Propofol e fentanil versus midazolam e fentanil para sedação em pacientes cirróticos durante a realização de endoscopia digestiva alta
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2012 |
Tipo de documento: | Tese |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP |
Texto Completo: | http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/9988 |
Resumo: | Background: Cirrhotic patients often undergo diagnostic or therapeutic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. The liver cirrhosis might impair the metabolism of drugs used to sedation due to changes in liver function, with possible consequences for the efficacy and safety during procedures. We designed a study to compare two regimens for sedation during endoscopy in this group of patients: propofol with fentanyl and midazolam with fentanyl. Objectives: To compare the two schemes proposed regarding the sedation efficacy (proportion of complete procedures using the initial proposed scheme), safety (occurrence of sedation-related complications) and recovery time (defined as time between the end of the procedure and ambulatory discharge). Patients and methods: We performed a prospective randomized controlled trial conducted between February 2008 to February 2009. Two hundred and ten cirrhotic outpatients were included and randomized in two groups: Midazolam Group (110 patients, 0.05 mg / kg associated with fentanyl, 50 mg intravenously) and Propofol Group (100 patients, 0.5 mg / kg combined with fentanyl, 50 mg intravenously). Results: There were no differences between groups regarding age, sex, weight, etiology of cirrhosis, classification Child-Pugh or ASA classification, as well as to the type of procedure exam was performed (diagnostic test, band ligation or sclerotherapy for esophageal varices). Sedation with propofol and fentanyl was more efficacious (100% vs. 88.2% - p <0.001) and had a shorter recovery time than sedation with midazolam to fentanyl (16.23 ± 6.84min vs. 27.40 ± 17.19 min, respectively - p <0.001). Complications rate were similar in both groups (14% vs. 7.3% - p = 0.172). Conclusion: Both sedation regimens were safe in this setting. Sedation with propofol and fentanyl was more efficacious and had shorter recovery time when compared to midazolam plus fentanyl. Propofol should be considered as an alternative to sedation during upper GI endoscopy in cirrhotic outpatients. |
id |
UFSP_f91bd6b47432e5279c55ff1c9f918422 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.unifesp.br/:11600/9988 |
network_acronym_str |
UFSP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP |
repository_id_str |
3465 |
spelling |
Propofol e fentanil versus midazolam e fentanil para sedação em pacientes cirróticos durante a realização de endoscopia digestiva altaPropofol and fentanil versus Midazolam and fentanil for sedation in cirrhotic patients during upper gastrointestinal endoscopyCirrose hepáticaEndoscopia Digestiva AltaPropofolMidazolamSedaçãoBackground: Cirrhotic patients often undergo diagnostic or therapeutic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. The liver cirrhosis might impair the metabolism of drugs used to sedation due to changes in liver function, with possible consequences for the efficacy and safety during procedures. We designed a study to compare two regimens for sedation during endoscopy in this group of patients: propofol with fentanyl and midazolam with fentanyl. Objectives: To compare the two schemes proposed regarding the sedation efficacy (proportion of complete procedures using the initial proposed scheme), safety (occurrence of sedation-related complications) and recovery time (defined as time between the end of the procedure and ambulatory discharge). Patients and methods: We performed a prospective randomized controlled trial conducted between February 2008 to February 2009. Two hundred and ten cirrhotic outpatients were included and randomized in two groups: Midazolam Group (110 patients, 0.05 mg / kg associated with fentanyl, 50 mg intravenously) and Propofol Group (100 patients, 0.5 mg / kg combined with fentanyl, 50 mg intravenously). Results: There were no differences between groups regarding age, sex, weight, etiology of cirrhosis, classification Child-Pugh or ASA classification, as well as to the type of procedure exam was performed (diagnostic test, band ligation or sclerotherapy for esophageal varices). Sedation with propofol and fentanyl was more efficacious (100% vs. 88.2% - p <0.001) and had a shorter recovery time than sedation with midazolam to fentanyl (16.23 ± 6.84min vs. 27.40 ± 17.19 min, respectively - p <0.001). Complications rate were similar in both groups (14% vs. 7.3% - p = 0.172). Conclusion: Both sedation regimens were safe in this setting. Sedation with propofol and fentanyl was more efficacious and had shorter recovery time when compared to midazolam plus fentanyl. Propofol should be considered as an alternative to sedation during upper GI endoscopy in cirrhotic outpatients.Introdução: Pacientes cirróticos frequentemente são submetidos a procedimentos de endoscopia digestiva alta diagnóstica ou terapêutica. A cirrose hepática pode prejudicar o metabolismo das drogas utilizadas para sedação devido às alterações de função hepática, com possíveis consequências para a eficácia e a segurança durante os procedimentos. Idealizamos um estudo comparando dois esquemas para sedação durante endoscopia digestiva neste grupo de pacientes: propofol associado a fentanil e midazolam associado a fentanil. Objetivos: comparar os dois esquemas de sedação propostos quanto à eficácia (proporção de exames completos realizados com o esquema inicialmente proposto), segurança (ocorrência de complicações relacionadas à sedação) e tempo de recuperação (definido como tempo entre o término do exame endoscópico e a alta ambulatorial). Pacientes e método: realizamos estudo prospectivo aleatorizado no período de fevereiro de 2008 a fevereiro de 2009. Foram incluídos para análise 210 pacientes cirróticos ambulatoriais, distribuídos em dois grupos: Grupo Midazolam (110 pacientes) e Grupo Propofol (100 pacientes). A dose inicialmente proposta de sedação foi, para o grupo Midazolam, 0,05 mg/kg associado a fentanil, 50 μg, por via intravenosa; e para o grupo Propofol, 0,5mg/kg associado a fentanil, 50 μg, por via intravenosa. Resultados: Não houve diferença entre os grupos quando comparados em relação à idade, sexo, peso, etiologia da cirrose, classificação de Child-Pugh ou ASA, bem como em relação ao tipo de procedimento endoscópico realizado (exame diagnóstico, ligadura elástica ou escleroterapia de varizes). A sedação com propofol e fentanil mostrou-se mais eficaz (100% vs. 88.2% - p <0,001) e com menor tempo de recuperação que a sedação com midazolam associado a fentanil (16,23 DP 6,84 min vs. 27,40 DP 17,19 min, respectivamente - p < 0,001). A ocorrência de complicações foi semelhante nos dois grupos (14% vs. 7,3% - p = 0,172). Conclusão: Ambos os esquemas mostraram-se seguros. A sedação com propofol e fentanil foi mais eficaz e apresentou tempo de recuperação mais curto quando comparado ao midazolam associado ao fentanil. Propofol deve ser considerado como alternativa para sedação durante endoscopia digestiva alta em pacientes cirróticos ambulatoriais.TEDEBV UNIFESP: Teses e dissertaçõesUniversidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)Libera Junior, Ermelindo Della [UNIFESP]Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)Correia, Lucianna Motta [UNIFESP]2015-07-22T20:50:40Z2015-07-22T20:50:40Z2012-02-22info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesisinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion135 p.application/pdfCORREIA, Lucianna Pereira da Motta Pires. Propofol e fentanil versus midazolam e fentanil para sedação em pacientes cirróticos durante a realização de endoscopia digestiva alta. 2012. Tese (Doutorado) - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP), São Paulo, 2012.Publico-12449.pdfhttp://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/9988porinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNIFESPinstname:Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)instacron:UNIFESP2024-08-06T10:40:23Zoai:repositorio.unifesp.br/:11600/9988Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://www.repositorio.unifesp.br/oai/requestbiblioteca.csp@unifesp.bropendoar:34652024-08-06T10:40:23Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Propofol e fentanil versus midazolam e fentanil para sedação em pacientes cirróticos durante a realização de endoscopia digestiva alta Propofol and fentanil versus Midazolam and fentanil for sedation in cirrhotic patients during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy |
title |
Propofol e fentanil versus midazolam e fentanil para sedação em pacientes cirróticos durante a realização de endoscopia digestiva alta |
spellingShingle |
Propofol e fentanil versus midazolam e fentanil para sedação em pacientes cirróticos durante a realização de endoscopia digestiva alta Correia, Lucianna Motta [UNIFESP] Cirrose hepática Endoscopia Digestiva Alta Propofol Midazolam Sedação |
title_short |
Propofol e fentanil versus midazolam e fentanil para sedação em pacientes cirróticos durante a realização de endoscopia digestiva alta |
