F Froehlich1, W Schwizer, J Thorens, M Köhler, J J Gonvers, M Fried. 1. Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospital Policlinique Médicale Universitaire/Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Most patients receive conscious sedation for gastroscopy. However, the benefit of the most often used combination of low-dose intravenous midazolam and topical lidocaine on patient tolerance remains poorly defined and has not been shown to outweigh cardiorespiratory risks. To respond to these issues, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled prospective study was performed. METHODS:Two hundred outpatients undergoing diagnostic gastroscopy were assigned to receive either (1) midazolam (35 micrograms/kg) and lidocaine spray (100 mg), (2) midazolam and placebo lidocaine, (3) placebo midazolam and lidocaine, or (4) placebo midazolam and placebo lidocaine. RESULTS:Tolerance (visual analogue scale, 0-100 points; 0, excellent; 100, unbearable) improved as compared with placebo midazolam and placebo lidocaine by 23 points (95% confidence interval, 15-32) in group 1, 15 points (95% confidence interval, 7-24) in group 2, and 10 points (95% confidence interval, 2-18) in group 3. Increasing age (P < 0.001), low anxiety (P < 0.001), and male sex (P < 0.03), but not amnesia, were associated with better patient tolerance. Oxygen desaturation (< 1 minute) occurred in 8.2% and was not more frequent after midazolam treatment. Hypotension was rare (2.1%), and no adverse outcome occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Both low-dose midazolam (35 micrograms/kg) and lidocaine spray have an additive beneficial effect on patients tolerance and rarely induce significant alterations in cardiorespiratory monitoring parameters, thus supporting the widespread use of conscious sedation.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Most patients receive conscious sedation for gastroscopy. However, the benefit of the most often used combination of low-dose intravenous midazolam and topical lidocaine on patient tolerance remains poorly defined and has not been shown to outweigh cardiorespiratory risks. To respond to these issues, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled prospective study was performed. METHODS: Two hundred outpatients undergoing diagnostic gastroscopy were assigned to receive either (1) midazolam (35 micrograms/kg) and lidocaine spray (100 mg), (2) midazolam and placebo lidocaine, (3) placebo midazolam and lidocaine, or (4) placebo midazolam and placebo lidocaine. RESULTS: Tolerance (visual analogue scale, 0-100 points; 0, excellent; 100, unbearable) improved as compared with placebo midazolam and placebo lidocaine by 23 points (95% confidence interval, 15-32) in group 1, 15 points (95% confidence interval, 7-24) in group 2, and 10 points (95% confidence interval, 2-18) in group 3. Increasing age (P < 0.001), low anxiety (P < 0.001), and male sex (P < 0.03), but not amnesia, were associated with better patient tolerance. Oxygen desaturation (< 1 minute) occurred in 8.2% and was not more frequent after midazolam treatment. Hypotension was rare (2.1%), and no adverse outcome occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Both low-dose midazolam (35 micrograms/kg) and lidocaine spray have an additive beneficial effect on patients tolerance and rarely induce significant alterations in cardiorespiratory monitoring parameters, thus supporting the widespread use of conscious sedation.
Authors: Se Young Jang; Hyun Gu Park; Min Kyu Jung; Chang Min Cho; Soo Young Park; Seong Woo Jeon; Won Young Tak; Young Oh Kweon; Sung Kook Kim; Young Hoon Jeon Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2012-11-21 Impact factor: 5.742