The efficacy and safety of ciprofol and propofol in patients undergoing colonoscopy: A double-blind, randomized, controlled trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Propofol is a commonly utilized anesthetic for painless colonoscopy, but its usage is occasionally limited due to its potential side effects, including cardiopulmonary suppression and injection pain. To address this limitation, the novel compound ciprofol has been proposed as a possible alternative for propofol. This study sought to determine whether there are any differences in the safety and efficacy of propofol and ciprofol for painless colonoscopy. DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial. SETTING: Single-centre, class A tertiary hospital, November 2021 to November 2022. PATIENTS: Adult, American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status I to II and body mass index of 18 to 30 kg m-2 patients scheduled to undergo colonoscopy. INTERVENTIONS: Consecutive patients were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive sedation for colonoscopy with ciprofol (group C) or propofol (group P). MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was the success rate of colonoscopy. The secondary outcomes were onset time of sedation, operation time, recovery time and discharge time, patients and endoscopists satisfaction, side effects (e.g. injection pain, myoclonus, drowsiness, dizziness, procedure recall, nausea and vomiting) and incidence rate of cardiopulmonary adverse events. MAIN RESULTS: No significant difference was found in the success rate of colonoscopy between the two groups (ciprofol 96.3% vs. propofol 97.6%; mean difference - 1.2%, 95% CI: -6.5% to 4.0%, P = 0.650). However, group C showed prolonged sedation (63.4 vs. 54.8 s, P < 0.001) and fully alert times (9 vs 8 min, P = 0.013), as well as reduced incidences of injection pain (0 vs. 40.2%, P < 0.001), respiratory depression (2.4% vs. 13.4%, P = 0.021) and hypotension (65.9% vs. 80.5%, P = 0.034). Patients satisfaction was also higher in Group C (10 vs 9, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Ciprofol can be used independently for colonoscopy. When comparing the sedation efficacy of ciprofol and propofol, a 0.4 mg kg-1 dose of ciprofol proved to be equal to a 2.0 mg kg-1 dose of propofol, with fewer side effects and greater patient satisfaction during the procedure.

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.

Fospropofol disodium versus propofol for long-term sedation during invasive mechanical ventilation: A pilot randomized clinical trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Fospropofol disodium is a propofol prodrug that is water-soluble and has a reduced risk of bacterial contamination and hypertriglyceridemia compared with propofol. Prior to implementing a large randomized trial, we investigated the feasibility, initial efficacy, and safety of fospropofol disodium compared with propofol in long-term mild-to-moderate sedation in intensive care units (ICUs). DESIGN: Single-centered, prospective, unblind, randomized, parallel-group clinical trial. SETTING: The general ICU of university-affiliated teaching hospital. PATIENTS: Adult patients (n = 60) expected to have mechanical ventilation for >24 h were enrolled and randomly assigned to the fospropofol or propofol group. INTERVENTIONS: The fospropofol group received continuous fospropofol disodium infusions and the propofol group received continuous propofol infusions. The sedation goal was a score of -3 to 0 on the Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale (RASS). MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was the percentage of time spent in the target sedation range without rescue sedation. Safety outcomes were based on adverse events. Blood samples were collected to measure formate concentration in plasma. MAIN RESULTS: The median dose was 4.33 (IQR, 3.08-4.94) mg/kg/h in the fospropofol group and 1.96 (IQR, 1.44-2.94) mg/kg/h in the propofol group. The median percentage of time spent in the target RASS range without rescue sedation was identical in both groups, with 83.33% (IQR, 74.43%-100.00%) in the fospropofol group and 83.33% (IQR, 77.45%-100.00%) in the propofol group (p = 0.887). At least one adverse event was identifed in 23 (76.7%) fospropofol patients and 27 (90.0%) propofol patients. The most common adverse events were tachycardia and hypotension. No paresthesia, catheter-related bloodstream infection or propofol infusion syndrome in both groups was reported. Three patients in the fospropofol group had mild hypertriglyceridemia, and nine patients in propofol group had hypertriglyceridemia (mild in eight patients and moderate in one patient) (10% versus 30%, p = 0.104). The formate concentration in plasma was very low, and no significant difference was identified at any time point between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Fospropofol disodium appears to be a feasible, effective and safe sedative for patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation with long-term sedation.

