54 minutes, respectively) than in Group 1 (25.05 +/- 5.93 minutes and 13.78 +/- 3.37 minutes, respectively) (P<.001). The sedation score of Group 2 (4.52 +/- 0.50) was better than that of Group 1 (3.45 +/- 0.75) (P<.001). Nine patients (15%) in Group 1 experienced diaphoresis, temporary memory loss, or lip smacking. Three patients in Group 1 and 1 patient in Group 2 had hypoxia. Three patients in Group 1 had hypotension; this was seen in 1 patient in Group 2. One patient had perforation in Group 1. The visual analog scale score was 4.37 +/- 1.38, and the endoscopist satisfaction was 6.72 +/- 0.99 in Group 1, while these values were 3.95 +/- 0.81 and 7.75 +/- 0.89, respectively, in Group 2 (P > .05). Conclusions: Use of midazolam and hyoscine N-butylbromide during colonoscopy is safe in the elderly and significantly reduces procedure time while increasing comfort for the endoscopist.
引用
收藏
页码:631 / 634
页数:4
相关论文
共 17 条
  • [1] Achieving quality in colonoscopy: bowel preparation timing and colon cleanliness
    Athreya, Prasad J.
    Owen, Gareth N.
    Wong, Shing W.
    Douglas, Philip R.
    Newstead, Graham L.
    [J]. ANZ JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2011, 81 (04) : 261 - 265
  • [2] Propofol for endoscopy in Canada: A sleepy or a slippery slope?
    Bhandari, Rakesh
    Adams, Paul C.
    [J]. CANADIAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY, 2006, 20 (12): : 765 - 766
  • [3] Sedation with midazolam versus midazolam plus meperidine for routine colonoscopy: A prospective, randomized, controlled study
    Cinar, Kubilay
    Yakut, Mustafa
    Ozden, Ali
    [J]. TURKISH JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2009, 20 (04) : 271 - 275
  • [4] Remifentanil vs. Meperidine for Patient-Controlled Analgesia During Colonoscopy: A Randomized Double-Blind Trial
    Fanti, Lorella
    Massimo, Agostoni
    Marco, Gemma
    Giulia, Gambino
    Antonio, Facciorusso
    Mario, Guslandi
    Giorgio, Torri
    Alberto, Testoni Pier
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2009, 104 (05) : 1119 - 1124
  • [5] Greilich PE, 2001, ANESTH ANALG, V92, P80
  • [6] Latta Kenneth S, 2002, Am J Ther, V9, P53, DOI 10.1097/00045391-200201000-00010
  • [7] Lee JM, 2010, HEPATO-GASTROENTEROL, V57, P90
  • [8] Lukens FJ, 2002, AM J GASTROENTEROL, V97, P1722
  • [9] Colonoscopy in elderly Asians: A prospective evaluation in routine clinical practice
    Ma, Wee-Tah
    Mahadeva, Sanjiv
    Kunanayagam, Soraya
    Poi, Philip Jun-Hua
    Goh, Khean-Lee
    [J]. JOURNAL OF DIGESTIVE DISEASES, 2007, 8 (02) : 77 - 81
  • [10] Martínez JF, 2011, REV ESP ENFERM DIG, V103, P76, DOI 10.4321/s1130-01082011000200005