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.

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.

The effects of selected sedatives on basal and stimulated serum cortisol concentrations in healthy dogs.

Background: Hormone assessment is typically recommended for awake, unsedated dogs. However, one of the most commonly asked questions from veterinary practitioners to the endocrinology laboratory is how sedation impacts cortisol concentrations and the adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) stimulation test. Butorphanol, dexmedetomidine, and trazodone are common sedatives for dogs, but their impact on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis (HPA) is unknown. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of butorphanol, dexmedetomidine, and trazodone on serum cortisol concentrations. Methods: Twelve healthy beagles were included in a prospective, randomized, four-period crossover design study with a 7-day washout. ACTH stimulation test results were determined after saline (0.5 mL IV), butorphanol (0.3 mg/kg IV), dexmedetomidine (4 µg/kg IV), and trazodone (3-5 mg/kg PO) administration. Results: Compared to saline, butorphanol increased basal (median 11.75 µg/dL (range 2.50-23.00) (324.13 nmol/L; range 68.97-634.48) vs 1.27 µg/dL (0.74-2.10) (35.03 nmol/L; 20.41-57.93); P < 0.0001) and post-ACTH cortisol concentrations (17.05 µg/dL (12.40-26.00) (470.34 nmol/L; 342.07-717.24) vs 13.75 µg/dL (10.00-18.90) (379.31 nmol/L; 275.96-521.38); P ≤ 0.0001). Dexmedetomidine and trazodone did not significantly affect basal (1.55 µg/dL (range 0.75-1.55) (42.76 nmol/L; 20.69-42.76); P = 0.33 and 0.79 µg/dL (range 0.69-1.89) (21.79 nmol/L; 19.03-52.14); P = 0.13, respectively, vs saline 1.27 (0.74-2.10) (35.03 nmol/L; 20.41-57.93)) or post-ACTH cortisol concentrations (14.35 µg/dL (range 10.70-18.00) (395.86 nmol/L; 295.17-496.55); (P = 0.98 and 12.90 µg/dL (range 8.94-17.40) (355.86 nmol/L; 246.62-480); P = 0.65), respectively, vs saline 13.75 µg/dL (10.00-18.60) (379.31 nmol/L; 275.86-513.10). Conclusion: Butorphanol administration should be avoided prior to ACTH stimulation testing in dogs. Further evaluation of dexmedetomidine and trazodone's effects on adrenocortical hormone testing in dogs suspected of HPA derangements is warranted to confirm they do not impact clinical diagnosis.

Revised European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC) recommended framework on palliative sedation: An international Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: The European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC) acknowledges palliative sedation as an important, broadly accepted intervention for patients with life-limiting disease experiencing refractory symptoms. The EAPC therefore developed 2009 a framework on palliative sedation. A revision was needed due to new evidence from literature, ongoing debate and criticism of methodology, terminology and applicability. AIM: To provide evidence- and consensus-based guidance on palliative sedation for healthcare professionals involved in end-of-life care, for medical associations and health policy decision-makers. DESIGN: Revision between June 2020 and September 2022 of the 2009 framework using a literature update and a Delphi procedure. SETTING: European. PARTICIPANTS: International experts on palliative sedation (identified through literature search and nomination by national palliative care associations) and a European patient organisation. RESULTS: A framework with 42 statements for which high or very high level of consensus was reached. Terminology is defined more precisely with the terms suffering used to encompass distressing physical and psychological symptoms as well as existential suffering and refractory to describe the untreatable (healthcare professionals) and intolerable (patient) nature of the suffering. The principle of proportionality is introduced in the definition of palliative sedation. No specific period of remaining life expectancy is defined, based on the principles of refractoriness of suffering, proportionality and independent decision-making for hydration. Patient autonomy is emphasised. A stepwise pharmacological approach and a guidance on hydration decision-making are provided. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first framework on palliative sedation using a strict consensus methodology. It should serve as comprehensive and soundly developed information for healthcare professionals.

Effect of moderate versus deep sedation on recovery following outpatient gastroscopy in older patients: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Although gastrointestinal endoscopy with sedation is increasingly performed in older patients, the optimal level of sedation remains open to debate. In this study, our objective was to compare the effects of moderate sedation (MS) and deep sedation (DS) on recovery following outpatient gastroscopy in elderly patients. METHODS: In this randomized, partially blinded, controlled trial, we randomly divided 270 patients older than 60 years who were scheduled for elective outpatient gastroscopy into the MS or DS group based on the Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (MOAA/S) scale. The primary outcome was the duration of stay in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU). Secondary outcomes included the duration of the total hospital stay, frequency of retching, bucking, and body movements during the examination, endoscopist and patient satisfaction, and sedation-associated adverse events during the procedure. RESULTS: A total of 264 patients completed the study, of whom 131 received MS and 133 received DS. MS was associated with a shorter PACU stay [16.15 ± 9.01 min vs. 20.02 ± 11.13 min, P < 0.01] and total hospital stay [27.32 ± 9.86 min vs. 30.82 ± 12.37 min, P < 0.05], lesser hypoxemia [2.3% (3/131) vs. 12.8% (17/133), P < 0.01], use of fewer vasoactive drugs (P < 0.001), and more retching (P < 0.001). There was no difference in the incidence of bucking and body movements or endoscopist and patient satisfaction between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Compared to deep sedation, moderate sedation may be a preferable choice for American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Grade I-III elderly patients undergoing outpatient gastroscopies, as demonstrated by shorter PACU stays and total hospital stays, lower sedation-associated adverse events, and similar levels of endoscopist and patient satisfaction.

A Retrospective Investigation of Patient- and Procedure-Related Factors Associated with Cardiorespiratory Complications in Pediatric Dental Patients Undergoing Deep Sedation.

Purpose: The purposes of this retrospective study were to investigate the incidence of cardiac and respiratory complications in pediatric patients undergoing dental procedures with deep propofol sedation and examine the factors that may lead to the development of these complica- tions. Methods: This study was carried out using the records of 421 pediatric patients who received dental treatment with deep sedation. Previously recorded cardiac/respiratory complications were noted. In addition, factors such as age, gender, body mass index (BMI), propofol induction/ infusion/total dose, operation duration, and the presence of comorbidities, which were investigated whether they affect these complications, were also noted. Data were analyzed with Mann-Whitney U, chi-square, and Fisher exact tests using univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses. A level of five percent was considered to indicate statistical significance. Results: There were no significant differences between the cases with and without complications in terms of gender, age, BMI, total propofol dose, and operation time (P=0.887, P=0.827, P=0.213, P=0.581, and P=0.081, respectively). According to the multivariable logistic regression analysis, trisomy 21, heart disease, and asthma were found to be significant risk factors for the development of these complications (odds ratios equal 9.776, 3.257, and 14.646, respectively, 95 percent confidence interval; 3.807-25.100, 1.095-9.690, 4.110-52.188, respectively). Conclusion: Considering the limitations of this study, to minimize cardio-respiratory complications it is recommended that patients with comorbidities should not be managed with deep sedation and an open airway.

Esketamine Combined with Propofol TCI versus Propofol TCI for Deep Sedation during Endobronchial Ultrasound-Guided Transbronchial Needle Aspiration: A Prospective, Randomized, and Controlled Trial.

Background: Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) is an invasive procedure that required deep sedation to suppress coughing and body movements. Deep sedation, on the other hand, has been shown to cause respiratory and circulatory depression, especially when the airway is shared with the endoscopist. Esketamine is a novel sedative and analgesic with little respiratory inhibition that appears to be an appropriate adjuvant in propofol sedation for EBUS-TBNA. We compared the efficacy and safety of esketamine combined with propofol target-controlled infusion (TCI) and propofol TCI for deep sedation in EBUS-TBNA. Methods: The study included 135 patients with ASA II-III undergoing EBUS-TBNA. They were randomly divided into two groups (group E and group P). Both groups received midazolam (0.01-0.03 mg/kg) and oxycodone (0.07-0.08 mg/kg). Then, patients in group E received 0.3 mg/kg esketamine, propofol TCI, and 0.2 mg·kg-1·h-1 esketamine for sedative maintenance. Patients in group P received only propofol TCI. The primary outcome was the dose of 1% lidocaine administrated by the endoscopist and the times of lidocaine sprays. Secondary outcome indicators were cough score, propofol dosage, patient satisfaction, endoscopist satisfaction, the incidence of sedation-related adverse effects and side effects, and recovery time. Results: Patients in group E were given significantly less lidocaine (4.36 ml/h (2.67-6.00) vs 6.00 ml/h (4.36-7.20), P < 0.001) and less spraying frequency (2.18 times/h (1.33-3.00) vs 3.00 times/h (2.18-3.60), P < 0.001) than group P. There was a statistically significant difference in cough score between the two groups (group E 2 (0-4) vs group P 3 (2-4), P=0.03). Also, mean arterial pressure (MAP) was higher in group E in the 30th min (T5, 84.10 ± 12.91 mmHg versus 79.04 ± 10.01 mmHg, P=0.012) and 40th min (T6, 87.72 ± 15.55 mmHg versus 82.14 ± 10.51 mmHg, P=0.026). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of sedation-related adverse events and side effects, recovery time, endoscopist satisfaction, and patient satisfaction. Conclusions: In patients with ASA II-III, esketamine as an adjuvant in combination with propofol TCI deep sedation for EBUS-TBNA can improve the sedation effect, reduce coughing reaction during the procedure, and obtain more stable blood pressure. No reduction in the occurrence of sedation-related side effects was observed. This trial is registered with ChiCTR2200061124.

