Prospective Pilot Study: Tolerability of Outpatient Penile Plication Under Nursing-Administered Conscious Sedation vs Anesthesiologist-Administered Deep Sedation.

INTRODUCTION: Penile plication is commonly performed for Peyronie's disease under general or spinal anesthesia. Conscious sedation (CS) offers decreased anesthetic risks, cost-effectiveness, and the ability to perform the procedure in outpatient settings with shorter wait times. We sought to compare tolerability of penile plication under deep intravenous sedation (DIS) administered by anesthesiologists and nursing-administered CS (NACS). METHODS: Tolerability for penile plication was prospectively evaluated, excluding revision surgeries and those with hourglass or hinge deformities. DIS included midazolam and ketamine with infusion of propofol and remifentanil. NACS consisted of midazolam and fentanyl. Baseline characteristics, procedural information, and patient- and surgeon-reported pain assessments were collected. Patients were administered a standardized tolerability questionnaire on follow-up. RESULTS: Forty patients were enrolled (23 DIS; 17 NACS) with similar baseline characteristics. Median curvature of the DIS cohort was 55° (interquartile range = 43.75-76.25) and 45° (interquartile range = 45-60) in NACS. There was a 100% success rate with no procedure abortion or conversion to general anesthetic. On follow-up, all patients had functional curvature (<20°), and 100% of patients in the DIS and NACS cohorts reported that they would recommend CS to others. Over 93% of patients in both cohorts would choose CS over general anesthetic in the future, with no differences in perioperative and postoperative pain between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Penile plication with CS, whether administered by an anesthesiologist or nursing, is well tolerated with no differences in pain or complications. This indicates that outpatient penile plication with trained nursing staff administering CS can safely reduce costs, risks, and wait times.

Place of high-flow nasal oxygen in nonoperating room anesthesia.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This article aims to assess the utility of high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) therapy in nonoperating room anesthesia (NORA) settings. RECENT FINDINGS: The number of procedural interventions under deep sedation in NORA is still increasing. Administration of oxygen is recommended to prevent hypoxemia and is usually delivered with standard oxygen through nasal cannula or a face mask. HFNO is a simple alternative with a high warmed humidified flow (ranging from 30 to 70 l/min) with a precise fraction inspired of oxygen (ranging from 21 to 100%). Compared to standard oxygen, HFNO has demonstrated efficacy in reducing the incidence of hypoxemia and the need for airway maneuvers. Research on HFNO has primarily focused on its application in gastrointestinal endoscopy procedures. Yet, it has also shown promising results in various other procedural interventions including bronchoscopy, cardiology, and endovascular procedures. However, the adoption of HFNO prompted considerations regarding cost-effectiveness and environmental impact. SUMMARY: HFNO emerges as a compelling alternative to conventional oxygen delivery methods for preventing hypoxemia during procedural interventions in NORA. However, its utilization should be reserved for patients at moderate-to-high risk to mitigate the impact of cost and environmental factors.

Tension between continuous and deep sedation and assistance in dying: a national survey of intensive care professionals' perceptions.

INTRODUCTION: The situation in France is unique, having a legal framework for continuous and deep sedation (CDS). However, its use in intensive care units (ICU), combined with the withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies, still raises ethical issues, particularly its potential to hasten death. The legalization of assistance in dying, i.e., assisted suicide or euthanasia at the patient's request, is currently under discussion in France. The objectives of this national survey were first, to assess whether ICU professionals perceive CDS administered to ICU patients as a practice that hastens death, in addition to relieving unbearable suffering, and second, to assess ICU professionals' perceptions of assistance in dying. METHODS: A national survey with online questionnaires for ICU physicians and nursesaddressed through the French Society of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine. RESULTS: A total of 956 ICU professionals responded to the survey (38% physicians and 62% nurses). Of these, 22% of physicians and 12% of nurses (p < 0.001) felt that the purpose of CDS was to hasten death. For 20% of physicians, CDS combined with terminal extubation was considered an assistance in dying. For 52% of ICU professionals, the current framework did not sufficiently cover the range of situations that occur in the ICU. A favorable opinion on the potential legalization of assistance in dying was observed in 83% of nurses and 71% of physicians (p < 0.001), with no preference between assisted suicide and euthanasia. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight the tension between CDS and assisted suicide/euthanasia in the specific context of intensive care and suggest that ICU professionals would be supportive of a legislative evolution.

