T Oztürk1, A Cakan, G Gülerçe, G Olgaç, S Deren, A Ozsöz. 1. Department of Anesthesiology, Izmir Chest Diseases and Thoracic Surgery Training and Research Hospital, Izmir, Turkey. ozturkb@deu.edu.tr
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To study the influence of the sedatives propofol and midazolam on cardiovascular parameters in patients undergoing fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB). METHODS:100 patients without a history of cardiac disease undergoing diagnostic FOB were investigated in a prospective-randomized design. After premedication with intramuscular atropine (0.01 mg/kg BW) patients received sedation with either propofol (group P, n = 50) or midazolam (group M, n = 50). Heart rate, arterial oxygen saturation (psaO (2)) and non-invasive blood pressure were recorded prior to and immediately after induction of sedation, when at the level of vocal cords, during the interventional diagnostic procedure (IDP) and 15 min after the end of the FOB. RESULTS: The mean heart rate and systolic pressure were significantly lower in group P when compared with group M when at the level of vocal cords and during the IDP (p < 0.05). The total incidence of major arrhythmias was 10 % and the incidence of minor arrhythmias was 62 %. A decline in psaO (2) < 90 % occurred in 16 patients of group M and 5 patients of group P (p = 0.44). CONCLUSION:Propofol, when used as a sedative for FOB, is associated with lower hemodynamic side effects than in patients undergoing FOB withmidazolam. In addition, it is well-tolerated by patients with pre-existing pulmonary disease. Even patients without a history of heart disease should be monitored for cardiac arrhythmia while undergoing FOB for pulmonary disease, especially patients with a FEV (1) of less than 50 % of the predicted value.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To study the influence of the sedatives propofol and midazolam on cardiovascular parameters in patients undergoing fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB). METHODS: 100 patients without a history of cardiac disease undergoing diagnostic FOB were investigated in a prospective-randomized design. After premedication with intramuscular atropine (0.01 mg/kg BW) patients received sedation with either propofol (group P, n = 50) or midazolam (group M, n = 50). Heart rate, arterial oxygen saturation (psaO (2)) and non-invasive blood pressure were recorded prior to and immediately after induction of sedation, when at the level of vocal cords, during the interventional diagnostic procedure (IDP) and 15 min after the end of the FOB. RESULTS: The mean heart rate and systolic pressure were significantly lower in group P when compared with group M when at the level of vocal cords and during the IDP (p < 0.05). The total incidence of major arrhythmias was 10 % and the incidence of minor arrhythmias was 62 %. A decline in psaO (2) < 90 % occurred in 16 patients of group M and 5 patients of group P (p = 0.44). CONCLUSION:Propofol, when used as a sedative for FOB, is associated with lower hemodynamic side effects than in patients undergoing FOB with midazolam. In addition, it is well-tolerated by patients with pre-existing pulmonary disease. Even patients without a history of heart disease should be monitored for cardiac arrhythmia while undergoing FOB for pulmonary disease, especially patients with a FEV (1) of less than 50 % of the predicted value.