Randomized, Single-Blind, Comparative Study of Remimazolam Besylate vs Propofol for Facial Plastic Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Use of local anesthesia and conscious sedation with a combination of a sedative and anesthetic drug during a surgical procedure is an approach designed to avoid intubation, which produces fewer adverse events compared to general anesthesia. In the present study, a comparison was made between the efficacy and safety of remimazolam besylate and propofol for facial plastic surgery. OBJECTIVES: The objective was to evaluate the clinical efficacy, comfort, and incidence of adverse events of remimazolam compared with propofol combined with alfentanil in outpatient facial plastic surgery. METHODS: In this randomized, single-blind, single-center, comparative study, facial plastic surgery patients were randomly divided into remimazolam-alfentanil (n = 50) and propofol-alfentanil (n = 50) groups for sedation and analgesia. The primary endpoint was the incidence of hypoxemia, while secondary endpoints included efficacy and safety evaluations. RESULTS: There were no significant differences regarding the surgical procedure, sedation and induction times, pain and comfort scores, muscle strength recovery, heart rate, respiratory rate, and blood pressure, but the dosage of alfentanil administered to the remimazolam group (387.5 µg) was lower than that for the propofol group (600 µg). The incidence of hypoxemia (P = .046) and towing of the mandibular (P = .028), as well as wake-up (P = .027) and injection pain (P = .008), were significantly higher in the propofol group than the remimazolam group. CONCLUSIONS: Remimazolam and propofol had similar efficacies for sedation and analgesia during facial plastic surgery, but especially the incidence of respiratory depression was significantly lower in patients given remimazolam.

Stubborn hypoxemia after mild to moderate sedation and analgesia: A case report.

INTRODUCTION: Atelectasis typically denotes the partial or complete collapse of lung segments, lobes, or lobules in individuals, leading to a compromised respiratory function. The prevalence of perioperative atelectasis may be significantly underestimated, particularly among patients subjected to general anesthesia. PATIENT CONCERNS: This article conducts a retrospective analysis of a case involving refractory hypoxemia in a patient with a liver tumor who was admitted to Yanbian University Affiliated Hospital (Yanbian Hospital) after undergoing mild-to-moderate sedation and analgesia outside the operating room. DIAGNOSIS: Based on the results of CT examination and present history, the patient was diagnosed with intraoperative atelectasis. INTERVENTION: After the surgery, the patient was transferred to the recovery ward, where nasal oxygen therapy and nebulized inhalation treatment were administered. Vital signs were closely monitored at the bedside, gradually returning to the preoperative baseline. OUTCOME: Postoperatively, the patient developed atelectasis, with the percentage of lung opacity shown in the image decreasing from 9.2% of the total thoracic cage area to 8.4%. CONCLUSION: During non-intubated intravenous anesthesia, patients with compromised pulmonary conditions are more susceptible to refractory hypoxemia. Therefore, a personalized approach should be adopted regarding oxygen concentration and the dosage and type of medication. Additionally, preparations for appropriate airway management measures are essential to safeguard patient safety in the event of respiratory issues.