Continuous palliative sedation until death: a qualitative study of palliative care clinicians' experiences.

BACKGROUND: The practice of continuous palliative sedation until death is the subject of much medical and ethical debate, which is reflected in the inconsistency that persists in the literature regarding the definition and indications of palliative sedation. AIM: This study aims to gain a better understanding of palliative care clinicians' experiences with continuous palliative sedation. DESIGN: We conducted a qualitative study based on focus group discussions. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: We conducted six focus groups with a total of 28 palliative care clinicians (i.e., 15 nurses, 12 physicians, and 1 end-of-life doula) from diverse care settings across Canada, where assisted dying has recently been legalized. RESULTS: An interpretative phenomenological analysis was used to consolidate the data into six key themes: responding to suffering; grappling with uncertainty; adapting care to ensure ongoing quality; grounding clinical practice in ethics; combining medical expertise, relational tact, and reflexivity; and offering an alternative to assisted death. CONCLUSIONS: Interaction with the patient's family, uncertainty about the patient's prognosis, the concurrent practice of assisted dying, and the treatment of existential suffering influence the quality of sedation and indicate a lack of clear palliative care guidelines. Nevertheless, clinicians exhibit a reflective and adaptive capacity that can facilitate good practice.

Palliative sedation - revised recommendations.

Palliative sedation is defined as the monitored use of medications intended to induce a state of decreased or absent awareness (unconsciousness) to relieve the burden of otherwise intractable suffering in a manner ethically acceptable to the patient, their family, and healthcare providers. In Switzerland, the prevalence of continuous deep sedation until death increased from 4.7% in 2001 to 17.5% of all deceased in 2013, depending on the research method used and on regional variations. Yet, these numbers may be overestimated due to a lack of understanding of the term "continuous deep sedation" by for example respondents of the questionnaire-based study. Inadequately trained and inexperienced healthcare professionals may incorrectly or inappropriately perform palliative sedation due to uncertainties regarding its definitions and practice. Therefore, the expert members of the Bigorio group and the authors of this manuscript believe that national recommendations should be published and made available to healthcare professionals to provide practical, terminological, and ethical guidance. The Bigorio group is the working group of the Swiss Palliative Care Society whose task is to publish clinical recommendations at a national level in Switzerland. These recommendations aim to provide guidance on the most critical questions and issues related to palliative sedation. The Swiss Society of Palliative Care (palliative.ch) mandated a writing board comprising four clinical experts (three physicians and one ethicist) and two national academic experts to revise the 2005 Bigorio guidelines. A first draft was created based on a narrative literature review, which was internally reviewed by five academic institutions (Lausanne, Geneva, Bern, Zürich, and Basel) and the heads of all working groups of the Swiss Society of Palliative Care before finalising the guidelines. The following themes are discussed regarding palliative sedation: (a) definitions and clinical aspects, (b) the decision-making process, (c) communication with patients and families, (d) patient monitoring, (e) pharmacological approaches, and (f) ethical and controversial issues. Palliative sedation must be practised with clinical and ethical accuracy and competence to avoid harm and ethically questionable use. Specialist palliative care teams should be consulted before initiating palliative sedation to avoid overlooking other potential treatment options for the patient's symptoms and suffering.

Safety and efficacy of a low-dose combination of midazolam, alfentanil, and propofol for deep sedation of elderly patients undergoing ERCP.

