141 124

Cited 6 times in

Endoscopist-directed propofol: pros and cons.

Authors
 Eun Hye Kim  ;  Sang Kil Lee 
Citation
 Clinical Endoscopy, Vol.47(2) : 129-134, 2014 
Journal Title
 Clinical Endoscopy 
ISSN
 2234-2400 
Issue Date
2014
Abstract
Concerns about the safety of endoscopist-directed propofol (EDP) have been voiced that propofol should be given only by healthcare professionals trained in the administration of general anesthesia. Here we discuss the safety and drawbacks of EDP for routine endoscopic procedures. Currently, both diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopy are well tolerated and accepted by both patients and endoscopists due to the application of sedation in most clinics worldwide. Accordingly, propofol use is increasing in many countries. It is crucial for endoscopists to be very familiar with the use of propofol or a combination of drugs. However, the controversy regarding the administration of sedation by an endoscopist or an anesthesiologist continues. Until now, there have been no randomized control trials comparing sedation induced by propofol administered by an endoscopist or by an anesthesiologist. It might be difficult to perform this kind of study. For the convenience and safety of sedative endoscopy, it would be important that EDP be generally applied to endoscopic procedures, and for more safety, an anesthesiologist may automatically take care of particular patients at high risk of suffering from propofol side effects.
Files in This Item:
T201405827.pdf Download
DOI
10.5946/ce.2014.47.2.129
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Internal Medicine (내과학교실) > 1. Journal Papers
Yonsei Authors
김은혜(Kim, Eun Hye) ORCID logo https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6691-6837
이상길(Lee, Sang Kil) ORCID logo https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0721-0364
Export
RIS (EndNote)
XLS (Excel)
XML
URI
https://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/138939
사서에게 알리기
  feedback

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Browse