Loading…
Clinical impact of gastroenterologist-administered propofol during esophagogastroduodenoscopy: a randomized comparison at a single medical clinic
Background Although midazolam is widely used during endoscopic procedures by endoscopists, propofol has been recently favored for its rapid action and metabolism. The aim of this study is to compare the clinical advantages between propofol and midazolam use during screening esophagogastroduodenoscop...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association 2015-04, Vol.18 (2), p.326-331 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Subjects: | |
| Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c536t-b61c68d228e3a7c85189c6c9a62c105d1a2e85e244e692f609a5c5937b6846bb3 |
|---|---|
| cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c536t-b61c68d228e3a7c85189c6c9a62c105d1a2e85e244e692f609a5c5937b6846bb3 |
| container_end_page | 331 |
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 326 |
| container_title | Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association |
| container_volume | 18 |
| creator | Yamamoto, Hisae Gotoda, Takuji Nakamura, Tetsuro Yamamoto, Tetsuro Kikuchi, Hitoshi Kitamura, Masatsugu Itoi, Takao Moriyasu, Fuminori |
| description | Background
Although midazolam is widely used during endoscopic procedures by endoscopists, propofol has been recently favored for its rapid action and metabolism. The aim of this study is to compare the clinical advantages between propofol and midazolam use during screening esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for gastric cancer and post-procedure management at a medical clinic.
Methods
One hundred six healthy patients aged 20–69 years requesting sedation for screening EGD from October 2012 to May 2013 at a single clinic in Japan were randomly assigned to propofol (
n
= 54) or midazolam (
n
= 52). Medications were given by bolus injection, and the dose was adjusted by body weight. Sedation level and tolerability during EGD and recovery time were assessed. Sedation level and tolerability were evaluated by American Society of Anesthesiologists responsiveness levels and four levels of the gag reflex, respectively. For safety purposes, endoscopists and nurses were trained in administering propofol and an anesthesiologist was on call at all times.
Results
No statistically significant differences were found between the two groups in sedation level and patient tolerability. Full recovery time in the propofol group (4.7 min) was significantly shorter than that in the midazolam group (24 min,
P
|
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10120-014-0371-1 |
| format | article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1666723604</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3641722381</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c536t-b61c68d228e3a7c85189c6c9a62c105d1a2e85e244e692f609a5c5937b6846bb3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kc1u1TAQhS0EoqXlAdggS2zYhHrs2InZVVf8SZW6oWvLsZ2LqyQT7GRR3oI3xmlahCqxsuX5zszxHELeAPsAjDUXGRhwVjGoKyYaqOAZOYVaqEoIJp8_3rmGE_Iq51vGQGpQL8kJr5WWuoFT8vswxCk6O9A4ztYtFHt6tHlJGKYlJBzwGPNSWT8WLJeX4OmccMYeB-rXFKcjDRnnH_aIu86v6MOE2eF895FamuzkcYy_itBhmZFixonapZRyUQ-BjsHfO3D3Vs7Ji94OObx-OM_IzedP3w9fq6vrL98Ol1eVk0ItVafAqdZz3gZhG9dKaLVTTlvFHTDpwfLQysDrOijNe8W0lU5q0XSqrVXXiTPyfu9bvvNzDXkxY8wuDIOdAq7ZgFKq4UKxuqDvnqC3uKapuNuoRreNFFAo2CmXMOcUejOnONp0Z4CZLS-z52VKXmbLy2yatw-d166s4a_iMaAC8B3I87brkP4Z_d-ufwAZHqMt</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1667987531</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Clinical impact of gastroenterologist-administered propofol during esophagogastroduodenoscopy: a randomized comparison at a single medical clinic</title><source>Springer Nature</source><creator>Yamamoto, Hisae ; Gotoda, Takuji ; Nakamura, Tetsuro ; Yamamoto, Tetsuro ; Kikuchi, Hitoshi ; Kitamura, Masatsugu ; Itoi, Takao ; Moriyasu, Fuminori</creator><creatorcontrib>Yamamoto, Hisae ; Gotoda, Takuji ; Nakamura, Tetsuro ; Yamamoto, Tetsuro ; Kikuchi, Hitoshi ; Kitamura, Masatsugu ; Itoi, Takao ; Moriyasu, Fuminori</creatorcontrib><description>Background
Although midazolam is widely used during endoscopic procedures by endoscopists, propofol has been recently favored for its rapid action and metabolism. The aim of this study is to compare the clinical advantages between propofol and midazolam use during screening esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for gastric cancer and post-procedure management at a medical clinic.