BACKGROUND: Proper sedation of patients, particularly elderly individuals, who are more susceptible to sedation-related complications, is of significant importance in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). This study aims to assess the safety and efficacy of a low-dose combination of midazolam, alfentanil, and propofol for deep sedation in elderly patients undergoing ERCP, compared to a group of middle-aged patients. METHODS: The medical records of 610 patients with common bile duct stones who underwent elective ERCP under deep sedation with a three-drug regimen, including midazolam, alfentanil, and propofol at Shandong Provincial Third Hospital from January 2023 to September 2023 were retrospectively reviewed in this study. Patients were categorized into three groups: middle-aged (50-64 years, n = 202), elderly (65-79 years, n = 216), and very elderly (≥ 80 years, n = 192). Intraoperative vital signs and complications were compared among these groups. RESULTS: The three groups showed no significant difference in terms of intraoperative variation of systolic blood pressure (P = 0.291), diastolic blood pressure (P = 0.737), heart rate (P = 0.107), peripheral oxygen saturation (P = 0.188), bispectral index (P = 0.158), and the occurrence of sedation-related adverse events including hypotension (P = 0.170) and hypoxemia (P = 0.423). CONCLUSION: The results suggest that a low-dose three-drug regimen consisting of midazolam, alfentanil, and propofol seems safe and effective for deep sedation of elderly and very elderly patients undergoing ERCP procedures. However, further studies are required to verify these findings and clarify the benefits and risks of this method.

Apnea during moderate to deep sedation using continuous infusion of remimazolam compared to propofol and dexmedetomidine: A retrospective observational study.

Remimazolam's rapid onset and offset make it an innovative sedative for use during regional anesthesia. However, its respiratory safety profile is not well understood. We compared the continuous infusion of remimazolam with commonly used sedatives, propofol and dexmedetomidine, after regional anesthesia. In this retrospective study, the incidence of apnea (>10 seconds) was assessed in patients who underwent orthopedic surgery under regional anesthesia and received moderate to deep sedation using continuous infusion of remimazolam (group R: 0.1 mg/kg in 2 minutes followed by 0.5 mg/kg/hr). The incidence was compared with that of propofol (group P: 2-3 µg/mL target-controlled infusion) and dexmedetomidine (group D: 1 µg/kg in 10 minutes followed by 0.4-1 µg/kg/hr). Propensity score weighted multivariable logistic regression model was utilized to determine the effects of the sedative agents on the incidence of apnea. A total of 634 (191, 278, and 165 in group R, P, and D) cases were included in the final analysis. The incidence of apnea was 63.9%, 67.3%, and 48.5% in group R, P, and D, respectively. The adjusted odds ratios for apnea were 2.33 (95% CI, 1.50 to 3.61) and 2.50 (95% CI, 1.63 to 3.85) in group R and P, compared to group D. The incidence of apnea in patients receiving moderate to deep sedation using continuous infusion of remimazolam with dosage suggested in the current study was over 60%. Therefore, careful titration and respiratory monitoring is warranted.

Revisión de la sedación continua en el paciente crítico. Evidencias de la efectividad de nuevos fármacos respecto a los esquemas farmacológicos tradicionales / Review of continuous sedation in the critical ill patient. Evidence of the effectiveness of new drugs compared to traditional pharmacological schemes

