Delayed Flumazenil Injection after Endoscopic Sedation Increases Patient Satisfaction Compared with Immediate Flumazenil Injection

Background/Aims

Flumazenil was administered after the completion of endoscopy under sedation to reduce recovery time and increase patient safety. We evaluated patient satisfaction after endoscopy under sedation according to the timing of a postprocedural flumazenil injection.

Methods

In total, 200 subjects undergoing concurrent colonoscopy and upper endoscopy while sedated with midazolam and meperidine were enrolled in our investigation. We randomly administered 0.3 mg of flumazenil either immediately or 15 minutes after the endoscopic procedure. A postprocedural questionnaire and next day telephone interview were conducted to assess patient satisfaction.

Results

Flumazenil injection timing did not affect the time spent in the recovery room when comparing the two groups of patients. However, the subjects in the 15 minutes injection group were more satisfied with undergoing endoscopy under sedation than the patients in the immediate injection group according to the postprocedural survey (p=0.019). However, no difference in overall satisfaction, memory, or willingness to undergo a future endoscopy was observed between the two groups when the telephone survey was conducted on the following day.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated that a delayed flumazenil injection after endoscopic sedation increased patient satisfaction without prolonging recovery time, even though the benefit of the delayed flumazenil injection did not persist into the following day.     

胃镜检查前联合应用镇静镇痛药物的研究

目的 :研究联合应用芬太尼和异丙酚或咪唑安定在胃镜检查中的镇静镇痛效果和安全性。方法 :将 132例胃镜检查患者随机分为Ⅰ组 (48例 ,给予芬太尼和异丙酚 )、Ⅱ组 (44例 ,给予芬太尼和咪唑安定 )和Ⅲ组 (对照组 ,40例 ,常规操作 ,不给镇静镇痛药 ) ,观察各组检查反应、操作时间、清醒时间及检查前、中、后血压、心率和SpO2 变化。结果 :Ⅰ、Ⅱ组的检查反应、操作时间明显优于Ⅲ组 (均为P <0 .0 0 5 ) ,Ⅰ组病人的清醒时间短于Ⅱ组 (P <0 .0 0 1)。Ⅰ、Ⅱ组病人检查中均有血压下降和心率减慢 ,但检查结束后恢复至检查前水平。结论 :胃镜检查前联合应用芬太尼和异丙酚或咪唑安定镇静镇痛是安全有效的 ,异丙酚 芬太尼的清醒时间短于咪唑安定 芬太尼     

长期饮酒对咪达唑仑在无痛气管镜检查中镇静作用的影响

目的 探讨长期饮酒对咪达唑仑在无痛气管镜检查中镇静作用的影响.方法 176例无痛气管镜检查患者根据是否有饮酒史分为非饮酒组(A组)、饮酒组(B组);B组患者依据咪达唑仑用量随机分为B1组和B2组.A组和B1组在复合麻醉中咪达唑仑的剂量为0.08 mg/kg;B2组的咪达唑仑剂量为0.1 mg/kg.对患者进行Ramsay镇静分级,观察患者声门开放情况、呛咳、心率变化、血氧饱和度变化、血压变化、术后不良记忆等.结果 各组间在Ramsay镇静分级中差异无统计学意义;B1较A组在检查过程中声门开放更差、心率改变更大、血压变化更大、不良记忆更多;B1组较B2组在检查过程中声门开放更差、心率改变更大、血压变化更大;A组和B2组在所有的观测指标上差异均无统计学意义.结论 长期饮酒可使咪达唑仑在无痛气管镜检查中的镇静作用降低;对长期饮酒患者咪达唑仑用量应增加至0.1 mg/kg.Ramsay镇静分级不适用于无痛气管镜检查中镇静状态的评估.     

异丙酚复合咪唑安定、芬太尼用于无痛人流术的临床研究

目的：探讨异丙酚复合咪唑安定、芬太尼用于无痛人流术的麻醉效能，对呼吸、循环的影响。方法：90例择期行无痛人流术孕妇，随机分为三组，P组静脉注射异丙酚2.5mg/kg；F组先给予芬太尼0.1mg，再静注异丙酚1.5mg/kg；M组首先给予咪唑安定0.02mg/kg，再分别静注芬太尼0.05mg、异丙酚1.5mg/kg；注药完毕患者入睡后开始手术。术中根据患者有无体动反应追加异丙酚0.5mg/kg或追加异丙酚至体动反应消失。结果：与术前比，M组的SBP、DBP、HR变化比P组F组平稳（P〈0.05）；异丙酚用量M组比P组F组量上，麻醉效能M组为优。结论：（1）三组对呼吸均有抑制，须密切监测通气情况；（2）配备完善的抢救设备及药物；（3）异丙酚复合咪唑安定、芬太尼具备用量少效果确切的优点。     