Success and safety of deep sedation as a primary anaesthetic approach for transvenous lead extraction: a retrospective analysis.

There is a rising number in complications associated with more cardiac electrical devices implanted (CIED). Infection and lead dysfunction are reasons to perform transvenous lead extraction. An ideal anaesthetic approach has not been described yet. Most centres use general anaesthesia, but there is a lack in studies looking into deep sedation (DS) as an anaesthetic approach. We report our retrospective experience for a large number of procedures performed with deep sedation as a primary approach. Extraction procedures performed between 2011 and 2018 in our electrophysiology laboratory have been included retrospectively. We began by applying a bolus injection of piritramide followed by midazolam as primary medication and would add etomidate if necessary. For extraction of leads a stepwise approach with careful traction, locking stylets, dilator sheaths, mechanical rotating sheaths and if needed snares and baskets has been used. A total of 780 leads in 463 patients (age 69.9 ± 12.3, 31.3% female) were extracted. Deep sedation was successful in 97.8% of patients. Piritramide was used as the main analgesic medication (98.5%) and midazolam as the main sedative (94.2%). Additional etomidate was administered in 15.1% of cases. In 2.2% of patients a conversion to general anaesthesia was required as adequate level of DS was not achieved before starting the procedure. Sedation related complications occurred in 1.1% (n = 5) of patients without sequalae. Deep sedation with piritramide, midazolam and if needed additional etomidate is a safe and feasible strategy for transvenous lead extraction.

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.

Feasibility and safety of deep sedation with propofol and remifentanil in spontaneous breathing during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: an observational prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is an interventional procedure that requires deep sedation or general anaesthesia. The purpose of this prospective observational study was to assess the feasibility and safety of deep sedation in ERCP to maintain spontaneous breathing. METHODS: This is a single-centre observational prospective cohort study conducted in a tertiary referral university hospital. All consecutive patients who needed sedation or general anaesthesia for ERCP were included from January 2021 to June 2021. Deep sedation was achieved and maintained by continuous infusion of an association of propofol and remifentanil. The primary endpoint was to assess the prevalence of major anaesthesia-related complications, such as arrhythmias, hypotension, gas exchange dysfunction, and vomiting (safety endpoint). Secondary endpoints were: (a) to assess the prevalence of signs of an insufficient level of sedation, such as movement, cough, and hiccups (feasibility endpoint): (b) time needed to achieve the target level of sedation and for recovery from anaesthesia. In order to do so we collect the following parameters: peripheral oxygen saturation, fraction of inspired oxygen, noninvasive systemic blood pressure, heart rate, number of breaths per minute, neurological functions with the use of the bispectral index to determine depth of anaesthesia, and partially exhaustive CO2 end pressure to continuously assess the ventilatory status. The collected data were analysed by several tests: Shapiro-Wilk, Student's t, Tuckey post-hoc, Wilcoxon rank-sum and Kruskall-Wallis ran. Statistical analysis was performed using Stata/BE 17.0 (StataCorp LLC). RESULTS: 114 patients were enroled. Eight patients were excluded because they did not meet the inclusion criteria. We found that all patients were hemodynamically stable: intraoperative mean systolic blood pressure was 139,23 mmHg, mean arterial pressure was on average 106,66 mmHg, mean heart rate was 74,471 bpm. The mean time to achieve the target level of sedation was 63 s, while the mean time for the awakening after having stopped drug infusion was 92 s. CONCLUSIONS: During ERCP, deep sedation and analgesia using the association of propofol and remifentanil and maintaining spontaneous breathing are safe and feasible, allowing for a safe and quick recovery from anaesthesia.

Sedation strategies for pulsed-field ablation of atrial fibrillation: focus on deep sedation with intravenous ketamine in spontaneous respiration.

