Comparative Study between Propofol and Dexmedetomidine for Conscious Sedation in Patients Undergoing Outpatient Colonoscopy.

Harish Karanth, Sumesh Murali, Reshma Koteshwar, Vasanth Shetty, Karunakara Adappa
Author Information
  1. Harish Karanth: Department of Anaesthesiology, A J Institute of Medical Sciences, Mangalore, Karnataka, India.
  2. Sumesh Murali: Department of Anaesthesiology, Saveetha Medical College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
  3. Reshma Koteshwar: Department of Anaesthesiology, A J Institute of Medical Sciences, Mangalore, Karnataka, India.
  4. Vasanth Shetty: Department of Anaesthesiology, A J Institute of Medical Sciences, Mangalore, Karnataka, India.
  5. Karunakara Adappa: Department of Anaesthesiology, A J Institute of Medical Sciences, Mangalore, Karnataka, India.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Colonoscopy is a mildly painful procedure requiring conscious sedation. Though propofol is a widely used anesthetic agent in day-care procedures due to its rapid onset and quick recovery has a drawback of requiring resuscitation maneuvers more often than the conventional methods. Dexmedetomidine, a newly introduced, highly selective α-adrenergic receptor agonist possessing hypnotic, sedative, anxiolytic, sympatholytic, and analgesic properties with impressive safety margin, needs to be explored for use in conscious sedation for colonoscopy procedure among South Indian population.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective randomized comparative study was conducted on patients aged between 25 and 60 years with the American Society of Anesthesiologist physical status classes I and II posted for colonoscopy under monitored anesthesia care. Study group was randomly divided into two groups and administered propofol and dexmedetomidine. The primary outcome variable was assessments of sedation scores between the two groups. Secondary outcome variables were pain score assessments, hemodynamic comparisons, and adverse events among the two groups. Appropriate statistical tests were applied to compare the findings.
RESULTS: After comparisons between the two groups, we found that patients on dexmedetomidine had similar sedation score as that of patients on propofol. However, there was a significantly higher incidence of systemic hypotension. Requirement of rescue analgesia and adverse events and other hemodynamic fluctuation were similar in both the groups.
CONCLUSION: We conclude that dexmedetomidine has similar efficacy as propofol for conscious sedation required during colonoscopy. Occurrence of systolic hypotension was, however, significantly more among the group receiving dexmedetomidine.

Keywords

References

  1. Anesthesiology. 1997 Apr;86(4):836-47 [PMID: 9105228]
  2. Br J Anaesth. 1997 Apr;78(4):400-6 [PMID: 9135361]
  3. Anesthesiology. 1993 May;78(5):813-20 [PMID: 8098190]
  4. Gastrointest Endosc. 2008 Apr;67(4):651-9 [PMID: 18291396]
  5. Crit Care. 2000;4(5):302-8 [PMID: 11056756]
  6. Anesth Analg. 2008 Jan;106(1):114-9, table of contents [PMID: 18165564]
  7. Anesth Analg. 2000 Mar;90(3):699-705 [PMID: 10702460]
  8. Anesthesiology. 2005 Aug;103(2):269-73 [PMID: 16052108]
  9. Anesthesiology. 2000 Nov;93(5):1345-9 [PMID: 11046225]
  10. Anesth Analg. 1992 Dec;75(6):940-6 [PMID: 1359809]
  11. Anesthesiology. 1990 Aug;73(2):230-5 [PMID: 1974394]
  12. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2000 Aug;24(8):1011-7 [PMID: 10951540]
  13. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2003 Nov;1(6):425-32 [PMID: 15017641]
  14. Br J Anaesth. 1992 Jun;68(6):570-5 [PMID: 1351736]
  15. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2011 Nov;12(6):e262-5 [PMID: 21263367]
  16. Anesth Analg. 2008 Jun;106(6):1741-8 [PMID: 18499604]
  17. Saudi J Anaesth. 2011 Jan;5(1):36-41 [PMID: 21655014]
  18. Can J Anaesth. 2006 Jul;53(7):646-52 [PMID: 16803911]
  19. Am J Gastroenterol. 2002 May;97(5):1159-63 [PMID: 12014721]
  20. Anesth Analg. 2010 Jan 1;110(1):47-56 [PMID: 19713256]
  21. J Clin Anesth. 2010 Feb;22(1):35-40 [PMID: 20206849]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0sedationpropofolgroupsdexmedetomidinetwoColonoscopyconsciouscolonoscopyamongpatientssimilarprocedurerequiringDexmedetomidineStudygroupoutcomeassessmentsscorehemodynamiccomparisonsadverseeventssignificantlyhypotensionINTRODUCTION:mildlypainfulThoughwidelyusedanestheticagentday-careproceduresduerapidonsetquickrecoverydrawbackresuscitationmaneuversoftenconventionalmethodsnewlyintroducedhighlyselectiveα-adrenergicreceptoragonistpossessinghypnoticsedativeanxiolyticsympatholyticanalgesicpropertiesimpressivesafetymarginneedsexploreduseSouthIndianpopulationMATERIALSANDMETHODS:prospectiverandomizedcomparativestudyconductedaged2560yearsAmericanSocietyAnesthesiologistphysicalstatusclassesIIpostedmonitoredanesthesiacarerandomlydividedadministeredprimaryvariablescoresSecondaryvariablespainAppropriatestatisticaltestsappliedcomparefindingsRESULTS:foundHoweverhigherincidencesystemicRequirementrescueanalgesiafluctuationCONCLUSION:concludeefficacyrequiredOccurrencesystolichoweverreceivingComparativePropofolConsciousSedationPatientsUndergoingOutpatient

Similar Articles

Cited By