Midazolam and pethidine versus propofol and fentanyl patient controlled sedation/analgesia for upper gastrointestinal tract ultrasound endoscopy

A prospective randomized controlled trial

M. Agostoni, L. Fanti, P. G. Arcidiacono, M. Gemma, G. Strini, G. Torri, P. A. Testoni

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

27 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background and objectives: The aim of this prospective, randomized study was to compare the standard regimen of midazolam and pethidine administered by the gastroenterologist versus patient controlled sedation with a propofol-fentanyl mixture during upper gastrointestinal tract endoscopic ultrasonography. Our primary end-points were patient satisfaction and patient cooperation assessed by endoscopist. Methods: Fifty-four consecutive patients, undergoing endoscopic ultrasonography, received sedation with midazolam and pethidine (Group M: n = 27) or propofol and fentanyl (Group P: n = 27). Group M: pethidine 0.7 mg/kg midazolam 0.04 mg/kg before examination; boluses of same drugs if the sedation was insufficient plus a sham patient controlled sedation analgesia; Group P: propofol 17 mg plus fentanyl 15 μg before examination and a patient controlled sedation analgesia pump containing 170 mg propofol plus 150 μg fentanyl injecting 0.5 ml every time the patient pressed the button (no "lock out"). Boluses of 1 ml of the same mixture if the sedation was insufficient. Results: Group M: mean dosage of pethidine and midazolam 88.6 and 5 mg, respectively. Group P: mean dosage of propofol and fentanyl 119.7 mg and 106 μg, respectively. Both groups were similar for duration and difficulty of the procedure, the grade of sedation (Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Score) and judgement by endoscopist and patient about cooperation and satisfaction. The only difference between groups was about the extra boluses administered during the procedure. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that a patient controlled sedation analgesia with propofol and fentanyl is an effective and safe technique for upper gastrointestinal tract endoscopic ultrasonography procedures and results in a high level of satisfaction both for patients and operator.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1024-1029
Number of pages6
JournalDigestive and Liver Disease
Volume39
Issue number11
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2007

Fingerprint

Patient-Controlled Analgesia
Meperidine
Upper Gastrointestinal Tract
Midazolam
Fentanyl
Propofol
Endoscopy
Randomized Controlled Trials
Endosonography
Patient Satisfaction
Patient Compliance
Prospective Studies
Pharmaceutical Preparations

Keywords

  • Endoscopic ultrasonography
  • Fentanyl
  • Midazolam
  • Patient controlled sedation analgesia
  • Pethidine
  • Propofol

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

@article{2fa13ee399d14880b3232f24ef7852d0,
title = "Midazolam and pethidine versus propofol and fentanyl patient controlled sedation/analgesia for upper gastrointestinal tract ultrasound endoscopy: A prospective randomized controlled trial",
abstract = "Background and objectives: The aim of this prospective, randomized study was to compare the standard regimen of midazolam and pethidine administered by the gastroenterologist versus patient controlled sedation with a propofol-fentanyl mixture during upper gastrointestinal tract endoscopic ultrasonography. Our primary end-points were patient satisfaction and patient cooperation assessed by endoscopist. Methods: Fifty-four consecutive patients, undergoing endoscopic ultrasonography, received sedation with midazolam and pethidine (Group M: n = 27) or propofol and fentanyl (Group P: n = 27). Group M: pethidine 0.7 mg/kg midazolam 0.04 mg/kg before examination; boluses of same drugs if the sedation was insufficient plus a sham patient controlled sedation analgesia; Group P: propofol 17 mg plus fentanyl 15 μg before examination and a patient controlled sedation analgesia pump containing 170 mg propofol plus 150 μg fentanyl injecting 0.5 ml every time the patient pressed the button (no {"}lock out{"}). Boluses of 1 ml of the same mixture if the sedation was insufficient. Results: Group M: mean dosage of pethidine and midazolam 88.6 and 5 mg, respectively. Group P: mean dosage of propofol and fentanyl 119.7 mg and 106 μg, respectively. Both groups were similar for duration and difficulty of the procedure, the grade of sedation (Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Score) and judgement by endoscopist and patient about cooperation and satisfaction. The only difference between groups was about the extra boluses administered during the procedure. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that a patient controlled sedation analgesia with propofol and fentanyl is an effective and safe technique for upper gastrointestinal tract endoscopic ultrasonography procedures and results in a high level of satisfaction both for patients and operator.",
keywords = "Endoscopic ultrasonography, Fentanyl, Midazolam, Patient controlled sedation analgesia, Pethidine, Propofol",
author = "M. Agostoni and L. Fanti and Arcidiacono, {P. G.} and M. Gemma and G. Strini and G. Torri and Testoni, {P. A.}",
year = "2007",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1016/j.dld.2007.08.004",
language = "English",
volume = "39",
pages = "1024--1029",
journal = "Digestive and Liver Disease",
issn = "1590-8658",
publisher = "Elsevier B.V.",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Midazolam and pethidine versus propofol and fentanyl patient controlled sedation/analgesia for upper gastrointestinal tract ultrasound endoscopy

T2 - A prospective randomized controlled trial

AU - Agostoni, M.

