Journals / Eurasian Journal of Medicine / 2011 / Cilt: 43 - Sayı: 1

Endoskopik retrograd Kolanjiyopankreatografide bilinçli sedasyon: Deksmedetomidin ve midazolamın karşılaştırılması

Conscious sedation for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: Dexmedetomidine versus midazolam

Pages
13–17
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

When patient and surgeon satisfaction was compared between the two groups, Group D showed higher surgeon satisfaction scores (p

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: Midazolam and dexmedetomidine, which are used for sedation during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, were compared to evaluate the differences in efficacy, hemodynamics, and side effects.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and Methods: Fifty patients aged between 18 and 80 were randomly assigned to two groups according to American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification: Group M received midazolam with an initial bolus infusion of 0.04 mg/kg intravenously (i.v.), followed by additional doses of 0.5 mg i.v. midazolam, titrated to achieve a Ramsay sedation scale score of 3-4.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:When patient and surgeon satisfaction was compared between the two groups, Group D showed higher surgeon satisfaction scores (p
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: Midazolam and dexmedetomidine, which are used for sedation during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, were compared to evaluate the differences in efficacy, hemodynamics, and side effects. Materials and Methods: Fifty patients aged between 18 and 80 were randomly assigned to two groups according to American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification: Group M received midazolam with an initial bolus infusion of 0.04 mg/kg intravenously (i.v.), followed by additional doses of 0.5 mg i.v. midazolam, titrated to achieve a Ramsay sedation scale score of 3-4. Group D received dexmedetomidine with an initial bolus infusion of 1 mcg/kg/hr i.v. over 10 minutes, followed by a continuous infusion of 0.2-0.7 mcg/ kg/hr, titrated to achieve an RSS of 3-4. A Mini Mental Status Examination (MMSE) was performed prior to sedation and in the recovery room once the Modified Aldrete Score (MAS) reached 9-10. Patient heart rates, arterial pressure and pain were evaluated.Results: Patients in Group D had lower heart rates at 20, 25, 30, 35 and 40 minutes following the initiation of sedation (p0.05). When patient and surgeon satisfaction was compared between the two groups, Group D showed higher surgeon satisfaction scores (p

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmada endoskopik retrograd kolonjiopankreatografi işlemi sırasında bilinçli sedasyon için uygulanan midazolam ve deksmedetomidinin hemodinami ve solunum parametreleri ve yan etkiler açısından karşılaştırılmaları amaçlandı. Gereç ve Yöntem: 18-80 yaşları arasında, Amerikan Anestezistler Birliği'nin (ASA) sınıflamasına göre I ve II anestezi risk grubuna giren 50 olgu çalışmaya alınarak, çalışma protokolü anlatıldı. Hastalar randomize olarak iki gruba ayrıldı: Grup M'deki olgulara midazolam 0.04 mg kg-1 intravenöz (i.v) uygulandıktan sonra RSS'u 3-4 olacak şekilde 0.5 mg ek dozlarla işleme devam edildi. Grup D'deki olgulara deksmedetomidin 1 μg kg-1 sa-1 olacak şekilde 10 dakika yükleme dozu uygulandı. Takiben olguların RSS'u 3-4 olacak şekilde 0.2-0.7 μg kg- 1sa-1 deksmedetomidin infüzyonuna başlandı.Olguların demografik verileri ve çalışma süresince vital bulguları kaydedildi. Sedasyon skorları ölçümünde Ramsay sedasyon skoru kullanıldı. Mini mental test (MMT) olgulara sedasyon öncesinde ve derlenme odasında modifiye Aldrete skoru (MAS) 9-10 olduğunda uygulandı. Ağrı değerlendirilmesinde yüz ağrı ölçeği (YAÖ) kullanıldı.Bulgular: Grup D'de 20, 25, 30, 35, 40. dakikalarda ölçülen kalp hızı değerleri Grup P'ye göre daha düşük bulundu (p0.05). Gruplar arasında cerrah ve hasta memnuniyeti karşılaştırıldığında, Grup D'de cerrah memnuniyetinin daha yüksek olduğu saptandı (p

🔖

Cite This Article

GÜRBET, A., AKSU, H., YAVAŞCAOĞLU, B., TÜRKER, G., ŞAHİN, Ş., KILIÇ, N., KADIOĞLU, A. G. (2022). Endoskopik retrograd Kolanjiyopankreatografide bilinçli sedasyon: Deksmedetomidin ve midazolamın karşılaştırılması. Eurasian Journal of Medicine, Cilt: 43 - Sayı: 1, 13–17. https://ajindex.com/articles/509276

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (6)

  1. Chen WX, Lin HJ, Zhang WF, Gu Q, Zhong XQ, Yu CH et al. Sedation and safety of propofol for therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int 2005; 4: 437-40
  2. Habib NE, Mandour NM, Balmer HG. Effects of midazolam on anxiety level and pain perception in cataract surgery with topical anesthesia. J Cataract Refract Surg 2004; 30: 437-43. [CrossRef] 3) Aantaa R, Jaakola ML, Kallio A. A comparison of deksmedetomidine, an alpha2-adrenoceptor agonist, and midazolam as i.m. premedication for minor gynaecological surgery. Br J Anaesth 1991; 67: 402-9. [CrossRef] 4) Arain SR, Ebert TJ. The efficacy, side effects, and recovery characteristics of dexmedetomidine versus propofol when used for intraoperative sedation. Anesth Analg 2002; 95: 461-6. [CrossRef] 5) Ramsay MA, Savege TM, Simpson BR, Goodwin R. Controlled sedation with alphaxolone. Br Med J 1974; 12: 656-9
  3. Folstein MF, Folstein S, Mc Hugh PR. ‘Mini Mental State' A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 1975; 12: 189-98. [CrossRef] 7) Alderette JA, Kroulik DA. Postanesthetic recovery score. Anesth Analg 1970; 51: 543-6
  4. Talu GK. Ağrılı hastanın değerlendirilmesi. In: Erdine S (ed). Ağrı. 3rd edition. İstanbul: Nobel kitabevleri; 2007; 61-9 9) American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Sedation Analgesia by Non Anesthesiologists. Practice guidelines for sedation and analgesia by Non anesthesiologists. Anesthesiology 2002; 96: 1004-17. [CrossRef] 10) Riphaus A, Stergiou N, Wehrmann T. Sedation with propofol for routine ERCP in high-risk octogenarians: A randomized, controlled study. Am J Gastroenterol 2005; 100: 1957-63. [CrossRef] 11) Demiraran Y, Korkut E, Tamer A, Yorulmaz I, Kocaman B, Sezen G, et al. The comparasion of dexmedetomidine and midazolam used for sedation of patients during upper endoscopy: A prospective, randomized study. Can J Gastroenterol 2007; 21: 25-9
  5. Schweickert WD, Kress JP. Strategies to optimize analgesia and sedation. Crit Care 2008; 12: 6-16
  6. Mackenzie N. Sedation during regional anaesthesia: Indications, advantages and methods. Eur J Anaesthesiol 1996; 13: 2-7. [CrossRef] 14) Kenny GN. Patient sedation: technical problems and developments. Eur J Anaesthesiol 1996; 13: 18-21. [CrossRef] 15) McHardy FE, Fortier J, Chung F, Krishnathas A, Marshall SI. A comparasion of midazolam, alfentanil and propofol for sedation in oupatient intraoculer sur