Introducción: La sedación es uno de los pilares fundamentales del manejo del paciente crítico internado en la Unidad de Terapia Intensiva (UTI), sobre todo en aquellos que requieren Asistencia Ventilatoria Mecánica (AVM). Los fármacos que se utilizan con este propósito tienen el objetivo de lograr un adecuado nivel de conciencia en el paciente, de forma tal que se encuentre confortable y tolere la AVM. Los esquemas de sedación utilizados se encontraban basados en Benzodiacepinas, aunque, su uso no está exento de efectos adversos. El presente estudio pretende realizar una Revisión y Síntesis de la evidencia existente sobre la efectividad y seguridad del uso de dos nuevos fármacos, Propofol y Dexmedetomidina, para sedación continua en UTI y su comparación con los esque- mas tradicionales. Los Resultados respecto a la reducción de días en UTI resultó siempre significativa a favor del uso de propofol o dexmedetomidina en comparación a benzodiacepinas; lo mismo ocurrió con los días vinculados a la AVM. Estos resultados fueron encontrados en revisiones tanto de alta calidad como moderada o baja. Sin embargo, todos los estudios tuvieron en común que la calidad de la evidencia utilizada fue baja a moderada. Según la evidencia identificada, el uso de dexmedetomidina o propofol disminuiría de manera estadísticamente significativa los días de estadía en UTI y los requerimientos de AVM en pacientes adultos. Se debe tener en cuenta que la mayoría de las Revisiones encontradas fueron de calidad baja, siendo solamente 2 (dos) de calidad alta y una moderada. Es por esto último que la recomendación del uso de sedación basada en Dexmedetomidina o Propofol es condicional, ya que la calidad de la evidencia que la soporta es baja, en la mayoría de los casos.

Introductión: Sedation is one of the fundamental pillars of the management of critically ill patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU), especially in those who require mechanical ventilatory assistance (MVA). The drugs used for this purpose have the objective of achieving an adequate level of consciousness in the patient, so that they are comfortable and tolerate AVM. The sedation schemes used were based on Benzodiazepines, however, their use is not free of adverse effects. The present work aims to carry out a review and synthesis of the existing evidence on the effectiveness and safety of the use of two new drugs Propofol and Dexmedetomidine for continuous sedation in ICU and its comparison with traditional regimens. The results regarding the reduction of days in ICU were always significant in favor of the use of Propofol or Dexmedetomidine compared to benzodiazepines; The same happened with the days linked to the AVM. These results were found in reviews of both high and moderate or low quality. However, what they all had in common was that the quality of the evidence used was low to moderate. According to the evidence identified, the use of Dexmedetomidine or Propofol would statistically significantly reduce the days of ICU stay and AVM requirements in adult patients. It should be taken into account that most of the reviews found were of low quality, with only 2 being of high quality, and 1 of moderate quality. It is for this last reason that the recommendation for the use of sedation based on Dexmedetomidine or Propofol is conditional, since the quality of the evidence supporting it is, for the most part, low.

Expanding the Use of Continuous Sedation Until Death and Physician-Assisted Suicide.

The controversy over the equivalence of continuous sedation until death (CSD) and physician-assisted suicide/euthanasia (PAS/E) provides an opportunity to focus on a significant extended use of CSD. This extension, suggested by the equivalence of PAS/E and CSD, is designed to promote additional patient autonomy at the end-of-life. Samuel LiPuma, in his article, "Continuous Sedation Until Death as Physician-Assisted Suicide/Euthanasia: A Conceptual Analysis" claims equivalence between CSD and death; his paper is seminal in the equivalency debate. Critics contend that sedation follows proportionality protocols for which LiPuma's thesis does not adequately account. Furthermore, sedation may not eliminate consciousness, and as such LiPuma's contention that CSD is equivalent to neocortical death is suspect. We not only defend the equivalence thesis, but also expand it to include additional moral considerations. First, we explain the equivalence thesis. This is followed by a defense of the thesis against five criticisms. The third section critiques the current use of CSD. Finally, we offer two proposals that, if adopted, would broaden the use of PAS/E and CSD and thereby expand options at the end-of-life.

[PAL-PRAT study: Healthcare workers' knowledge and perception of palliative practices in a Cancer Center]. / Quelle connaissance et quelle perception ont les professionnels de santé d'un Centre de lutte contre le cancer à propos des pratiques palliatives encadrées par la loi Claeys-Leonetti : étude PAL PRAT.

