TY - JOUR
T1 - Endoscopist-directed propofol as an adjunct to standard sedation
T2 - A Canadian experience
AU - Heron, Valérie
AU - Golden, Charlotte
AU - Blum, Seymour
AU - Friedman, Gad
AU - Galiatsatos, Polymnia
AU - Hilzenrat, Nir
AU - Stein, Barry L.
AU - Szilagyi, Andrew
AU - Wyse, Jonathan
AU - Battat, Robert
AU - Cohen, Albert
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology.
PY - 2020/6/1
Y1 - 2020/6/1
N2 - Background: Sedation practices vary widely by region. In Canada, endoscopist-directed administration of a combination of fentanyl and midazolam is standard practice. A minority of cases are performed with propofol. Aims: To describe the safety of nonanaesthetist administered low-dose propofol as an adjunct to standard sedation. Methods: This was a single-centre retrospective study of patients having undergone endoscopic procedures with propofol sedation between 2004 and 2012 in a teaching hospital in Montreal. Procedures were performed by gastroenterologists trained in Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support. Sedation was administered by intravenous bolus by a registered nurse, under the direction of the endoscopist. Outcomes of procedures were collected in the context of a retrospective chart review using the hospital’s endoscopy database. Results: Of patients undergoing endoscopies at our centre, 4930 patients received propofol as an adjunct to standard sedation with fentanyl and midazolam. Cecal intubation rate for colonoscopies (n = 2921) was 92.0%. Gastroscopies (n = 1614), flexible sigmoidoscopies (n = 28), endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (n = 331) and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy insertion (n = 36) had success rates, defined as successful completion of the procedure within anatomical limits, of 99.0, 96.4, 94.0 and 91.7%, respectively. The average dose of propofol used for each procedure was 34.5 ± 20.8 mg. Fentanyl was used in 67.4% of procedures at an average dose of 94.3 ± 17.5 mcg. Midazolam was used in 92.7% of cases at an average dose of 3.0 ± 0.7 mg. Reversal agents (naloxone or flumazenil) were used in 0.43% of the cases (n = 21). Patients who received propofol were discharged uneventfully within the usual postprocedure recovery time. One patient required sedation-related hospitalization. For patients having received propofol in addition to standard sedation agents, 99.6% experienced no adverse events. There were no mortalities. Conclusion: The use of low-dose propofol as an adjunct to fentanyl and midazolam, administered by a registered nurse under the direction of the endoscopist was safe and effective in patients at our centre.
AB - Background: Sedation practices vary widely by region. In Canada, endoscopist-directed administration of a combination of fentanyl and midazolam is standard practice. A minority of cases are performed with propofol. Aims: To describe the safety of nonanaesthetist administered low-dose propofol as an adjunct to standard sedation. Methods: This was a single-centre retrospective study of patients having undergone endoscopic procedures with propofol sedation between 2004 and 2012 in a teaching hospital in Montreal. Procedures were performed by gastroenterologists trained in Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support. Sedation was administered by intravenous bolus by a registered nurse, under the direction of the endoscopist. Outcomes of procedures were collected in the context of a retrospective chart review using the hospital’s endoscopy database. Results: Of patients undergoing endoscopies at our centre, 4930 patients received propofol as an adjunct to standard sedation with fentanyl and midazolam. Cecal intubation rate for colonoscopies (n = 2921) was 92.0%. Gastroscopies (n = 1614), flexible sigmoidoscopies (n = 28), endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (n = 331) and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy insertion (n = 36) had success rates, defined as successful completion of the procedure within anatomical limits, of 99.0, 96.4, 94.0 and 91.7%, respectively. The average dose of propofol used for each procedure was 34.5 ± 20.8 mg. Fentanyl was used in 67.4% of procedures at an average dose of 94.3 ± 17.5 mcg. Midazolam was used in 92.7% of cases at an average dose of 3.0 ± 0.7 mg. Reversal agents (naloxone or flumazenil) were used in 0.43% of the cases (n = 21). Patients who received propofol were discharged uneventfully within the usual postprocedure recovery time. One patient required sedation-related hospitalization. For patients having received propofol in addition to standard sedation agents, 99.6% experienced no adverse events. There were no mortalities. Conclusion: The use of low-dose propofol as an adjunct to fentanyl and midazolam, administered by a registered nurse under the direction of the endoscopist was safe and effective in patients at our centre.
KW - Endoscopist-directed propofol
KW - Endoscopy
KW - Outcomes
KW - Safety
KW - Standard sedation
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85125210994
U2 - 10.1093/jcag/gwz011
DO - 10.1093/jcag/gwz011
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85125210994
SN - 2515-2084
VL - 3
SP - 141
EP - 144
JO - Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology
JF - Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology
IS - 3
ER -