芬太尼为基础的镇静方案对机械通气患者镇静效果的影响

目的 探讨以芬太尼为基础的镇静对重症病房机械通气患者镇静效果的影响。方法40例需机械通气的内科患者随机分为咪达唑仑组（M组）和芬太尼＋咪达唑仑组（F＋M组）,每组20例。以肌肉活动评分法（MAAS）评分3分、ATICE人机顺应性评分≥3分为镇静目标。记录镇静前的血压、心率、呼吸频率、脉搏氧饱和度、气道峰压、吸入氧浓度、动脉氧分压、MAAS评分、ATICE意识评分和人机顺应性评分。镇静开始M组以咪达唑仑0．05mg／kg（静脉推注1次／5min）,并进行镇静评估至达镇静目标。F＋M组以芬太尼0．25μg／kg（静脉推滓1次／5min）,并进行镇静评估至达镇静目标。然后M组开始以眯达唑仑0．1mg·kg·h^-1。持续泵入;F＋M组开始以芬太尼1．0μg·kg^-1·h^-1持续泵人。每隔2h进行一次镇静评估,调整药物输注速率维持镇静目标,记录呼吸、循环及镇静指标,当芬太尼输注速度达到2μg·kg^-1·h^-1仍未达镇静目标时加用咪达唑仑静脉泵入。镇静中12h和24h各监测一次血气分析,计算氧合指数。镇静达24h时停止药物输注,每30min评估一次镇静深度,记录恢复时间（停药至MAAS评分≥3分的时间）。计算镇静药物费用、药物调整次数、镇静满意程度和人机顺应性满意程度。结果镇静过程中两组患者的血压及药物调整次数比较差异均无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。F＋M组的心率、气道压力、呼吸频率、药物费用均明显低于M组（P＜0．05）;F＋M组的脉搏氧饱和度、氧合指数高于M组（P〈0．05）。F＋M组的镇静满意程度、人机顺应性满意程度和意识评分明显高于M组,恢复时间较短（P〈0．05）。结论对机械通气的内科患者以芬太尼为基础的镇静能提高镇静效果,减轻患者经济负手担。     

Sedation for middle ear surgery: prospective clinical trial comparing propofol and midazolam

During middle-ear-surgery under local anaesthesia (MES-LA), patients report hearing noises, feeling anxious, and experiencing earache. In a prospective randomized clinical trial, we compared propofol and midazolam for sedation in 68 patients scheduled for MES-LA. The starting dose of propofol was 1 to 1.5 mg per kilogram intravenously, followed by 1 to 2 mg per kilogram per hour given by infusion. The starting dose of midazolam was 0.02 to 0.05 mg per kilogram intravenously, followed by 0.01 to 0.02 mg per kilogram intravenously. Metamizol and fentanyl were added when required. Sedation was titrated to a Ramsay score of 3 to 4 and a bispectral index value of 70 to 80. Patients were assessed for vital parameters and sedation and pain scores. In the recovery room, readiness for discharge and satisfaction of both patient and surgeon with the procedure were assessed. The group receiving propofol had a significantly lower heart rate, shorter duration of sedation, and earlier readiness for discharge (p<0.05). There were no significant differences in other parameters evaluated. Seventy-nine per cent of patients in the group receiving propofol and 91.1% receiving midazolam would choose the same method of anaesthesia and sedation for any further MES-LA. Our results suggest that, compared to midazolam, propofol is more suitable for sedation in patients undergoing MES-LA. However, appropriate patient selection, adequate preparation, and careful monitoring are mandatory.     

Analgosedierungsverfahren für zahnärztlich-chirurgische Eingriffe mit Midazolam/Pentazocin und Midazolam/Ketamin Klinische Doppelblindstudie zu Anxiolyse,Analgesie, Sedierung und Amnesie