INTRODUCTION: The issue of end-of-life care is the subject of a sensitive debate in French society, particularly regarding the possibility for certain patients to have access to medical assistance in dying. The aim of this study was to assess the knowledge and opinion of healthcare providers on the care practices for patients at the end of life, as well as to highlight any specificities in their discourse. METHOD: A survey of healthcare providers' opinions, composed of closed and open questions, that were analyzed using a lexicometric approach, was distributed in a cancer center. RESULTS: The results of the study reveal a good knowledge of the different procedures. Professionals considered that advance directives should be systematically collected; a majority of them differentiated euthanasia from deep continuous sedation and perceived the latter as a means of relieving patients' suffering without inducing death. The different procedures related to the active assistance in dying were known by a majority of professionals and the survey did not identify a dominant trend concerning the will to practice euthanasia if the legal framework allowed it. Half of the participants considered their training insufficient, indicating the need to fill this gap. DISCUSSION: This survey underlines the importance of training and support for the professionals caring for patients in palliative situation and their relatives in France.

The risk of delirium after sedation with propofol or midazolam in intensive care unit patients.

AIM: Knowledge of risk factors may provide strategies to reduce the high burden of delirium in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. We aimed to compare the risk of delirium after deep sedation with propofol versus midazolam in ICU patients. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, ICU patients who were in an unarousable state for ≥24 h due to continuous sedation with propofol and/or midazolam were included. Patients admitted ≤24 h, those with an acute neurological disorder and those receiving palliative sedation were excluded. ICU patients were assessed daily for delirium during the 7 days following an unarousable state due to continuous sedation. RESULTS: Among 950 included patients, 605 (64%) subjects were delirious during the 7 days after awaking. The proportion of subsequent delirium was higher after midazolam sedation (152/207 [73%] patients) and after both propofol and midazolam sedation (257/377 [68%] patients), compared to propofol sedation only (196/366 [54%] patients). Midazolam sedation (adjusted cause-specific hazard ratio [adj. cause-specific HR] 1.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-1.66) and propofol and midazolam sedation (adj. cause-specific HR 1.29, 95% CI 1.06-1.56) were associated with a higher risk of subsequent delirium compared to propofol sedation only. CONCLUSION: This study among sedated ICU patients suggests that, compared to propofol sedation, midazolam sedation is associated with a higher risk of subsequent delirium. This risk seems more apparent in patients with high cumulative midazolam intravenous doses. Our findings underpin the recommendations of the Society of Critical Care Medicine Pain, Agitation/sedation, Delirium, Immobility (rehabilitation/mobilization), and Sleep (disruption) guidelines to use propofol over benzodiazepines for sedation in ICU patients.

Enhancing Safety in Tumescent Liposuction: Managing Sedation-Related Respiratory Issues and Serious Complications Under Deep Sedation with the Propofol-Ketamine Protocol.

