Propofol e fentanil versus midazolam e fentanil para sedação em pacientes cirróticos durante a realização de endoscopia digestiva alta

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Correia, Lucianna Motta [UNIFESP]
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