4.6 Article

Fiberoptic bronchoscopy under noninvasive ventilation and propofol target-controlled infusion in hypoxemic patients

Journal

INTENSIVE CARE MEDICINE
Volume 37, Issue 12, Pages 1969-1975

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00134-011-2375-1

Keywords

Noninvasive ventilation; Target-controlled infusion; Propofol; Sedation; Acute respiratory failure; Fiberoptic bronchoscopy; Bronchoalveolar lavage

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In critically ill patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF), fiberoptic bronchoscopy and bronchoalveolar lavage (FOB-BAL) are important tools in diagnostic strategies. In nonintubated patients, the patient's agitation may lead to desaturation and compromise the realization of FOB. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and safety of target-controlled (TCI) propofol sedation during FOB-BAL in nonintubated hypoxemic patients. The first end point in our prospective investigation within an intensive care unit (ICU) was the avoidance of endotracheal intubation within 24 h. Secondary end points were changes in the PaO2/FiO(2) ratio, hemodynamic stability, patient comfort, occurrence of adverse effects, and quality of FOB. Patients self-evaluated their comfort after FOB. Twenty-four FOBs were performed in 23 patients with ARF. PaO2/FiO(2) before FOB was 181 +/- A 50 (range 85-286). All patients tolerated FOB with BAL. None was intubated during the 2 h after FOB. Loss of consciousness was obtained with an effect site concentration of propofol of 1.49 +/- A 0.46 mu g/mL (range 2.6-0.6). No significant adverse events occurred. TCI propofol allowed us to obtain amnesia, patient comfort, and it did not impair airway protection. Any hemodynamic changes observed were modest and transient. FOB-BAL, under NIV and TCI with propofol, is feasible and safe in nonintubated patients with ARF. The TCI of propofol during FOB-BAL reduces patient discomfort with no significant adverse effects.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available