AIMS: A standardized sedation protocol for pulsed-field ablation (PFA) of atrial fibrillation (AF) through irreversible cellular electroporation has not been well established. We report our experience of a protocol for deep sedation with ketamine in spontaneous respiration during the PFA of AF. METHODS AND RESULTS: All consecutive patients undergoing PFA for AF at our center were included. Our sedation protocol involves the intravenous administration of fentanyl (1.5 mcg/kg) and midazolam (2 mg) at low doses before local anesthesia with lidocaine. A ketamine adjunct (1 mg/kg) was injected about 5 minutes before the first PFA delivery. We enrolled 66 patients (age = 59 ± 9 years, 78.8% males, body mass index = 28.8 ± 5 kg/m2, fluoroscopy time = 21[15-30] min, skin-to-skin time = 75[60-100] min and PFA LA dwell time = 25[22-28] min). By the end of the procedure, PVI had been achieved in all patients by means of PFA alone. The mean time under sedation was 56.4 ± 6 min, with 50 (76%) patients being sedated for less than 1 hour. A satisfactory Ramsey Sedation Scale level before ketamine infusion was achieved in all patients except one (78.8% of the patients with rank 3; 19.7% with rank 2). In all procedures, the satisfaction level was found to be acceptable by both the patient and the primary operator (Score = 0 in 98.5% of cases). All patients reported none or mild pain. No major procedure or anesthesia-related complications were reported. CONCLUSION: Our standardized sedation protocol with the administration of drugs with rapid onset and pharmacological offset at low doses was safe and effective, with an optimal degree of patient and operator satisfaction. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Advanced TecHnologies For SuccEssful AblatioN of AF in Clinical Practice (ATHENA). URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov/Identifier: NCT05617456.

A comparison of the success rate of pneumatic reduction in intussusception between general anesthesia and deep sedation: a randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: This study was aimed to compare the success rate between patients who underwent general anesthesia and deep sedation. METHODS: Patients who were diagnosed with intussusception and had no contraindications would receive non-operative treatment first by undergoing pneumatic reduction. The patients were then split in to two groups: one group underwent general anesthesia (GA group), while the other underwent deep sedation (SD group). This study was a randomized controlled trial which compared success rate between two groups. RESULTS: A total of 49 episodes diagnosed with intussusception were random into 25 episodes in GA group and 24 episodes in SD group. There was no significant difference in baseline characteristic between the two groups. The success rates of GA group and SD group were equally 88.0% (p = 1.00). Sub-analysis of the success rate was lower in the patients with high-risk score for failed reduction. (Chiang Mai University Intussusception (CMUI) failed score in success VS failed = 6.9 ± 3.2 vs. 10.3 ± 3.0 p = 0.017). CONCLUSION: General anesthesia and deep sedation offered similar success rates. In cases of high risk of failure, general anesthesia should be considered to accommodate the switch to surgical management in the same setting if the non-operative approach fails. The appropriate treatment and sedative protocol also increase the success of reduction.

Driving performance of outpatients achieving discharge criteria after deep sedation is worse than these of their escort-driver: a prospective observational study on simulator.

Background: Achieving post-anesthesia discharge criteria after surgery or outpatient procedures does not mean that the patient has regained all his or her faculties, such as driving. Although mandated by many clinical guidelines, there is no evidence that escort-drivers reduce the risk of traffic accidents after deep sedation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate that hypothesis that driving performance as measured using a driving simulation would not differ between patients who had undergone deep sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy meeting discharge criteria and their escorts. Methods: This prospective study included patients scheduled for ambulatory gastrointestinal endoscopy under deep propofol sedation (patient group) and their escorts (escort group). Driving performance of escorts and patients (when discharge criteria were met) was assessed using a driving simulator. Results: 30 patients and their escorts were included. Patients crossed the midline significantly more frequently than escorts (3 [2-4] (median [IQR]) and 2 [1-3] crossings, respectively, p=0.015]. Patients were speeding for a higher proportion of the distance traveled compared with escorts (37 (20)% (mean (SD)) and 24 (17)% in patients and escorts, respectively, p = 0.029). There were no significant differences between groups in other simulation parameters. Conclusions: The ability to stay within the traffic lanes, as measured by the number of midline crossing during a simulated driving performance, is impaired in patients who meet discharge criteria after gastrointestinal endoscopy under deep sedation compared with their escorts. This finding does not support a practice of allowing patients to drive themselves home after these procedures.

Deep continuous patient-requested sedation until death: a multicentric study.