Pharmacological agents for procedural sedation and analgesia in the emergency department and intensive care unit: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of various i.v. pharmacologic agents used for procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) in the emergency department (ED) and ICU. We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis to enable direct and indirect comparisons between available medications. METHODS: We searched Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane, and PubMed from inception to 2 March 2023 for RCTs comparing two or more procedural sedation and analgesia medications in all patients (adults and children >30 days of age) requiring emergent procedures in the ED or ICU. We focused on the outcomes of sedation recovery time, patient satisfaction, and adverse events (AEs). We performed frequentist random-effects model network meta-analysis and used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to rate certainty in estimates. RESULTS: We included 82 RCTs (8105 patients, 78 conducted in the ED and four in the ICU) of which 52 studies included adults, 23 included children, and seven included both. Compared with midazolam-opioids, recovery time was shorter with propofol (mean difference 16.3 min, 95% confidence interval [CI] 8.4-24.3 fewer minutes; high certainty), and patient satisfaction was better with ketamine-propofol (mean difference 1.5 points, 95% CI 0.3-2.6 points, high certainty). Regarding AEs, compared with midazolam-opioids, respiratory AEs were less frequent with ketamine (relative risk [RR] 0.55, 95% CI 0.32-0.96; high certainty), gastrointestinal AEs were more common with ketamine-midazolam (RR 3.08, 95% CI 1.15-8.27; high certainty), and neurological AEs were more common with ketamine-propofol (RR 3.68, 95% CI 1.08-12.53; high certainty). CONCLUSION: When considering procedural sedation and analgesia in the ED and ICU, compared with midazolam-opioids, sedation recovery time is shorter with propofol, patient satisfaction is better with ketamine-propofol, and respiratory adverse events are less common with ketamine.

General anesthesia vs. conscious sedation and local anesthesia for endovascular treatment in patients with posterior circulation acute ischemic stroke: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The best anesthetic choice for patients with acute posterior circulation stroke during endovascular treatment (EVT) remains uncertain. METHOD: We searched five databases to identify studies that met the inclusion criteria. Our primary outcome measure was functional independence (FI). Secondary outcomes were 3-month mortality, any intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), symptomatic ICH (sICH), successful reperfusion, and procedure- and ventilator-associated complications. RESULTS: A total of 10 studies were included in our meta-analysis. No significant differences were detected between the general anesthesia (GA) and conscious sedation and local anesthesia (CS/LA) groups in 3-month FI (nine studies; OR=0.69; 95% CI 0.45-1.06; P=0.083; I2=66%;), 3-month mortality (nine studies; OR=1.41; 95% CI 0.94-2.11; P=0.096; I2=61.2%;), any ICH (three studies; OR=0.75; 95% CI 0.44-1.25; P=0.269; I2=0%;), or sICH (six studies; OR=0.64; 95% CI 0.40-1.04; P=0.073; I2=0%;). No significant differences were observed for successful reperfusion (10 studies; OR=1.17; 95% CI 0.91-1.49; P=0.219; I2=0%;), procedure-related complications (four studies; OR=1.14; 95% CI 0.70-1.87; P=0.603; I2=7.9%;), or respiratory complications (four studies; OR=1.19; 95% CI 0.61-2.32; P=0.616; I2=64.9%;) between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed no differences in 3-month FI, 3-month mortality, and successful reperfusion between patients treated with GA and those treated with CS/LA. Additionally, no increased risk of hemorrhagic transformation or pulmonary infection was observed in the CS/LA group. These results indicate that CS/LA may be an EVT option for acute posterior circulation stroke patients.

Korean clinical practice guidelines for diagnostic and procedural sedation.

Safe and effective sedation depends on various factors, such as the choice of sedatives, sedation techniques used, experience of the sedation provider, degree of sedation-related education and training, equipment and healthcare worker availability, the patient's underlying diseases, and the procedure being performed. The purpose of these evidence-based multidisciplinary clinical practice guidelines is to ensure the safety and efficacy of sedation, thereby contributing to patient safety and ultimately improving public health. These clinical practice guidelines comprise 15 key questions covering various topics related to the following: the sedation providers; medications and equipment available; appropriate patient selection; anesthesiologist referrals for high-risk patients; pre-sedation fasting; comparison of representative drugs used in adult and pediatric patients; respiratory system, cardiovascular system, and sedation depth monitoring during sedation; management of respiratory complications during pediatric sedation; and discharge criteria. The recommendations in these clinical practice guidelines were systematically developed to assist providers and patients in sedation-related decision making for diagnostic and therapeutic examinations or procedures. Depending on the characteristics of primary, secondary, and tertiary care institutions as well as the clinical needs and limitations, sedation providers at each medical institution may choose to apply the recommendations as they are, modify them appropriately, or reject them completely.

