4.3 Article

Efficacy and Tolerability of Sufentanil, Dexmedetomidine, or Ketamine Added to Propofol-based Sedation for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy in Elderly Patients: A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial

Journal

CLINICAL THERAPEUTICS
Volume 41, Issue 9, Pages 1864-1877

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2019.06.011

Keywords

dexmedetomidine; elderly patients; gastrointestinal endoscopy; ketamine; propofol; sufentanil

Funding

  1. Research Foundation of Shenzhen Hospital of Southern Medical University [8167010880]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To investigate the optimal agent combined with propofol for sedation in elderly patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy. Methods: A total of 120 elderly patients scheduled for gastrointestinal endoscopy under propofol-based sedation were randomly allocated to receive propofol + saline (control group), propofol + sufentanil 0.1 mu g/kg, propofol + dexmedetomidine 0.4 mu g/kg, or propofol + ketamine 0.4 mg/kg. Mean arterial pressure, heart rate, pulse oximetry, pressure of endtidal carbon dioxide, respiratory rate, and Ramsay sedation scale score were recorded. Induction time, procedure time, recovery time, propofol dose, and adverse events were also recorded. Findings: During the sedation procedure, the AUC of HR was lowest in the propofol + dexmedetomidine group (all, P < 0.05), and the AUC of pulse oximetry was significantly higher in the propofol + dexmedetomidine and propofol + ketamine groups compared to the other 2 groups (both, P < 0.05). The propofol + dexmedetomidine group had the highest prevalences of hypotension and bradycardia, and the control group experienced the largest number of hypoxia episodes (all, P < 0.05). The control group consumed the highest dose of propofol, while the propofol + ketamine group needed the lowest dose (all, P < 0.05). (C) 2019 Published by Elsevier Inc.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available