OBJECTIVES: In 2016, a new law was adopted in France granting patients the right, under specific conditions, to continuous deep sedation until death (CDSUD). The goal of this study was to measure the frequency of requests for CDSUD from patients in palliative care. METHODS: The data collected from the medical records of patients in palliative care units (PCU) or followed by palliative care support teams (PCST) in the Rhône-Alpes area, who died after CDSUD, focused on the patient's characteristics, the drugs used (and compliance with regulatory processes). RESULTS: All 12 PCU and 12 of the 24 PCST were included. Among the 8500 patients followed, 42 (0.5%) requested CDSUD until death. The patients were: 65.7 (SD=13.7) years old, highly educated (69%), had cancer (81%), refractory symptoms (98%) and mostly psychoexistential distress (69%). The request was rejected for 2 (5%) patients and delayed for 31 (74%) patients. After a delay of a mean 8 days, 13 (31%) patients were granted CDSUD. The drug used was midazolam at 115 mg/24 hours (15-480), during a mean of 3 days. PCUs used lower dosages than PCSTs (83 vs 147), with significantly lower initial doses (39 mg vs 132 mg, p=0.01). A life-threatening condition was recorded in 13 cases (31%) and a collegial decision was taken in 25 cases (60%). CONCLUSION: This study highlights the low rate of request and the even lower rate of CDSUD in specialised palliative care. However, the sedation for psychoexistential distress and the lack of procedure records raise ethical questions.

Green discoloration of the urine following sedation with propofol for colonoscopy.

Propofol (2,6-diisopropylphenol) is the most widely used drug for endoscopic procedures under deep sedation. We present the clinical case of an 83-year-old man who underwent a colonoscopy under sedation with propofol, observing a green discolouration of the urine during the procedure.

Safety of endoscopist-administered deep sedation with propofol in ASA III patients

Introduction: deep sedation controlled by the endoscopist is safe in patients with low anesthetic risk (ASA I-II). However, scarce evidence is available in patients with intermediate risk (ASA III).Objective: to evaluate the safety of deep sedation with propofol controlled by the usual endoscopy staff (endoscopist, nurse, assistant) in outpatients classified as ASA III and the risk factors for the occurrence of complications during deep sedation.Patients and methods: this observational and single-center cross-sectional study included consecutive patients undergoing non-complex procedures in which deep sedation was administered by the endoscopy staff. Patients were divided into group I (ASA = III) and group II (ASA < III).Results: a total of 562 patients were included and 80 (14.2 %) were in group I. Complications related to deep sedation were more frequent in group I (23.8 % vs 14.5 %; p = 0.036), mainly mild desaturations (13.8 % vs 7.5 %; p = 0.058). Emergency intervention or death were not registered. The adjusted analysis identified age as the only independent baseline risk factor for developing global adverse events.Conclusion: ASA III patients developed more sedation-related complications than ASA I-II patients. However, these complications were mild and did not prevent the correct performance of the procedure. (AU)

A dual-center cohort study on the association between early deep sedation and clinical outcomes in mechanically ventilated patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: The COVID-SED study.

BACKGROUND: Mechanically ventilated patients have experienced greater periods of prolonged deep sedation during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. Multiple studies from the pre-COVID era demonstrate that early deep sedation is associated with worse outcome. Despite this, there is a lack of data on sedation depth and its impact on outcome for mechanically ventilated patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to characterize the emergency department (ED) and intensive care unit (ICU) sedation practices during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to determine if early deep sedation was associated with worse clinical outcomes. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Dual-center, retrospective cohort study conducted over 6 months (March-August, 2020), involving consecutive, mechanically ventilated adults. All sedation-related data during the first 48 h were collected. Deep sedation was defined as Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale of - 3 to - 5 or Riker Sedation-Agitation Scale of 1-3. To examine impact of early sedation depth on hospital mortality (primary outcome), we used a multivariable logistic regression model. Secondary outcomes included ventilator-, ICU-, and hospital-free days. RESULTS: 391 patients were studied, and 283 (72.4%) experienced early deep sedation. Deeply sedated patients received higher cumulative doses of fentanyl, propofol, midazolam, and ketamine when compared to light sedation. Deep sedation patients experienced fewer ventilator-, ICU-, and hospital-free days, and greater mortality (30.4% versus 11.1%) when compared to light sedation (p < 0.01 for all). After adjusting for confounders, early deep sedation remained significantly associated with higher mortality (adjusted OR 3.44; 95% CI 1.65-7.17; p < 0.01). These results were stable in the subgroup of patients with COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: The management of sedation for mechanically ventilated patients in the ICU has changed during the COVID pandemic. Early deep sedation is common and independently associated with worse clinical outcomes. A protocol-driven approach to sedation, targeting light sedation as early as possible, should continue to remain the default approach.