The Impact of Sedation on Cardio-Cerebrovascular Adverse Events after Surveillance Esophagogastroduodenoscopy in Patients with Gastric Cancer: A Nationwide Population-Based Cohort Study.

Background/Aims: The impact of sedation on cardio-cerebrovascular (CCV) adverse events after esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in patients with gastric cancer (GC) is unclear. We investigated the incidence rate and impact of sedation on CCV adverse events after surveillance EGD in patients with GC. Methods: We performed a nationwide population-based cohort study using the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service databases from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2020. Using a propensity score-matched analysis, patients with GC were divided into two groups: sedative agent users and nonusers for surveillance EGD. We compared the occurrence of CCV adverse events within 14 days between the two groups. Results: Of the 103,463 patients with GC, newly diagnosed CCV adverse events occurred in 2.57% of patients within 14 days after surveillance EGD. Sedative agents were used in 41.3% of the patients during EGD. The incidence rates of CCV adverse events with and without sedation were 173.6/10,000 and 315.4/10,000, respectively. Between sedative agent users and nonusers based on propensity score matching (28,008 pairs), there were no significant differences in the occurrence of 14-day CCV, cardiac, cerebral, and other vascular adverse events (2.28% vs 2.22%, p=0.69; 1.44% vs 1.31%, p=0.23; 0.74% vs 0.84%, p=0.20; 0.10% vs 0.07%, p=0.25, respectively). Conclusions: Sedation during surveillance EGD was not associated with CCV adverse events in patients with GC. Therefore, the use of sedative agents may be considered in patients with GC during surveillance EGD without excessive concerns about CCV adverse events.

Procedural sedation programme minimising adverse events: a 3-year experience from a tertiary paediatric emergency department.

INTRODUCTION: A well-developed procedural sedation programme in the paediatric emergency department can minimise adverse events. We examined how adherence to current best evidence ensures safe delivery of paediatric sedation in a newly established tertiary paediatric hospital. METHODS: Our sedation service uses a robust provider training and privileging system, standardised policy and procedures and rigorous data collection all within an evidence-based clinical governance process. We examined sedation data from the first 3 years of operation. RESULTS: From July 2018 to May 2022, ketamine was used in 3388 of the 3405 sedations. The mean age of sedated children was 5.5 years (range 6 months to 17.8 years) and common indications were closed reduction of fractures and laceration repairs. A total of 148 (4.37%, 95% CI 3.68% to 5.06%) adverse events were documented, including 88 (2.59%, 95% CI 2.06% to 3.13%) cases of vomiting, 50 (1.48%, 95% CI 1.07% to 1.88%) cases related to airway and breathing with 40 (1.18%, 95% CI 0.82% to 1.54%) cases of oxygen desaturation, 6 (0.18%, 95% CI 0.04% to 0.32%) cases of laryngospasm, 4 (0.12%, 95% CI 0% to 0.23%) cases of apnoea. CONCLUSION: This study presents a large single-centre dataset on the use of intravenous ketamine in paediatric procedural sedation. Adhering to international standards and benchmarks for provider skills and training, drug administration and monitoring facilities, with a strict clinical governance process, optimizes patient safety.

