Cargando…

Dexmedetomidine versus midazolam for conscious sedation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: An open-label randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Traditionally, midazolam has been used for providing conscious sedation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Recently, dexmedetomidine has been tried, but very little evidence exists to support its use. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to compare haemodynamic, re...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sethi, Priyanka, Mohammed, Sadik, Bhatia, Pradeep Kumar, Gupta, Neeraj
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3968645/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24700894
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0019-5049.126782
_version_ 1782309184463699968
author Sethi, Priyanka
Mohammed, Sadik
Bhatia, Pradeep Kumar
Gupta, Neeraj
author_facet Sethi, Priyanka
Mohammed, Sadik
Bhatia, Pradeep Kumar
Gupta, Neeraj
author_sort Sethi, Priyanka
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Traditionally, midazolam has been used for providing conscious sedation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Recently, dexmedetomidine has been tried, but very little evidence exists to support its use. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to compare haemodynamic, respiratory and recovery profile of both drugs. Secondary objective was to compare the degree of comfort experienced by patients and the usefulness of the drug to endoscopist. STUDY DESIGN: Open-label Randomised Controlled Trial. METHODS: Subjects between 18 and 60 years of age with American Society of Anaesthesiologist Grade I-II requiring ERCP were enrolled in two groups (30 each). Both groups received fentanyl 1 μg/kg IV at the beginning of ERCP. Group M received IV midazolam (0.04 mg/kg) and additional 0.5 mg doses until Ramsay Sedation Scale (RSS) score reached 3-4. Group D received dexmedetomidine at loading dose of 1 μg/kg over 10 min followed by 0.5 μg/kg/h infusion until RSS reached 3-4. The vital parameters (heart rate (HR), blood pressure (BP), respiration rate, SpO(2)), time to achieve RSS 3-4 and facial pain score (FPS) were compared during and after the procedure. In the recovery room, time to reach modified Aldrete score (MAS) 9-10 and patient and surgeon's satisfaction scores was also recorded and compared. Any complication during or after the procedure were also noted. RESULTS: In Group D, patients had lower HR and FPS at 5, 10 and 15 min following the initiation of sedation (P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in BP and respiratory rate. The procedure elicited a gag response in 29 (97%) and 7 (23%) subjects in Group M and Group D respectively (P<0.05). MAS of 9-10 at 5 min during recovery was achieved in 27 (90%) subjects in Group D in contrast to 5 (17%) in Group M (P<0.05). Dexmedetomidine showed higher patient and surgeon satisfaction scores (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: Dexmedetomidine can be a superior alternative to midazolam for conscious sedation in ERCP.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3968645
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-39686452014-04-03 Dexmedetomidine versus midazolam for conscious sedation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: An open-label randomised controlled trial Sethi, Priyanka Mohammed, Sadik Bhatia, Pradeep Kumar Gupta, Neeraj Indian J Anaesth Clinical Investigation BACKGROUND: Traditionally, midazolam has been used for providing conscious sedation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Recently, dexmedetomidine has been tried, but very little evidence exists to support its use. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to compare haemodynamic, respiratory and recovery profile of both drugs. Secondary objective was to compare the degree of comfort experienced by patients and the usefulness of the drug to endoscopist. STUDY DESIGN: Open-label Randomised Controlled Trial. METHODS: Subjects between 18 and 60 years of age with American Society of Anaesthesiologist Grade I-II requiring ERCP were enrolled in two groups (30 each). Both groups received fentanyl 1 μg/kg IV at the beginning of ERCP. Group M received IV midazolam (0.04 mg/kg) and additional 0.5 mg doses until Ramsay Sedation Scale (RSS) score reached 3-4. Group D received dexmedetomidine at loading dose of 1 μg/kg over 10 min followed by 0.5 μg/kg/h infusion until RSS reached 3-4. The vital parameters (heart rate (HR), blood pressure (BP), respiration rate, SpO(2)), time to achieve RSS 3-4 and facial pain score (FPS) were compared during and after the procedure. In the recovery room, time to reach modified Aldrete score (MAS) 9-10 and patient and surgeon's satisfaction scores was also recorded and compared. Any complication during or after the procedure were also noted. RESULTS: In Group D, patients had lower HR and FPS at 5, 10 and 15 min following the initiation of sedation (P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in BP and respiratory rate. The procedure elicited a gag response in 29 (97%) and 7 (23%) subjects in Group M and Group D respectively (P<0.05). MAS of 9-10 at 5 min during recovery was achieved in 27 (90%) subjects in Group D in contrast to 5 (17%) in Group M (P<0.05). Dexmedetomidine showed higher patient and surgeon satisfaction scores (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: Dexmedetomidine can be a superior alternative to midazolam for conscious sedation in ERCP. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2014 /pmc/articles/PMC3968645/ /pubmed/24700894 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0019-5049.126782 Text en Copyright: © Indian Journal of Anaesthesia http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Clinical Investigation
Sethi, Priyanka
Mohammed, Sadik
Bhatia, Pradeep Kumar
Gupta, Neeraj
Dexmedetomidine versus midazolam for conscious sedation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: An open-label randomised controlled trial
title Dexmedetomidine versus midazolam for conscious sedation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: An open-label randomised controlled trial
title_full Dexmedetomidine versus midazolam for conscious sedation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: An open-label randomised controlled trial
title_fullStr Dexmedetomidine versus midazolam for conscious sedation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: An open-label randomised controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Dexmedetomidine versus midazolam for conscious sedation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: An open-label randomised controlled trial
title_short Dexmedetomidine versus midazolam for conscious sedation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: An open-label randomised controlled trial
title_sort dexmedetomidine versus midazolam for conscious sedation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: an open-label randomised controlled trial
topic Clinical Investigation
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3968645/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24700894
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0019-5049.126782
work_keys_str_mv AT sethipriyanka dexmedetomidineversusmidazolamforconscioussedationinendoscopicretrogradecholangiopancreatographyanopenlabelrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT mohammedsadik dexmedetomidineversusmidazolamforconscioussedationinendoscopicretrogradecholangiopancreatographyanopenlabelrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT bhatiapradeepkumar dexmedetomidineversusmidazolamforconscioussedationinendoscopicretrogradecholangiopancreatographyanopenlabelrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT guptaneeraj dexmedetomidineversusmidazolamforconscioussedationinendoscopicretrogradecholangiopancreatographyanopenlabelrandomisedcontrolledtrial