Methods
One hundred six healthy patients aged 20–69 years requesting sedation for screening EGD from October 2012 to May 2013 at a single clinic in Japan were randomly assigned to propofol (
n
= 54) or midazolam (
n
= 52). Medications were given by bolus injection, and the dose was adjusted by body weight. Sedation level and tolerability during EGD and recovery time were assessed. Sedation level and tolerability were evaluated by American Society of Anesthesiologists responsiveness levels and four levels of the gag reflex, respectively. For safety purposes, endoscopists and nurses were trained in administering propofol and an anesthesiologist was on call at all times.
Results
No statistically significant differences were found between the two groups in sedation level and patient tolerability. Full recovery time in the propofol group (4.7 min) was significantly shorter than that in the midazolam group (24 min,
P
< 0.01).
Conclusions
Regarding post-procedure management of patients in a medical clinic, propofol use might not necessitate a recovery room and excessive assessment tasks because of rapid recovery time without any prolonged reaction, which causes patient compliance. (Clinical trial registration number: UMIN000009142.)</description><identifier>ISSN: 1436-3291</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1436-3305</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10120-014-0371-1</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24695971</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Tokyo: Springer Japan</publisher><subject>Abdominal Surgery ; Adult ; Aged ; Anesthesia Recovery Period ; Anesthetics, Intravenous - administration & dosage ; Cancer Research ; Endoscopy, Digestive System - methods ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Gastric cancer ; Gastroenterology ; Humans ; Male ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Midazolam - administration & dosage ; Middle Aged ; Oncology ; Original Article ; Prognosis ; Propofol - administration & dosage ; Prospective Studies ; Stomach Neoplasms - diagnosis ; Surgical Oncology ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association, 2015-04, Vol.18 (2), p.326-331</ispartof><rights>The International Gastric Cancer Association and The Japanese Gastric Cancer Association 2014</rights><rights>The International Gastric Cancer Association and The Japanese Gastric Cancer Association 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c536t-b61c68d228e3a7c85189c6c9a62c105d1a2e85e244e692f609a5c5937b6846bb3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c536t-b61c68d228e3a7c85189c6c9a62c105d1a2e85e244e692f609a5c5937b6846bb3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24695971$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Yamamoto, Hisae</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gotoda, Takuji</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nakamura, Tetsuro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yamamoto, Tetsuro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kikuchi, Hitoshi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kitamura, Masatsugu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Itoi, Takao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moriyasu, Fuminori</creatorcontrib><title>Clinical impact of gastroenterologist-administered propofol during esophagogastroduodenoscopy: a randomized comparison at a single medical clinic</title><title>Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association</title><addtitle>Gastric Cancer</addtitle><addtitle>Gastric Cancer</addtitle><description>Background
Although midazolam is widely used during endoscopic procedures by endoscopists, propofol has been recently favored for its rapid action and metabolism. The aim of this study is to compare the clinical advantages between propofol and midazolam use during screening esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for gastric cancer and post-procedure management at a medical clinic.
Methods
One hundred six healthy patients aged 20–69 years requesting sedation for screening EGD from October 2012 to May 2013 at a single clinic in Japan were randomly assigned to propofol (
n
= 54) or midazolam (
n
= 52). Medications were given by bolus injection, and the dose was adjusted by body weight. Sedation level and tolerability during EGD and recovery time were assessed. Sedation level and tolerability were evaluated by American Society of Anesthesiologists responsiveness levels and four levels of the gag reflex, respectively. For safety purposes, endoscopists and nurses were trained in administering propofol and an anesthesiologist was on call at all times.