BACKGROUND: Over the past 4 years, aesthetic surgery, notably liposuction, has substantially increased. Tumescent liposuction, a popular technique, has two variants-true tumescent liposuction (TTL) and semi-tumescent liposuction. While TTL reduces risks, it has limitations. There is no literature reported on semi-tumescent liposuction under deep sedation using the propofol-ketamine protocol, which is proposed as a potentially safe alternative. METHODS: The retrospective analysis covered 8 years and included 3094 patients performed for tumescent liposuction under deep sedation, utilizing the propofol-ketamine protocol. The evaluation of patient safety involved an examination of potential adverse events with a specific focus on respiratory issues related to sedation, including instances of mask ventilation. RESULTS: Among the 3094 cases, no fatalities were recorded. Noteworthy events included 43 mask ventilation instances, primarily occurring in the initial 10 min. Twelve cases experienced surgery cancellation due to various factors, including respiratory issues. Three patients were transferred to upper-level hospitals, while another three required blood transfusions. Vigilant management prevented significant complications, and other adverse events like venous thromboembolism (VTE), fat embolism, severe lidocaine toxicity, and so on were not observed. CONCLUSIONS: The analysis of 3094 tumescent liposuction cases highlighted the overall safety profile of the propofol-ketamine protocol under deep sedation. The scarcity of severe complications underscores its viability. The study emphasizes the significance of thorough preoperative assessments, careful patient selection, and awareness of potential complications. Prompt interventions, particularly in addressing sedation-related respiratory issues, further contribute to positive outcomes for patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Bolus administration of remimazolam was superior to midazolam for deep sedation in elderly patients undergoing diagnostic bronchoscopy: A randomized, double-blind, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: To date, there is no standardized practice for the use of pharmacological sedatives during flexible bronchoscopy, particularly for elderly patients. This exploratory study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of remimazolam at a single induced dose for deep sedation in elderly patients undergoing diagnostic flexible bronchoscopy (DFB), and compare with midazolam, a commonly used sedative. METHODS: A total of 100 elderly patients (age range 65-80 yr; American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status I-III) undergoing DFB were randomly allocated into 2 groups according to the sedatives used for induction: the remimazolam group and the midazolam group. Sedation induction was initiated by an intravenous bolus of remimazolam (0.135 mg/kg) or midazolam (0.045 mg/kg), respectively, both groups were combined with a high-dose of alfentanil (18 µg/kg), and supplemented with high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen supply at a flow rate of 45 L/min. If the target depth of sedation was not achieved, propofol would be titrated as a rescue. The primary outcome was the success rate of sedation at a single induced dose to achieve target depth (Ramsay sedation score [RSS] = 4) during induction, intraoperative changes in vital signs, postoperative follow-up situation and incidence of post-bronchoscopy adverse events were evaluated as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: The success rate of sedation in the remimazolam group was significantly higher than that in the midazolam group (65.2% vs 39.6%, P = .013), while the incidence of extra sleep within 6 hours after procedure was lower in the remimazolam group as compared to the midazolam group (10.9% vs 31.3%, P = .016). No statistically significant differences were observed between the 2 groups regarding hemodynamic fluctuations, incidence of hypoxemia, and cough response during the procedure, as well as postoperative recall, willingness to undergo reexamination, and other post-bronchoscopy adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Bolus administration of remimazolam offers advantages over midazolam for deep sedation in elderly patients undergoing DFB, in terms of a higher success rate of sedation and a lower incidence of extra sleep within 6 hours after procedure, though the safety profiles of both groups were favorable.

Ethnic Disparities in Deep Sedation of Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in the United States: Secondary Analysis of a Multicenter Randomized Trial.

Rationale: Patients identified as Hispanic, the largest minority group in the United States, are more likely to die from acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) than non-Hispanic patients. Mechanisms to explain this disparity remain unidentified. However, Hispanic patients may be at risk of overexposure to deep sedation because of language differences between patients and clinicians, and deep sedation is associated with higher ARDS mortality.Objective: We examined associations between Hispanic ethnicity and exposure to deep sedation among patients with ARDS.Methods: A secondary analysis was conducted of patients enrolled in the control arm of a randomized trial of neuromuscular blockade for ARDS across 48 U.S. hospitals. Exposure to deep sedation was measured over the first 5 days that a patient was alive and received mechanical ventilation. Multilevel mixed-effects models were used to evaluate associations between Hispanic ethnicity and exposure to deep sedation, controlling for patient characteristics.Results: Patients identified as Hispanic had approximately five times the odds of deep sedation (odds ratio, 4.98; 95% confidence interval, 2.02-12.28; P < 0.0001) on a given day, compared with non-Hispanic White patients. Hospitals with at least one enrolled Hispanic patient kept all enrolled patients deeply sedated longer than hospitals without any enrolled Hispanic patients (85.8% of ventilator-days vs. 65.5%; P < 0.001).Conclusions: Hispanic patients are at higher risk of exposure to deep sedation than non-Hispanic White patients. There is an urgent need to understand and address disparities in sedation delivery.