Dexmedetomidine or midazolam in combination with propofol for sedation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a randomized double blind prospective study

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.authorid0000-0003-1795-150X
dc.authorid0000-0002-9001-2309
dc.contributor.authorKoruk, Senem
dc.contributor.authorKoruk, İrfan
dc.contributor.authorArslan, Ayse Mızrak
dc.contributor.authorBilgi, Murat
dc.contributor.authorGül, Rauf
dc.contributor.authorBozgeyik, Şemsettin
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-23T19:54:47Z
dc.date.available2021-06-23T19:54:47Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.departmentBAİBÜ, Tıp Fakültesi, Cerrahi Tıp Bilimleri Bölümüen_US
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: Interventional endoscopic procedures, such as endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), often require sedation during the procedure. The most commonly used drugs for this purpose are midazolam and propofol, which are used as sedative and hypnotic agents with minimal analgesic potential. Aim: To compare the analgesic sedative effects of midazolam-propofol and dexmedetomidine-propofol combinations and their influence on hemodynamic and respiratory variables in patients undergoing ERCP. Material and methods: Forty adult patients aged 20-78 and undergoing ERCP were randomized to two groups. Patients were premedicated with midazolam (0.05 mg/kg 10 min before the procedure) in group M and with dexmedetomidine (1 mu g/kg for 10 min) in group D. Propofol was used for maintenance. The sedation level was monitored using the bispectral index (BIS) to maintain a score between 70 and 80. Hemodynamic and respiratory variables, recovery time and adverse events were recorded. Results: The hemodynamic and respiratory variables were similar in both groups. Total propofol consumption was significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group (208.5 +/- 80.0 vs. 154.5 +/- 66.7 mg; p = 0.011). The recovery period was shorter in group D (time to achieve the Aldrete score 9 was 9.4 +/- 2.1 vs. 6.6 +/- 1.1 min; p < 0.001). Changes in hemodynamic and respiratory variables and adverse events were not different between the two groups. Conclusions: We found a shorter recovery time and comparable sedative and adverse effects with the dexmedetomidine-propofol combination compared with the midazolam-propofol combination. Dexmedetomidine in combination with propofol may be a safe and useful alternative for sedation for ERCP patients.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.5114/wiitm.2020.95066
dc.identifier.endpage532en_US
dc.identifier.issn1895-4588
dc.identifier.issn2299-0054
dc.identifier.issue3en_US
dc.identifier.pmid32904611en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85091057881en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ2en_US
dc.identifier.startpage526en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.5114/wiitm.2020.95066
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12491/10646
dc.identifier.volume15en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000561377700019en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ4en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMeden_US
dc.institutionauthorBilgi, Murat
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherTermedia Publishing House Ltden_US
dc.relation.ispartofVideosurgery And Other Miniinvasive Techniquesen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectDexmedetomidineen_US
dc.subjectSedationen_US
dc.subjectBispectral Indexen_US
dc.subjectEndoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatographyen_US
dc.subjectRecovery Timeen_US
dc.titleDexmedetomidine or midazolam in combination with propofol for sedation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a randomized double blind prospective studyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Orijinal paket
Listeleniyor 1 - 1 / 1
Küçük Resim
İsim:
senem-koruk.pdf
Boyut:
93.18 KB
Biçim:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Açıklama:
Tam Metin/Full Text
İndir

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Cerrahi Tıp Bilimleri Bölümü Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu