Literature DB >> 17225879

The comparison of dexmedetomidine and midazolam used for sedation of patients during upper endoscopy: A prospective, randomized study.

Yavuz Demiraran1, Esin Korkut, Ali Tamer, Ilknur Yorulmaz, Buket Kocaman, Gulbin Sezen, Yusuf Akcan.   

Abstract

The aim of the present prospective, randomized study was to investigate and compare the safety and efficacy of dexmedetomidine versus midazolam in providing sedation for gastroscopy. A total of 50 adult patients (25 patients receiving dexmedetomidine and 25 patients receiving midazolam), 18 to 60 years of age, and rated I and II on the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification system were included. A brief questionnaire was used to collect demographic data; patients were asked to rate anxiety, satisfaction with care to date and expected discomfort on a visual analogue scale. The following parameters were measured continuously and recorded every minute: heart rate, mean arterial pressure, hemoglobin oxygen saturation and respiratory rate. The two groups were similar with regard to age, body mass index, sex, education, duration of endoscopy, and ethanol or tobacco use. After the procedure, full recovery time, mean arterial pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate and hemoglobin oxygen saturation levels were similar in both groups. Both groups also had low levels of perceived procedural gagging, discomfort and anxiety scores (P > 0.05), and high satisfaction levels (90.1+/-3.0 for dexmedetomidine versus 84.9+/-4.5 for midazolam; P > 0.05). Retching and endoscopist satisfaction were significantly different in patients receiving dexmedetomidine versus those receiving midazolam (88.8+/-6.5 versus 73.5+/-16.4, P < 0.05; and 20.6+/-4.4 versus 45.2+/-6.0; P < 0.001). In the midazolam group, the number of patients who had adverse effects was higher than the dexmedetomidine group (P < 0.05). As a result, dexmedetomidine performed as effectively and safely as midazolam when used as a sedative in upper gastroscopy; it was superior to midazolam with regard to retching, rate of side effects and endoscopist satisfaction. It was concluded that dexmedetomidine may be a good alternative to midazolam to sedate patients for upper endoscopy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17225879      PMCID: PMC2656627          DOI: 10.1155/2007/350279

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0835-7900            Impact factor:   3.522


  22 in total

1.  Pharmacokinetics of dexmedetomidine infusions for sedation of postoperative patients requiring intensive caret.

Authors:  R M Venn; M D Karol; R M Grounds
Journal:  Br J Anaesth       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 9.166

2.  Alpha-2 adrenergic agonists to prevent perioperative cardiovascular complications: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Duminda N Wijeysundera; Jennifer S Naik; W Scott Beattie
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  2003-06-15       Impact factor: 4.965

3.  [Sedation with intravenous midazolam during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy--changes in hemodynamics, oxygen saturation and memory].

Authors:  Ju Mizuno; Michiko Matsuki; Yoshinori Gouda; Tomoki Nishiyama; Kazuo Hanaoka
Journal:  Masui       Date:  2003-09

4.  The reliability of a linear analogue for evaluating pain.

Authors:  S I Revill; J O Robinson; M Rosen; M I Hogg
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  1976-11       Impact factor: 6.955

Review 5.  Alpha 2-adrenergic agents in anaesthesia.

Authors:  R Aantaa; M Scheinin
Journal:  Acta Anaesthesiol Scand       Date:  1993-07       Impact factor: 2.105

6.  Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: are preparatory interventions or conscious sedation effective? A randomized trial.

Authors:  Lucio Trevisani; Sergio Sartori; Piergiorgio Gaudenzi; Giuseppe Gilli; Giancarlo Matarese; Sergio Gullini; Vincenzo Abbasciano
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2004-11-15       Impact factor: 5.742

7.  Gastroenterologist-administered propofol versus meperidine and midazolam for advanced upper endoscopy: a prospective, randomized trial.

Authors:  John J Vargo; Gregory Zuccaro; John A Dumot; Kenneth M Shermock; J Brad Morrow; Darwin L Conwell; Patricia A Trolli; Walter G Maurer
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 22.682

8.  Moderate level sedation during endoscopy: a prospective study using low-dose propofol, meperidine/fentanyl, and midazolam.

Authors:  Lawrence B Cohen; Charles D Hightower; Daniel A Wood; Kenneth M Miller; James Aisenberg
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 9.427

9.  Effects of intravenous dexmedetomidine in humans. I. Sedation, ventilation, and metabolic rate.

Authors:  J P Belleville; D S Ward; B C Bloor; M Maze
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  1992-12       Impact factor: 7.892

10.  Results from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy/U.S. Food and Drug Administration collaborative study on complication rates and drug use during gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Authors:  J B Arrowsmith; B B Gerstman; D E Fleischer; S B Benjamin
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1991 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 9.427

View more
  26 in total

1.  Efficacy of novel sedation using the combination of dexmedetomidine and midazolam during endoscopic submucosal dissection for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Toshiyuki Yoshio; Akiyoshi Ishiyama; Tomohiro Tsuchida; Shoichi Yoshimizu; Yusuke Horiuchi; Masami Omae; Toshiaki Hirasawa; Yorimasa Yamamoto; Hiromi Sano; Miyuki Yokota; Junko Fujisaki
Journal:  Esophagus       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 4.230

2.  Sedation and monitoring for gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Authors:  Somchai Amornyotin
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2013-02-16

3.  Conscious sedation for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: dexmedetomidine versus midazolam.

Authors:  Neslihan Kilic; Sukran Sahin; Hale Aksu; Belgin Yavascaoglu; Alp Gurbet; Gurkan Turker; Asli Guler Kadioglu
Journal:  Eurasian J Med       Date:  2011-04

4.  The Efficacy and Safety of Dexmedetomidine for Sedation During Surgery Under Epidural or Spinal Anesthesia: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study.

Authors:  Yoshimi Inagaki; Michiaki Yamakage; Atsuhiro Sakamoto; Akifumi Okayama; Nobuyo Oya; Takehiko Hiraoka; Kiyoshi Morita
Journal:  Yonago Acta Med       Date:  2022-01-04       Impact factor: 1.641

5.  Is it safe to use propofol in the emergency department? A randomized controlled trial to compare propofol and midazolam.

Authors:  Nik Hisamuddin Nik Ab Rahman; Ahmad Hashim
Journal:  Int J Emerg Med       Date:  2010-03-25

6.  Dexmedetomidine impairs success of patient-controlled sedation in alcoholics during ERCP: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

Authors:  Max Mazanikov; Marianne Udd; Leena Kylänpää; Harri Mustonen; Outi Lindström; Jorma Halttunen; Reino Pöyhiä
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2013-01-26       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Comparison of Dexmedetomidine and Midazolam in Sedation for Percutaneous Drainage of Hepatic Hydatid Cysts.

Authors:  Emine Nilgün Bavullu; Esra Aksoy; Ruslan Abdullayev; Nermin Göğüş; Doğan Dede
Journal:  Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim       Date:  2013-05-23

8.  Efficacy of dexmedetomidine on postoperative nausea and vomiting: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Xiao Liang; Miao Zhou; Jiao-Jiao Feng; Liang Wu; Shang-Ping Fang; Xin-Yu Ge; Hai-Jing Sun; Peng-Cheng Ren; Xin Lv
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-06-15

9.  Dexmedetomidine versus midazolam for sedation during endoscopy: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Fan Zhang; Hao-Rui Sun; Ze-Bing Zheng; Ren Liao; Jin Liu
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2016-03-24       Impact factor: 2.447

10.  Efficacy of dexmedetomidine on postoperative nausea and vomiting: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Xiao Liang; Miao Zhou; Jiao-Jiao Feng; Liang Wu; Shang-Ping Fang; Xin-Yu Ge; Hai-Jing Sun; Peng-Cheng Ren; Xin Lv
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-08-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.