Technical performance of colonoscopy in patients sedated with nurse-administered propofol

被引:55
作者
Hansen, JJ [1 ]
Ulmer, BJ [1 ]
Rex, DK [1 ]
机构
[1] Indiana Univ, Sch Med, Div Gastroenterol, Dept Med, Bloomington, IN 47405 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1046/j.1572-0241.2003.04022.x
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
OBJECTIVES: Nurse-administered propofol has gained attention as a safe and effective means of sedation for patients undergoing endoscopic procedures. However, little is known about the effect of propofol on the technical performance of colonoscopy. METHODS: Three separate studies were conducted. In the first study, we reviewed procedure notes from consecutive colonoscopies performed by a single experienced endoscopist at our hospital endoscopy unit on patients sedated with either nurse-administered propofol (n = 162) or midazolam/narcotic (n = 164). In the second study, 100 eligible colonoscopy outpatients were randomized to receive either nurse-administered propofol (n = 50) or midazolam/fentanyl (n = 50). In both studies, the measured parameters included visualization of the cecum, time required to reach the cecum, repositioning of the patient, and the application of abdominal counterpressure. In a third study, we reviewed the rate of cecal intubation and colonic perforation in the first 2357 patients in our unit receiving nurse-ad ministered propofol. RESULTS: In the retrospective comparative study, there was no difference in the cecal intubation rate in those receiving propofol (99.4%) compared to those receiving midazolam/narcotic (97%; p = 0.1), and three of five failed cecal intubations in the latter group resulted from obstructing masses. Patients sedated with propofol were repositioned less frequently compared to those receiving midazolam/narcotic (3.7% vs 26.2%) (p < 0.0001). Abdominal pressure was employed in 9.9% of patients sedated with propofol compared to 19.5% (p = 0.01) of those given midazolam/narcotic. The mean time to reach the cecum was lower in the propofol group than in the midazolam/narcotic group (4.6 min vs 6.0 min, p = 0.002). In the prospective randomized study, the endoscopist intubated the cecum in all 100 patients. Patients in the propofol group were repositioned less frequently than those in the midazolam/fentanyl group (2% vs 24%, respectively, p = 0.001). The number of cases requiring abdominal counterpressure was not significantly different between the propofol and midazolam/fentanyl groups (12% vs 24%, respectively, p = 0.1). The mean time to reach the cecum in the propofol group (3.2 min) was similar to that in the midazolam/fentanyl group (3.8 min, p = 0.08). Among the first 2357 patients in our unit undergoing colonoscopy with nurse-administered propofol, the rate of complete colonoscopy was 99.2% and there were no perforations. CONCLUSION: Nurse-administered propofol sedation is safe and simplifies the technical performance of colonoscopy compared to midazolam/narcotic sedation.
引用
收藏
页码:52 / 56
页数:5
相关论文
共 41 条
[1]   PHARMACOKINETIC EVALUATION OF ICI-35868 IN MAN - SINGLE INDUCTION DOSES WITH DIFFERENT RATES OF INJECTION [J].
ADAM, HK ;
BRIGGS, LP ;
BAHAR, M ;
DOUGLAS, EJ ;
DUNDEE, JW .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 1983, 55 (02) :97-103
[2]  
AMREIN R, 1981, ARZNEIMITTEL-FORSCH, V31-2, P2202
[3]   RESULTS FROM THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY UNITED-STATES FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION COLLABORATIVE STUDY ON COMPLICATION RATES AND DRUG-USE DURING GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY [J].
ARROWSMITH, JB ;
GERSTMAN, BB ;
FLEISCHER, DE ;
BENJAMIN, SB .
GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 1991, 37 (04) :421-427
[4]   FREQUENT HYPOXEMIA AND APNEA AFTER SEDATION WITH MIDAZOLAM AND FENTANYL [J].
BAILEY, PL ;
PACE, NL ;
ASHBURN, MA ;
MOLL, JWB ;
EAST, KA ;
STANLEY, TH .
ANESTHESIOLOGY, 1990, 73 (05) :826-830
[5]  
Bell GD, 2000, ENDOSCOPY, V32, P92
[6]   Premedication, preparation, and surveillance [J].
Bell, GD .
ENDOSCOPY, 2002, 34 (01) :2-12
[7]   Colonoscopy - Is sedation necessary and is there any role for intravenous propofol? [J].
Bell, GD ;
Charlton, JE .
ENDOSCOPY, 2000, 32 (03) :264-267
[8]   SEDATION FOR ENDOSCOPY - A COMPARISON BETWEEN DIAZEPAM, AND DIAZEPAM PLUS PETHIDINE WITH NALOXONE REVERSAL [J].
BOLDY, DAR ;
ENGLISH, JSC ;
LANG, GS ;
HOARE, AM .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 1984, 56 (10) :1109-1112
[9]   SEDATION FOR UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY - A COMPARATIVE-STUDY OF PROPOFOL AND MIDAZOLAM [J].
CARLSSON, U ;
GRATTIDGE, P .
ENDOSCOPY, 1995, 27 (03) :240-243
[10]   PROPOFOL VS MIDAZOLAM IN SHORT-TERM, MEDIUM-TERM, AND LONG-TERM SEDATION OF CRITICALLY ILL PATIENTS - A COST-BENEFIT-ANALYSIS [J].
CARRASCO, G ;
MOLINA, R ;
COSTA, J ;
SOLER, JM ;
CABRE, L .
CHEST, 1993, 103 (02) :557-564