The effect of anesthesia on hemodynamics and outcome of patients undergoing thrombectomy after acute ischemic stroke: a retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Anesthesia during thrombectomy remains a matter of debate. We retrospectively investigated the influence of intraprocedural blood pressure and type of anaesthetic agent on 3-month functional outcome and mortality in stroke patients undergoing mechanical thrombectomy under general anesthesia in a single center study. METHODS: All patients suffering from stroke who presented between January 2019 and July 2021 at Ziekenhuis Oost-Limburg Genk, Belgium and who received thrombectomy were included. Patient's characteristics and outcome data had been collected for benchmarking. Detailed perioperative data were exported from the electronic anesthesia records and clinically validated. Patients were stratified by peri-operative presence of hypotension (MAP < 65 mmHg at any time point) versus no-hypotension (MAP ≥ 65 mmHg). RESULTS: All 98 patients received mechanical thrombectomy under general anesthesia. Thirty-six percent (n = 35) was hypotensive peri-operatively at any time point. Proportion of sevoflurane use was higher in non-hypotensive patients compared to hypotensive patients (73% (n = 45) vs. 51% (n = 18), p = 0.04). Peri-operative use of vasopressors was higher in the hypotensive group compared to non-hypotensive (88% (n = 30) vs. 63% (n = 39), p = 0.008). Proportion of patients with good functional outcome at 3 months (mRS 0-2) was higher in non-hypotensive patients compared to hypotensive patients 44% (n = 27) vs. 24% (n = 8), p < 0.05. 90-day mortality was lower in non-hypotensive patients compared to hypotensive patients 21% (n = 13) vs. 43% (n = 15), (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Patients who are hypotensive at any given time during thrombectomy under general anesthesia may have worse neurological outcome compared to non-hypotensive patients. The best anaesthetic management for mechanical thrombectomy needs to be clarified prospectively in large multicenter studies.

Outcomes of patients undergoing edge-to-edge mitral valve repair with the Edwards PASCAL transcatheter valve repair system under conscious sedation.

BACKGROUND: The development of the PASCAL transcatheter valve repair system for treating mitral regurgitation (MR) greatly extends therapeutic options. AIMS: To assess the safety, efficacy, and time efficiency of the PASCAL system in transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) under conscious sedation (CS). METHODS: This is a retrospective, two-center, German registry study consisting of 211 patients who underwent TEER using the PASCAL system under CS. The endpoints were to assess (1) technical, device, and procedural success as per Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium (MVARC), (2) conversion rate to general anesthesia (GA), (3) hospital length of stay (LoS), (4) New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, and (5) MR compared to baseline at 30-day. RESULTS: A total of 211 patients with a mean age of 78.4 ± 8.9 years, with 51.4% being female and 86.7% belonging to NYHA functional class III/IV and EuroSCORE II 6.3 ± 4.9%, were enrolled. Procedural success attained was 96.9%, and six patients (2.8%) required conversion from CS to GA. At 30 days follow-up, a significant improvement in MR was found in 96 patients (54.2%) patients with 0/1 grade MR and 45 patients (29.5%) were in NYHA functional class III + IV. Moreover, TEER under CS has a short hospital LoS (6.71 ± 5.29 days) and intensive care unit LoS (1.34 ± 3.49 days) with a 2.8% mortality rate. CONCLUSIONS: Performing TEER with the PASCAL system under CS resulted in appreciable (96.9%) procedural success with low mortality and is a safe and promising alternative to GA with positive clinical outcomes.

Clinical Outcomes of Percutaneous Left-Atrial Appendage Occlusion with Conscious Sedation without an Anesthesiologist on Site: Results from a Multicenter Study.

Background and Objectives: Percutaneous left-atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion is an important therapeutic option for preventing cardioembolic stroke in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) at high risk of thromboembolic events and with contraindications for oral anticoagulation (OAC). It is usually performed with transesophageal echocardiography (TOE) guidance under general anesthesia (GA). In this retrospective study, we present a multicenter experience of LAA occlusion performed with conscious sedation (CS) without an anesthesiologist on site. Materials and Methods: All the patients on the waiting list for LAA occlusion procedure at Infermi Hospital, Rivoli, and San Luigi Gonzaga University Hospital, Orbassano, from October 2018 to October 2022 were analyzed. All the procedures were performed with a Watchman/FLX LAA closure device under TOE and fluoroscopic guidance without an anesthesiologist on site. CS was performed with a combination of midazolam and fentanyl as needed. Results: One-hundred fifteen patients were included (age 76.4 ± 7.6 years, median CHA2DS2Vasc 4.4 ± 1.4). CS was performed using midazolam (mean dose 5.9 ± 2.1 mg), adding fentanyl for thirty-nine (33.9%) patients in case of poor tolerance for the procedure despite midazolam. The acute procedural success rate was 99.1%. We observed seven acute severe complications. No patients needed anesthesiological assistance during the procedure, and no cases of respiratory failure necessitating ventilation were reported. In a follow-up after 10 ± 9 months, one case of stroke (0.9%) and one case (0.9%) of transient ischemic attack (TIA) occurred. Conclusions: LAA occlusion performed under CS and without the presence of an anesthesiologist on site appears to be safe and effective. It can be an attractive alternative to general anesthesia (GA), as fewer resources are required.

