TY - JOUR
T1 - Two dosages of remifentanil for patient-controlled analgesia vs. meperidine during colonoscopy
T2 - A prospective randomized controlled trial
AU - Fanti, Lorella
AU - Agostoni, Massimo
AU - Gemma, Marco
AU - Rossi, Gemma
AU - Azzolini, Maria Luisa
AU - Viale, Edi
AU - Guslandi, Mario
AU - Beretta, Luigi
AU - Testoni, Pier Alberto
PY - 2013/4
Y1 - 2013/4
N2 - Background and study: Combined use of opiates and benzodiazepines often results in delayed discharge after colonoscopy. Aims: To compare sedation quality of two dosages of patient controlled analgesia remifentanil with one another and with that of a midazolam-meperidine association during colonoscopy. Methods: Ninety patients undergoing colonoscopy were randomly assigned to three groups. Group M received a meperidine bolus (0.7. mg/kg) and sham patient controlled analgesia. Group R1 received remifentanil 0.5. μg/kg and group R2 remifentanil 0.8. μg/kg together with a patient-controlled analgesia pump injecting further boluses (2-min lock-out). Technical difficulties of the examination, gastroenterologist's and patient's satisfaction with sedoanalgesia were evaluated after colonoscopy on a 100. mm Visual Analogue Scale. Patient's satisfaction was assessed 24. h later. Results: Group M had more adverse events ( p= 0.044), required more rescue boluses ( p= 0.0010), had lower Observer's Assessment of Alertness and Sedation Scale score at the end of the procedure ( p= 0.0016) and longer discharge time ( p= 0.0001). Groups R1 and R2 did not differ with respect to these variables. Patient's degree of pain and satisfaction with sedo-analgesia, endoscopist's technical difficulty and satisfaction were not different among groups. Conclusions: Remifentanil patient controlled analgesia is a safe approach to sedation for colonoscopy.
AB - Background and study: Combined use of opiates and benzodiazepines often results in delayed discharge after colonoscopy. Aims: To compare sedation quality of two dosages of patient controlled analgesia remifentanil with one another and with that of a midazolam-meperidine association during colonoscopy. Methods: Ninety patients undergoing colonoscopy were randomly assigned to three groups. Group M received a meperidine bolus (0.7. mg/kg) and sham patient controlled analgesia. Group R1 received remifentanil 0.5. μg/kg and group R2 remifentanil 0.8. μg/kg together with a patient-controlled analgesia pump injecting further boluses (2-min lock-out). Technical difficulties of the examination, gastroenterologist's and patient's satisfaction with sedoanalgesia were evaluated after colonoscopy on a 100. mm Visual Analogue Scale. Patient's satisfaction was assessed 24. h later. Results: Group M had more adverse events ( p= 0.044), required more rescue boluses ( p= 0.0010), had lower Observer's Assessment of Alertness and Sedation Scale score at the end of the procedure ( p= 0.0016) and longer discharge time ( p= 0.0001). Groups R1 and R2 did not differ with respect to these variables. Patient's degree of pain and satisfaction with sedo-analgesia, endoscopist's technical difficulty and satisfaction were not different among groups. Conclusions: Remifentanil patient controlled analgesia is a safe approach to sedation for colonoscopy.
KW - Analgesia
KW - Gastrointestinal endoscopy
KW - Sedation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84875279689&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84875279689&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.dld.2012.11.003
DO - 10.1016/j.dld.2012.11.003
M3 - Article
C2 - 23245591
AN - SCOPUS:84875279689
VL - 45
SP - 310
EP - 315
JO - Digestive and Liver Disease
JF - Digestive and Liver Disease
SN - 1590-8658
IS - 4
ER -