title_full |
Propofol e fentanil versus midazolam e fentanil para sedação em pacientes cirróticos durante a realização de endoscopia digestiva alta |
title_fullStr |
Propofol e fentanil versus midazolam e fentanil para sedação em pacientes cirróticos durante a realização de endoscopia digestiva alta |
title_full_unstemmed |
Propofol e fentanil versus midazolam e fentanil para sedação em pacientes cirróticos durante a realização de endoscopia digestiva alta |
title_sort |
Propofol e fentanil versus midazolam e fentanil para sedação em pacientes cirróticos durante a realização de endoscopia digestiva alta |
author |
Correia, Lucianna Motta [UNIFESP] |
author_facet |
Correia, Lucianna Motta [UNIFESP] |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Libera Junior, Ermelindo Della [UNIFESP] Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Correia, Lucianna Motta [UNIFESP] |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Cirrose hepática Endoscopia Digestiva Alta Propofol Midazolam Sedação |
topic |
Cirrose hepática Endoscopia Digestiva Alta Propofol Midazolam Sedação |
description |
Background: Cirrhotic patients often undergo diagnostic or therapeutic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. The liver cirrhosis might impair the metabolism of drugs used to sedation due to changes in liver function, with possible consequences for the efficacy and safety during procedures. We designed a study to compare two regimens for sedation during endoscopy in this group of patients: propofol with fentanyl and midazolam with fentanyl. Objectives: To compare the two schemes proposed regarding the sedation efficacy (proportion of complete procedures using the initial proposed scheme), safety (occurrence of sedation-related complications) and recovery time (defined as time between the end of the procedure and ambulatory discharge). Patients and methods: We performed a prospective randomized controlled trial conducted between February 2008 to February 2009. Two hundred and ten cirrhotic outpatients were included and randomized in two groups: Midazolam Group (110 patients, 0.05 mg / kg associated with fentanyl, 50 mg intravenously) and Propofol Group (100 patients, 0.5 mg / kg combined with fentanyl, 50 mg intravenously). Results: There were no differences between groups regarding age, sex, weight, etiology of cirrhosis, classification Child-Pugh or ASA classification, as well as to the type of procedure exam was performed (diagnostic test, band ligation or sclerotherapy for esophageal varices). Sedation with propofol and fentanyl was more efficacious (100% vs. 88.2% - p <0.001) and had a shorter recovery time than sedation with midazolam to fentanyl (16.23 ± 6.84min vs. 27.40 ± 17.19 min, respectively - p <0.001). Complications rate were similar in both groups (14% vs. 7.3% - p = 0.172). Conclusion: Both sedation regimens were safe in this setting. Sedation with propofol and fentanyl was more efficacious and had shorter recovery time when compared to midazolam plus fentanyl. Propofol should be considered as an alternative to sedation during upper GI endoscopy in cirrhotic outpatients. |
publishDate |
2012 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2012-02-22 2015-07-22T20:50:40Z 2015-07-22T20:50:40Z |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
doctoralThesis |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
CORREIA, Lucianna Pereira da Motta Pires. Propofol e fentanil versus midazolam e fentanil para sedação em pacientes cirróticos durante a realização de endoscopia digestiva alta. 2012. Tese (Doutorado) - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP), São Paulo, 2012. Publico-12449.pdf http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/9988 |
identifier_str_mv |
CORREIA, Lucianna Pereira da Motta Pires. Propofol e fentanil versus midazolam e fentanil para sedação em pacientes cirróticos durante a realização de endoscopia digestiva alta. 2012. Tese (Doutorado) - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP), São Paulo, 2012. Publico-12449.pdf |
url |
http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/9988 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
135 p. application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP instname:Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) instacron:UNIFESP |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) |
instacron_str |
UNIFESP |
institution |
UNIFESP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
biblioteca.csp@unifesp.br |
_version_ |
1814268460489768960 |