A clinical trial comparing propofol versus propofol plus midazolam in diagnostic endoscopy of patients with a low anesthetic risk.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: propofol and midazolam are two of the most commonly used sedatives in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (UGE). The objective of this study was to evaluate these two sedation regimens administered to patients who underwent an UGE with regard to security, efficiency, quality of exploration and patient response. PATIENTS AND METHODS: a prospective, randomized and double-blind study was performed which included 83 patients between 18 and 80 years of age of a low anesthetic risk (ASA - American Society of Anesthesiologists- I-II) who underwent a diagnostic UGE. Patients were randomized to receive sedation with either placebo plus propofol (group A) or midazolam plus propofol (group B). RESULTS: in group A, 42 patients received a placebo bolus (saline solution) and on average up to 115 mg of propofol in boluses of 20 mg. In group B, 41 patients received 3 mg of midazolam and an average of up to 83 mg of propofol in boluses of 20 mg. There were no significant differences in the adverse effects observed in either group and all adverse events were treated conservatively. The patients in group B (midazolam plus propofol) entered the desired sedated state more quickly with no variation in the overall time of the exploration. The quality of the endoscopic evaluation was similar in both groups and the patients were equally satisfied regardless of the sedatives they received. CONCLUSIONS: the use of midazolam plus propofol as a sedative does not affect the overall exploration time, a lower dose of propofol can be used and it is as safe as administering propofol as a monotherapy while providing the same level of both exploration quality and patient approval.

[Mycobacterium kansasii infection after liver transplantation]. / Infección por Mycobacterium kansasii tras el trasplante hepático.

Infections are one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in solid organ transplant recipients because of treatment with immunosuppressive agents. Infections due to nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) are infrequent but may be a major cause of morbidity. Treatment is associated with therapeutic limitations due to drug interactions with immunosuppressive agents and enhanced toxicity. Treatment of NTM infection most commonly involves surgery, reducing the doses of immunosuppressive medications and/or therapy with antimycobacterial medications The American Thoracic Society recommends isoniazid, rifampicin, and ethambutol. The current duration for treatment of pulmonary disease caused by Mycobacterium kansasii is 18 months. We describe the case of an immunosuppressed liver transplant recipient with poor outcome due to acute cholangitis who also developed concomitant infection with an uncommon organism, M. kansasii, in the late posttransplantation period.