Results
No statistically significant differences were found between the two groups in sedation level and patient tolerability. Full recovery time in the propofol group (4.7 min) was significantly shorter than that in the midazolam group (24 min,
P
< 0.01).
Conclusions
Regarding post-procedure management of patients in a medical clinic, propofol use might not necessitate a recovery room and excessive assessment tasks because of rapid recovery time without any prolonged reaction, which causes patient compliance. (Clinical trial registration number: UMIN000009142.)</description><subject>Abdominal Surgery</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Anesthesia Recovery Period</subject><subject>Anesthetics, Intravenous - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Cancer Research</subject><subject>Endoscopy, Digestive System - methods</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Follow-Up Studies</subject><subject>Gastric cancer</subject><subject>Gastroenterology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Midazolam - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Oncology</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Prognosis</subject><subject>Propofol - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Stomach Neoplasms - diagnosis</subject><subject>Surgical Oncology</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>1436-3291</issn><issn>1436-3305</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kc1u1TAQhS0EoqXlAdggS2zYhHrs2InZVVf8SZW6oWvLsZ2LqyQT7GRR3oI3xmlahCqxsuX5zszxHELeAPsAjDUXGRhwVjGoKyYaqOAZOYVaqEoIJp8_3rmGE_Iq51vGQGpQL8kJr5WWuoFT8vswxCk6O9A4ztYtFHt6tHlJGKYlJBzwGPNSWT8WLJeX4OmccMYeB-rXFKcjDRnnH_aIu86v6MOE2eF895FamuzkcYy_itBhmZFixonapZRyUQ-BjsHfO3D3Vs7Ji94OObx-OM_IzedP3w9fq6vrL98Ol1eVk0ItVafAqdZz3gZhG9dKaLVTTlvFHTDpwfLQysDrOijNe8W0lU5q0XSqrVXXiTPyfu9bvvNzDXkxY8wuDIOdAq7ZgFKq4UKxuqDvnqC3uKapuNuoRreNFFAo2CmXMOcUejOnONp0Z4CZLS-z52VKXmbLy2yatw-d166s4a_iMaAC8B3I87brkP4Z_d-ufwAZHqMt</recordid><startdate>20150401</startdate><enddate>20150401</enddate><creator>Yamamoto, Hisae</creator><creator>Gotoda, Takuji</creator><creator>Nakamura, Tetsuro</creator><creator>Yamamoto, Tetsuro</creator><creator>Kikuchi, Hitoshi</creator><creator>Kitamura, Masatsugu</creator><creator>Itoi, Takao</creator><creator>Moriyasu, Fuminori</creator><general>Springer Japan</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150401</creationdate><title>Clinical impact of gastroenterologist-administered propofol during esophagogastroduodenoscopy: a randomized comparison at a single medical clinic</title><author>Yamamoto, Hisae ; Gotoda, Takuji ; Nakamura, Tetsuro ; Yamamoto, Tetsuro ; Kikuchi, Hitoshi ; Kitamura, Masatsugu ; Itoi, Takao ; Moriyasu, Fuminori</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c536t-b61c68d228e3a7c85189c6c9a62c105d1a2e85e244e692f609a5c5937b6846bb3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Abdominal Surgery</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Anesthesia Recovery Period</topic><topic>Anesthetics, Intravenous - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Cancer Research</topic><topic>Endoscopy, Digestive System - methods</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Follow-Up Studies</topic><topic>Gastric cancer</topic><topic>Gastroenterology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Midazolam - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Oncology</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Prognosis</topic><topic>Propofol - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Stomach Neoplasms - diagnosis</topic><topic>Surgical Oncology</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Yamamoto, Hisae</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gotoda, Takuji</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nakamura, Tetsuro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yamamoto, Tetsuro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kikuchi, Hitoshi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kitamura, Masatsugu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Itoi, Takao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moriyasu, Fuminori</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Proquest Health & Medical Complete</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>PML(ProQuest Medical Library)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Yamamoto, Hisae</au><au>Gotoda, Takuji</au><au>Nakamura, Tetsuro</au><au>Yamamoto, Tetsuro</au><au>Kikuchi, Hitoshi</au><au>Kitamura, Masatsugu</au><au>Itoi, Takao</au><au>Moriyasu, Fuminori</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Clinical impact of gastroenterologist-administered propofol during esophagogastroduodenoscopy: a randomized comparison at a single medical clinic</atitle><jtitle>Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association</jtitle><stitle>Gastric Cancer</stitle><addtitle>Gastric Cancer</addtitle><date>2015-04-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>18</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>326</spage><epage>331</epage><pages>326-331</pages><issn>1436-3291</issn><eissn>1436-3305</eissn><abstract>Background
Although midazolam is widely used during endoscopic procedures by endoscopists, propofol has been recently favored for its rapid action and metabolism. The aim of this study is to compare the clinical advantages between propofol and midazolam use during screening esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for gastric cancer and post-procedure management at a medical clinic.
