BACKGROUND: Propofol is increasingly used for sedation during colonoscopy, with many recent reports of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and large non-randomized case series. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to identify, analyze and summarize RCTs comparing the relative effectiveness, patient acceptance and safety of propofol for colonoscopy, to traditional sedatives (narcotics and/or benzodiazepines).The secondary objective was to synthesize the studies comparing propofol administration by anesthesiologists to that by non-anesthesiologists for sedation during colonoscopy. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched Medline, Cancerlit, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS, Biological Abstracts, Web of Science and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry database between January 1980 and June 2007; and conference proceeding abstracts for DDW, EUGW and ACG between 1990 and June 2007. There were no language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials comparing use of propofol and traditional agents or administration of propofol by anesthesiologists to that by non-anesthesiologists for sedation during colonoscopy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently extracted the data. The data were pooled using the Cochrane Collaborations' methodology and statistical software RevMan 4.2.10. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria for the primary objective. Most studies included only healthy out-patients. Recovery and discharge times were shorter with use of propofol. There was higher patient satisfaction with use of propofol (OR for dissatisfaction 0.35, 95% CI 0.23, 0.53). There was no difference in procedure time, cecal intubation rate or complications. There was no difference in pain control with non- patient controlled sedation (PCS) use of propofol as compared to the traditional agents (OR 0.90; 95% CI 0.58, 1.39). Although there was higher patient satisfaction (OR for dissatisfaction 0.42, 95% CI 0.20, 0.89), the pain control was inferior with use of PCS use of propofol as compared to the use of traditional agents (OR 3.09; 95% CI 2.15, 4.46).There was only one study comparing administration of propofol by anesthesiologists to that by non-anesthesiologists for sedation during colonoscopy, with no difference in procedure time or patient satisfaction. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Propofol for sedation during colonoscopy for generally healthy individuals can lead to faster recovery and discharge times, increased patient satisfaction without an increase in side-effects. More studies with standardized end-points are needed to compare propofol administration by anesthesiologists to that by non-anesthesiologists.
BACKGROUND: Propofol is increasingly used for sedation during colonoscopy, with many recent reports of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and large non-randomized case series. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to identify, analyze and summarize RCTs comparing the relative effectiveness, patient acceptance and safety of propofol for colonoscopy, to traditional sedatives (narcotics and/or benzodiazepines).The secondary objective was to synthesize the studies comparing propofol administration by anesthesiologists to that by non-anesthesiologists for sedation during colonoscopy. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched Medline, Cancerlit, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS, Biological Abstracts, Web of Science and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry database between January 1980 and June 2007; and conference proceeding abstracts for DDW, EUGW and ACG between 1990 and June 2007. There were no language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials comparing use of propofol and traditional agents or administration of propofol by anesthesiologists to that by non-anesthesiologists for sedation during colonoscopy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently extracted the data. The data were pooled using the Cochrane Collaborations' methodology and statistical software RevMan 4.2.10. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria for the primary objective. Most studies included only healthy out-patients. Recovery and discharge times were shorter with use of propofol. There was higher patient satisfaction with use of propofol (OR for dissatisfaction 0.35, 95% CI 0.23, 0.53). There was no difference in procedure time, cecal intubation rate or complications. There was no difference in pain control with non- patient controlled sedation (PCS) use of propofol as compared to the traditional agents (OR 0.90; 95% CI 0.58, 1.39). Although there was higher patient satisfaction (OR for dissatisfaction 0.42, 95% CI 0.20, 0.89), the pain control was inferior with use of PCS use of propofol as compared to the use of traditional agents (OR 3.09; 95% CI 2.15, 4.46).There was only one study comparing administration of propofol by anesthesiologists to that by non-anesthesiologists for sedation during colonoscopy, with no difference in procedure time or patient satisfaction. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Propofol for sedation during colonoscopy for generally healthy individuals can lead to faster recovery and discharge times, increased patient satisfaction without an increase in side-effects. More studies with standardized end-points are needed to compare propofol administration by anesthesiologists to that by non-anesthesiologists.
Authors: Brian J Ulmer; Jonathan J Hansen; Christine A Overley; Michelle R Symms; Vidyasree Chadalawada; Suthat Liangpunsakul; Eloise Strahl; April M Mendel; Douglas K Rex Journal: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2003-11 Impact factor: 11.382
Authors: Danny W H Lee; Angus C W Chan; Tak-Suen Sze; Chi-Wah Ko; Chi-Ming Poon; Kang-Chung Chan; Kwok-Sang Sin; S C Sydney Chung Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2002-11 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: A T Moerman; L A Foubert; L L Herregods; M M R F Struys; D J De Wolf; D A De Looze; M M De Vos; E P Mortier Journal: Eur J Anaesthesiol Date: 2003-06 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: John K Triantafillidis; Emmanuel Merikas; Dimitrios Nikolakis; Apostolos E Papalois Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2013-01-28 Impact factor: 5.742