Conscious sedation anesthesia using different doses of remifentanil combined with dexmedetomidine for peritoneal dialysis catheter implantation.

BACKGROUND: Conscious sedation anesthesia (CSA) is an anesthetic method during peritoneal dialysis catheter implantation. However, lack of optimal CSA strategies for patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). This study aimed to evaluate the analgesic effects and safety of CSA using different doses of remifentanil combined with dexmedetomidine during peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion. METHODS: Patients who underwent peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter placement via open surgical incision were retrospectively analyzed and divided into three groups based on the tertile dose of remifentanil. The bispectral index (BIS) was used to monitor the depth of anesthesia. Data regarding clinical findings, the effects of anesthesia, and the incidence of drug-related adverse effects were collected. RESULTS: In total, 102 patients completed the surgery successfully and safely. The dose of remifentanil was 0.02-0.07 µg/kg/min, 0.08-0.13 µg/kg/min, and 0.14-0.20 µg/kg/min in Groups A, B, and C, respectively. Only seven patients reported mild pain during the surgery. No significant differences were observed among the numeric rating scale scores of the three groups (p > 0.05). Intraoperative hemodynamics were stable. The incidence of respiratory depression was 8.3%, 20.0%, and 41.9% in Groups A, B, and C, respectively (p < 0.01). The incidence of gastrointestinal symptoms in Group C (51.6%) was higher than that in Groups A and B (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Low-dose remifentanil (0.02-0.07 µg/kg/min) combined with dexmedetomidine achieved satisfactory anesthetic effects with fewer adverse drug reactions during PD catheter implantation, indicating its potential for use in patients undergoing PD catheter placement.

Propofol-remifentanil patient-controlled sedation for endoscopic procedures: a prospective service audit.