Methods
One hundred six healthy patients aged 20–69 years requesting sedation for screening EGD from October 2012 to May 2013 at a single clinic in Japan were randomly assigned to propofol (
n
= 54) or midazolam (
n
= 52). Medications were given by bolus injection, and the dose was adjusted by body weight. Sedation level and tolerability during EGD and recovery time were assessed. Sedation level and tolerability were evaluated by American Society of Anesthesiologists responsiveness levels and four levels of the gag reflex, respectively. For safety purposes, endoscopists and nurses were trained in administering propofol and an anesthesiologist was on call at all times.
Results
No statistically significant differences were found between the two groups in sedation level and patient tolerability. Full recovery time in the propofol group (4.7 min) was significantly shorter than that in the midazolam group (24 min,
P
< 0.01).
Conclusions
Regarding post-procedure management of patients in a medical clinic, propofol use might not necessitate a recovery room and excessive assessment tasks because of rapid recovery time without any prolonged reaction, which causes patient compliance. (Clinical trial registration number: UMIN000009142.)</abstract><cop>Tokyo</cop><pub>Springer Japan</pub><pmid>24695971</pmid><doi>10.1007/s10120-014-0371-1</doi><tpages>6</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1436-3291 |
| ispartof | Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association, 2015-04, Vol.18 (2), p.326-331 |
| issn | 1436-3291 1436-3305 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1666723604 |
| source | Springer Nature |
| subjects | Abdominal Surgery Adult Aged Anesthesia Recovery Period Anesthetics, Intravenous - administration & dosage Cancer Research Endoscopy, Digestive System - methods Female Follow-Up Studies Gastric cancer Gastroenterology Humans Male Medicine Medicine & Public Health Midazolam - administration & dosage Middle Aged Oncology Original Article Prognosis Propofol - administration & dosage Prospective Studies Stomach Neoplasms - diagnosis Surgical Oncology Young Adult |
| title | Clinical impact of gastroenterologist-administered propofol during esophagogastroduodenoscopy: a randomized comparison at a single medical clinic |
| url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-23T23%3A05%3A16IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Clinical%20impact%20of%20gastroenterologist-administered%20propofol%20during%20esophagogastroduodenoscopy:%20a%20randomized%20comparison%20at%20a%20single%20medical%20clinic&rft.jtitle=Gastric%20cancer%20:%20official%20journal%20of%20the%20International%20Gastric%20Cancer%20Association%20and%20the%20Japanese%20Gastric%20Cancer%20Association&rft.au=Yamamoto,%20Hisae&rft.date=2015-04-01&rft.volume=18&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=326&rft.epage=331&rft.pages=326-331&rft.issn=1436-3291&rft.eissn=1436-3305&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10120-014-0371-1&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3641722381%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c536t-b61c68d228e3a7c85189c6c9a62c105d1a2e85e244e692f609a5c5937b6846bb3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1667987531&rft_id=info:pmid/24695971&rfr_iscdi=true |