Ketamine and midazolam, applied as intravenous medication for conscious sedation in day-case maxillo-facial surgery, has been proven to be superior to pentazocine and midazolam concerning cardiovascular parameters and respiratory depression. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of low-dose ketamine/midazolam on anxiety, analgesia, amnesia and subjective feelings. Methods. 140 out-patients (ASA I) were randomly divided into four groups. The double-blind study was prospective. Control group: Local anaesthesia (LA), articaine 4% plus epinephrine 1:200000 (n=35); test group P/M: LA, additional pentazocine 0.40 mg/kg bw and midazolam 0.075 mg/kg bw i.v. (n=35); test group K25/M: LA, additionally ketamine 0.25 mg/kg bw and midazolam 0.075 mg/kg bw i.v. (n=35), test group K50/M: LA, additionally ketamine 0.5 mg/kg bw and midazolam 0.075 mg/kg bw i.v. (n=35). LA was injected 3 min after application of the systemic medication in the test groups or application of a placebo (saline 0.9%) in the control group. Three further minutes later, operation was started. For evaluation questionnaires, visual analogue scales (VAS) and the state-trait anxiety inventory (STAI) were used. For testing retrograde and anterograde amnesia, acoustic sensations were delivered before application of the systemic medication (a Christmas carol) and during operation (the German national anthem). Results. The control group and the test groups were comparable with regard to biological data, duration of operation, applied dosage of local anaesthetics and actual anxiety before operation. The patients in all test groups rated intraoperative anxiety as mild, in contrast to the control group. Nearly no pain sensation during the operation was remembered in all test groups. Retrograde amnesia was not found in any group. Complete anterograde amnesia was observed in all test groups with respect to the intraoperative sensation, but even in the control group 50% of the patients did not remember having heard the national anthem. As subjective feelings negative criteria were mainly reported in the control group, where as in all test groups positive sensations dominated. Dreams were reported mostly after the higher dosage of ketamine, but no patient experienced any unpleasant dreams. The clinical assessment of the different regimes were excellent for test groups P/M and K50/M, modest for the control group and test group K25/M. Postoperatively, patients of test group P/M were remarkably sedated, but no clinically relevant sedation or motor weakness were observed in the other groups. Postoperative pain sensations were rated more intense in all test groups than in the control group. In test groups P/M and K25/M an increasing pain level was recorded during the postoperative period, with the consequence of a higher demand rate for analgesics. Conclusions. Dental surgery can be performed safely with low-dose ketamine/midazolam. Compared to pentazocine/midazolam, the higher dosage of ketamine (0.5 mg/kg bw) showed identical results intraoperatively, but was superior during the postoperative period (vigilance), and thus may represent a suitable dosage. The lower dosage of ketamine resulted in worse operating conditions, but a dosage higher than 0.5 mg/kg bw might lead to unconscious sedation and might increase the frequency of unpleasant dreams.     

Enhancement of Antitumor Immunity after Propofol Treatment in Mice

Propofol and midazolam are the most widely used sedatives in the intensive care setting after surgery. We studied whether these sedatives had any antitumor immunity effects in mice. Mice were given intraperitoneal injections of propofol or midazolam and subcutaneous inoculation of tumor cells (EL4). Then, spleen cells were collected and the in vitro activity of cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTL) was measured using flow cytometry. The in vitro activity of CTL against EL4 was significantly greater after propofol injection compared with its vehicle (Intralipid) or saline. Midazolam had no effect on CTL activity. We also studied whether tumor growth in vivo was affected by the administration of propofol. Tumor growth was significantly suppressed in mice that were given propofol, compared with tumor growth in mice given saline. Therefore, it is concluded that propofol may have a beneficial effect on antitumor immunity in mice.     

瑞芬太尼复合咪唑安定在胃镜检查中的应用

目的:观察瑞芬太尼复合咪唑安定在胃镜检查中应用的有效性和安全性.方法:120例ASAⅠ～Ⅱ级行胃镜检查病人随机分为2组:药物组(D组,n=60)给予瑞芬太尼1μg*kg-1复合咪唑安定1～2mg静脉麻醉;对照组(C组,n=60)不给予任何麻醉药物.观察记录两组病人在胃镜检查前、中、后心率(HR)、血压(BP)、SpO2、病人反应、检查时间及成功率.结果:D组在HR、BP、舒适度、检查时间及成功率方面均明显优于C组(P＜0.01),两组SpO2无明显差异(P＞0.05).结论:瑞芬太尼复合咪唑安定用于胃镜检查舒适、有效和安全.     

脑电双频指数对镇静深度和血液动力学预测作用的研究

目的　研究脑电双频指数 (BIS)对镇静深度和血液动力学的预测作用。方法　 30例ASAⅠ～Ⅱ级、择期行胸腹部手术患者 ,随机分为丙泊酚组 (P组 )和咪唑安定组 (M组 ) ,每组 15例。以恒定的给药速度 (P组为 8mg·kg 1·h 1,M组为 0 5mg·kg 1·h 1)持续静脉输注 ,每 3分钟行OAA/S评分一次 ,直到OAA/S评分达 1分停止给药。记录评分前即刻的BIS、收缩压 (SBP)、舒张压(DBP)、激发指数 (ACI)。结果　随着镇静加深 ,两组BIS、SBP、DBP、ACI均明显下降 ,而心率 (HR)变化不明显 ;BIS预测OAA/S与SBP、DBP和ACI的预测概率 (Pk)值均有显著性差异 (P <0 0 1) ,而BIS预测HR的Pk值无显著性差异。BIS预测P组的OAA/S、SBP、DBP的Pk值较M组的相同指标的Pk值明显高 ,而BIS预测ACI的Pk值无显著性差异。结论　BIS对麻醉的意识成分变化预测效果较好 ,对血压和心肌收缩性变化也有一定的预测能力 ,但明显较镇静深度预测能力差 ,BIS与心率变化无关。