PURPOSE: Following demand, we established a patient-controlled propofol-remifentanil sedation service for endoscopy overseen by an anesthesiologist. To assess the effectiveness of the intervention of this service and any complications, we prospectively audited the service. Our primary outcomes of interest were adequacy of sedation and patient satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included any adverse events associated with the sedation. METHODS: Patients were referred for failure of procedure under endoscopist-administered sedation, refusal of procedure without general anesthesia (GA), or planned complex procedure. We included all 670 procedures performed between 2017 and 2021. We used a mixture of 8.9 mg·mL-1 propofol and 5.4 µg·mL-1 remifentanil with a 1-mL bolus and 20-sec lockout. We assessed the adequacy of sedation using the Modified Gloucester Scale and categorized adverse events according to the Tracking and Reporting Outcomes of Procedural Sedation. RESULTS: All 670 procedures were accomplished with adequate sedation without the need for ventilation or GA, and all patients were satisfied with the sedation. The complication rate was low, with no sentinel airway or respiratory events. Nineteen out of 670 patients (2.8%) had an incidence of airway obstruction (requiring a simple airway maneuver). The body mass index (BMI) was documented in 18/19 of these patients and the average BMI in this group was 35 kg·m-2. Seven of the 670 patients (1%) had self-terminating apnea, 3/670 patients (0.4%) vomited, no patients aspirated, and 17/665 patients (2.6%) required a vasopressor to maintain blood pressure within 20% of preprocedure values. CONCLUSION: The results from our prospective service audit indicate that propofol-remifentanil patient-controlled sedation is a safe and reliable technique in patients undergoing endoscopic procedures.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Pour répondre à la demande, nous avons mis en place un service de sédation au propofol-rémifentanil contrôlée par le/la patient·e pour l'endoscopie supervisé par l'anesthésiologiste. Pour évaluer l'efficacité de l'intervention de ce service et ses complications, nous avons audité le service de manière prospective. Les principaux critères d'évaluation d'intérêt étaient l'adéquation de la sédation et la satisfaction des patient·es. Les critères d'évaluation secondaires incluaient tous les événements indésirables associés à la sédation. MéTHODE: Les patient·es ont été référé·es pour échec d'une intervention sous sédation administrée par l'endoscopiste, refus d'une intervention sans anesthésie générale (AG) ou intervention complexe planifiée. Nous avons inclus les 670 interventions réalisées entre 2017 et 2021. Nous avons utilisé un mélange de 8,9 mg·mL−1 de propofol et 5,4 µg·mL−1 de rémifentanil avec un bolus de 1 mL et une période de verrouillage de 20 secondes. Nous avons évalué l'adéquation de la sédation à l'aide de l'échelle de Gloucester modifiée et classé les événements indésirables en fonction de l'outil de suivi et de déclaration des issues de la sédation procédurale (Tracking and Reporting Outcomes of Procedural Sedation). RéSULTATS: Les 670 interventions ont été réalisées avec une sédation adéquate sans avoir besoin de ventilation ou d'AG, et tou·tes les patient·es étaient satisfait·es de la sédation. Le taux de complications était faible, sans événements sentinelles respiratoires ou des voies aériennes. Dix-neuf patient·es sur 670 (2,8 %) ont présenté une incidence d'obstruction des voies aériennes (nécessitant une simple manœuvre des voies aériennes). L'indice de masse corporelle (IMC) a été documenté chez 18/19 de ces patient·es et l'IMC moyen dans ce groupe était de 35 kg·m−2. Sept des 670 patient·es (1 %) ont eu une apnée qui s'est terminée spontanément, 3/670 (0,4 %) ont vomi, il n'y a pas eu d'aspiration et 17/665 patient·es (2,6 %) ont eu besoin d'un vasopresseur pour maintenir la pression artérielle dans la plage de 20 % entourant leurs valeurs préopératoires. CONCLUSION: Les résultats de notre audit prospectif du service indiquent que la sédation au propofol-rémifentanil contrôlée par le/la patient·e est une technique sécuritaire et fiable chez les personnes bénéficiant d'interventions endoscopiques.

Transcutaneous gas monitoring is a useful tool to detect respiratory depression during bronchoscopy performed under propofol sedation.

BACKGROUND: Bronchoscopy is a relatively invasive procedure where patients are often sedated. However, adequate sedation is not always achieved. Propofol is often used for difficult-to-sedate patients undergoing bronchoscopy despite a potential risk of respiratory depression. Transcutaneous carbon dioxide (tcpCO2) monitoring, introduced recently, is recognized as a convenient surrogate method for continuous monitoring of the partial pressure of arterial carbon dioxide (PaCO2). This study examined the safety of switching to propofol during bronchoscopy by using transcutaneous carbon dioxide monitoring. METHODS: Patients in whom transcutaneous gas monitoring had been performed during bronchoscopy were included in this study. The participants were divided into two groups: 1) the midazolam + fentanyl group (MF group), and 2) the group in which midazolam was switched to propofol owing to inadequate sedation obtained with midazolam + fentanyl (MFP group). We retrospectively analyzed the transcutaneous gas measurement data collected in patients under propofol sedation for bronchoscopy. RESULTS: This study included 61 (MF, n = 41; MFP, n = 20) patients. The duration of elevated tcpCO2 (>50 mm Hg) was greater in the MFP group (MF 8.5 min vs. MFP 22.1 min, p = 0.042). CONCLUSION: Switching midazolam to propofol during bronchoscopy was significantly associated with a higher risk of elevated tcpCO2, which is indicative of respiratory depression. Therefore, continuous tcpCO2 monitoring is required to ensure the safety of patients under propofol sedation for bronchoscopy.

Assessing the safety of deep sedation in outpatient pediatric oral health care.

BACKGROUND: Children are the patient subgroup with the lowest error tolerance regarding deep sedation (DS)-supported care. This study assessed the safety of DS-supported pediatric dental treatment carried out in an outpatient setting through retrospective review of patient charts. METHODS: An automated script was developed to identify charts of pediatric patients who underwent DS-supported dental procedures from 2017 through 2019 at a dental clinic. Charts were assessed for the presence of sedation-related adverse events (AEs). A panel of experts performed a second review and confirmed or refuted the designation of AE (by the first reviewer). AEs were classified with the Tracking and Reporting Outcomes of Procedural Sedation system. RESULTS: Of the 175 DS cases, 19 AEs were identified in 15 cases (8.60%). Using the Tracking and Reporting Outcomes of Procedural Sedation classification system, 7 (36.84%) events were related to the airway and breathing category, 9 (47.37%) were related to sedation quality (including a dizzy patient who fell at the checkout desk and sustained a head laceration), and 3 (15.79%) were classified as an allergy. CONCLUSION: This study suggests an AE (whether relatively minor or of potentially major consequence) occurs in 1 of every 12 DS cases involving pediatric patients, performed at an outpatient dental clinic. Larger studies are needed, in addition to root cause analyses. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: As dentists increasingly pivot in the use of DS services from in-hospital to outpatient settings, patients expect comparable levels of safety. This work helps generate evidence to drive targeted efforts to improve the safety and reliability of pediatric outpatient sedation.

Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Under Miniaturized Transesophageal Echocardiographic Guidance and Conscious Sedation: Multicenter European Experience.

BACKGROUND: Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) procedures are widely guided by standard transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) probes, requiring general anesthesia in most patients. The use of miniaturized TEE probes allows for LAAO guidance under local anesthesia and offers an attractive imaging alternative to standard TEE probes. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of miniaturized TEE probes for procedural guidance of LAAO. METHODS: Multicenter retrospective observational study of LAAO procedures performed under miniaturized TEE guidance and conscious sedation. The primary efficacy endpoint was technical success. The secondary efficacy endpoint was procedural success (technical success without major periprocedural complications). The safety outcome was a composite of major periprocedural complications. RESULTS: A total of 546 consecutive LAAO procedures were performed in 5 European centers. Technical success was achieved in 534 (98.0%) patients. Sixteen major periprocedural complications occurred in 15 (2.9%) patients, yielding a procedural success rate of 97.0%. Conversion to general anesthesia was required in 4 (0.7%) patients. Short-term imaging follow-up was available in 422 patients with an incidence of major (>5 mm) TEE-detected residual leaks of 0.7%, complete LAA occlusion of 82.2% on cardiac computed tomography, and device-related thrombus of 5%. As compared with procedural 2-dimensional imaging for device sizing, preprocedural assessment by 3-dimensional imaging resulted in improved technical success (100% vs 95.0%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: LAAO under conscious sedation and miniaturized TEE guidance is safe and feasible with a high rate of technical success and a low rate of periprocedural complications.

Postoperative Epistaxis Following Dental Treatment With Nitrous Oxide/Oxygen Sedation.

A 12-year-old Caucasian male undergoing a dental extraction for a grossly carious mandibular molar under inhalational sedation with nitrous oxide/oxygen experienced an episode of anterior epistaxis postoperatively that was controlled well with local measures. Epistaxis following inhalational sedation with nitrous oxide/oxygen in the dental setting is a very rare complication but has been previously reported in the literature. This case report provides a review of the existing literature regarding cases of epistaxis associated with inhalational sedation using nitrous oxide/oxygen and discusses the potential etiology of epistaxis associated with inhalational sedation. Patients at higher risk of epistaxis should be properly informed of the risks prior to inhalational sedation with nitrous oxide/oxygen, and dentists should also be familiar with epistaxis management in the dental setting.