Cited 11 times in
Effect of the midazolam added with propofol‐based sedation in esophagogastroduodenoscopy: A randomized trial
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | 김은혜 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 박준철 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 신성관 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 이상길 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 이용찬 | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2018-10-22T13:17:08Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2018-10-22T13:17:08Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2018 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 0815-9319 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | https://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/163705 | - |
dc.description.abstract | BACKGROUND AND AIM: Although propofol has been widely used for sedation during esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), adverse events including hypoxia and hypotension may be a concern in the propofol-based sedation. We aimed to analyze whether administration of midazolam would improve safety and efficacy of propofol-based sedation in EGD. METHODS: One hundred twenty patients who were scheduled to undergo diagnostic EGD were randomly assigned to either midazolam plus propofol (MP) or propofol alone groups. In the MP group, 2 mg of midazolam and 10 mg of propofol were given initially. In the propofol alone group, 40-60 mg of propofol was given initially. In both groups, 20 mg of propofol was given repeatedly to maintain moderate sedation as needed. Vital signs including oxygen saturation were monitored every 2 min. After the patients fully recovered, satisfaction score was investigated from endoscopists, nurses, and patients, respectively. RESULTS: The baseline characteristics did not differ between the MP and propofol alone groups. The mean required doses of propofol was (mean ± standard deviation) 0.3 ± 0.3 and 0.8 ± 0.2 mg/kg in the MP and propofol alone groups, respectively (P < 0.001). In addition, sedation-related adverse events and recovery time did not differ between the two groups. The proportion of satisfactory did not differ between the two groups (MP vs propofol alone; proportion; patient, 95.0% vs 93.3%, P > 0.999; endoscopist, 73.3% vs 80.0%, P = 0.064; nurse, 73.3% vs 76.7%, P = 0.551). CONCLUSION: Adding midazolam to propofol did not reduced the safety and efficacy, and sedation using propofol alone could be suitable for sedation during diagnostic EGD | - |
dc.description.statementOfResponsibility | restriction | - |
dc.language | English | - |
dc.publisher | Blackwell Scientific Publications | - |
dc.relation.isPartOf | JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY | - |
dc.rights | CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 KR | - |
dc.rights | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/kr/ | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Adult | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Aged | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Conscious Sedation/adverse effects | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Conscious Sedation/methods* | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Conscious Sedation/psychology | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Drug Combinations | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Endoscopy, Digestive System* | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Female | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Humans | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Male | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Midazolam/administration & dosage* | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Middle Aged | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Personal Satisfaction | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Propofol/administration & dosage* | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Prospective Studies | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Safety | - |
dc.title | Effect of the midazolam added with propofol‐based sedation in esophagogastroduodenoscopy: A randomized trial | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.contributor.college | College of Medicine | - |
dc.contributor.department | Dept. of Internal Medicine | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Eun Hye Kim | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Jun Chul Park | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Sung Kwan Shin | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Yong Chan Lee | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Sang Kil Lee | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1111/jgh.14026 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A00827 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A01676 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A02112 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A02812 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A02988 | - |
dc.relation.journalcode | J01417 | - |
dc.identifier.eissn | 1440-1746 | - |
dc.identifier.pmid | 29048708 | - |
dc.identifier.url | https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jgh.14026 | - |
dc.subject.keyword | endoscopy | - |
dc.subject.keyword | midazolam | - |
dc.subject.keyword | propofol | - |
dc.subject.keyword | sedation | - |
dc.contributor.alternativeName | Kim, Eun Hye | - |
dc.contributor.alternativeName | Park, Jun Chul | - |
dc.contributor.alternativeName | Shin, Sung Kwan | - |
dc.contributor.alternativeName | Lee, Sang Kil | - |
dc.contributor.alternativeName | Lee, Yong Chan | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | Kim, Eun Hye | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | Park, Jun Chul | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | Shin, Sung Kwan | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | Lee, Sang Kil | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | Lee, Yong Chan | - |
dc.citation.volume | 33 | - |
dc.citation.number | 4 | - |
dc.citation.startPage | 894 | - |
dc.citation.endPage | 899 | - |
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitation | JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY, Vol.33(4) : 894-899, 2018 | - |
dc.identifier.rimsid | 59002 | - |
dc.type.rims | ART | - |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.