AU - Fanti, L.

AU - Arcidiacono, P. G.

AU - Gemma, M.

AU - Strini, G.

AU - Torri, G.

AU - Testoni, P. A.

PY - 2007/11

Y1 - 2007/11

N2 - Background and objectives: The aim of this prospective, randomized study was to compare the standard regimen of midazolam and pethidine administered by the gastroenterologist versus patient controlled sedation with a propofol-fentanyl mixture during upper gastrointestinal tract endoscopic ultrasonography. Our primary end-points were patient satisfaction and patient cooperation assessed by endoscopist. Methods: Fifty-four consecutive patients, undergoing endoscopic ultrasonography, received sedation with midazolam and pethidine (Group M: n = 27) or propofol and fentanyl (Group P: n = 27). Group M: pethidine 0.7 mg/kg midazolam 0.04 mg/kg before examination; boluses of same drugs if the sedation was insufficient plus a sham patient controlled sedation analgesia; Group P: propofol 17 mg plus fentanyl 15 μg before examination and a patient controlled sedation analgesia pump containing 170 mg propofol plus 150 μg fentanyl injecting 0.5 ml every time the patient pressed the button (no "lock out"). Boluses of 1 ml of the same mixture if the sedation was insufficient. Results: Group M: mean dosage of pethidine and midazolam 88.6 and 5 mg, respectively. Group P: mean dosage of propofol and fentanyl 119.7 mg and 106 μg, respectively. Both groups were similar for duration and difficulty of the procedure, the grade of sedation (Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Score) and judgement by endoscopist and patient about cooperation and satisfaction. The only difference between groups was about the extra boluses administered during the procedure. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that a patient controlled sedation analgesia with propofol and fentanyl is an effective and safe technique for upper gastrointestinal tract endoscopic ultrasonography procedures and results in a high level of satisfaction both for patients and operator.

AB - Background and objectives: The aim of this prospective, randomized study was to compare the standard regimen of midazolam and pethidine administered by the gastroenterologist versus patient controlled sedation with a propofol-fentanyl mixture during upper gastrointestinal tract endoscopic ultrasonography. Our primary end-points were patient satisfaction and patient cooperation assessed by endoscopist. Methods: Fifty-four consecutive patients, undergoing endoscopic ultrasonography, received sedation with midazolam and pethidine (Group M: n = 27) or propofol and fentanyl (Group P: n = 27). Group M: pethidine 0.7 mg/kg midazolam 0.04 mg/kg before examination; boluses of same drugs if the sedation was insufficient plus a sham patient controlled sedation analgesia; Group P: propofol 17 mg plus fentanyl 15 μg before examination and a patient controlled sedation analgesia pump containing 170 mg propofol plus 150 μg fentanyl injecting 0.5 ml every time the patient pressed the button (no "lock out"). Boluses of 1 ml of the same mixture if the sedation was insufficient. Results: Group M: mean dosage of pethidine and midazolam 88.6 and 5 mg, respectively. Group P: mean dosage of propofol and fentanyl 119.7 mg and 106 μg, respectively. Both groups were similar for duration and difficulty of the procedure, the grade of sedation (Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Score) and judgement by endoscopist and patient about cooperation and satisfaction. The only difference between groups was about the extra boluses administered during the procedure. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that a patient controlled sedation analgesia with propofol and fentanyl is an effective and safe technique for upper gastrointestinal tract endoscopic ultrasonography procedures and results in a high level of satisfaction both for patients and operator.

KW - Endoscopic ultrasonography

KW - Fentanyl

KW - Midazolam

KW - Patient controlled sedation analgesia

KW - Pethidine

KW - Propofol

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=35548994934&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=35548994934&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.dld.2007.08.004

DO - 10.1016/j.dld.2007.08.004

M3 - Article

VL - 39

SP - 1024

EP - 1029

JO - Digestive and Liver Disease

JF - Digestive and Liver Disease

SN - 1590-8658

IS - 11

ER -