Dexmedetomidine combined with midazolam infusion guided by bispectral index during bronchoscopy

Sedation with Propofol and Propofol-Ketamine (Ketofol) in Flexible Bronchoscopy: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Prospective Study

BACKGROUND

The flexible bronchoscopy procedure, which is performed in awake conditions or under local anesthesia, is a difficult and complicated procedure for patients and physicians. Propofol is a fast-acting sedative-hypnotic anesthetic with a rapid return. Ketamine hydrochloride is a fast-acting general anesthetic producing an anesthetic state characterized by deep analgesia, normal pharyngeal, and laryngeal reflexes.

MATERIALS AND METHOD

The study was planned in a randomized, prospective, and double-blind design. The drug(s) administered by the anesthesiologist was not known to the bronchoscopist and the patient. A total of 64 cases were included in the study (34/propofol, 30/ketamine-propofol (ketofol) group). Group propofol received 0.1 mL/kg propofol, and group ketofol received 0.1 mL/kg ketofol intravenously over approximately 30 seconds. Vital signs, non-invasive blood pressure, peripheral oxygen saturation, and pulse values of all cases were measured three times and were recorded just before the start of the procedure, after entering the trachea, and after the procedure was terminated. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and The Ramsay scoring were additionally used in the present study.

RESULTS

Statistically significant differences were detected between the groups in terms of blood pressure and heart rates. Statistically significant differences were detected between the two groups according to The VAS scoring and additional dose requirement.

CONCLUSION

It must be noted that flexible bronchoscopy procedures, which are performed with local anesthesia by both the patient and the physician with a high degree of difficulty, especially combined drugs to be applied with anesthesia support, are more effective/comfortable/reliable, and have fewer complications and higher tolerability if there are no contraindications.

The Efficacy and Safety of Remimazolam Tosilate Versus Dexmedetomidine in Outpatients Undergoing Flexible Bronchoscopy: A Prospective, Randomized, Blind, Non-Inferiority Trial

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of remimazolam tosilate-remifentanil (RT-RF) vs dexmedetomidine-remifentanil (Dex-RF) for outpatients undergoing fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FB).

Patients and methods: We conducted a double-blind, randomized, prospective study involving a total of 146 outpatients undergoing FB divided into two groups. The RT-RF (RR) group (n = 73) received an initial dose of 12 mg/kg/h of RT for 10 min followed by a maintenance dose of 1–2 mg/kg/h, while the Dex-RF (DR) group (n = 73) received an initial dose of 0.5 μg/kg of Dex for 10 min followed by a maintenance dose of 0.2–0.7 μg/kg/h. All outpatients also received 0.05–0.2 μg/kg/min RF to maintain the Modified Observer’s Assessment of Alertness and Sedation (MOAA/S) scale <3. The primary outcome was rate of successful FB completed. Secondary outcomes were time metrics, hemodynamics, intubating conditions, oxygen saturation, coughing severity, number of remedies, total dose of fentanyl, RF, RT, and Dex, incidence of dreaming, patient and bronchoscopist satisfaction, willingness to repeat bronchoscopy, and adverse events.

Results: The FB successful completion rate was 94.52% (95% CI: 89.20–99.90) in the RR group and 91.78% (95% CI: 85.30–98.20) in the DR group. Compared with patients in the DR group, the onset time, time to fully alert, and hospital discharge were all significantly shorter in the RR group (p < 0.01), and hemodynamics were more stable in the RR group. Intubating conditions, clinically acceptable intubating conditions, lowest oxygen saturation, coughing severity, consumption of fentanyl and RF, number of remedies, and patient and bronchoscopist satisfaction were similar between the groups (p > 0.05), as were demographic characteristics, incidence of dreaming, willingness to repeat bronchoscopy, and adverse events (p > 0.05).

Conclusion: RT-RF has non-inferior efficacy, better time metrics and hemodynamic stability for outpatients undergoing FB than Dex-RF.

Systematic Review Registration: [http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=66673], identifier [ChiCTR2000041524].

Dexmedetomidine versus propofol sedation in flexible bronchoscopy: a randomized controlled trial

Background

Dexmedetomidine (DEX), is a highly selective alpha2 adrenoceptor (α2-AR) agonist, successfully used in various procedures including flexible bronchoscopy. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating DEX sedation during bronchoscopy report equivocal results regarding respiratory and hemodynamic outcomes.

Methods

We conducted an RCT to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine compared to propofol for sedation during bronchoscopy. The primary outcome was the number of desaturation events, secondary outcomes were transcutaneous Pco2 level, hemodynamic adverse events and physician and patient satisfaction.

Results

Overall, 63 patients were included, 30 and 33 in the DEX and propofol groups, respectively. The number of desaturation events was similar between groups, median (IQR) 1 (0–1) and 1 (0–2) in the DEX and control groups, respectively (P = 0.29). Median desaturation time was 1 (0–2) and 1 (0–3) minutes in the DEX and control groups, respectively (P = 0.48). Adverse events included hypotension, 33% vs 21.1% in intervention and control groups, respectively (P = 0.04), bradycardia, cough, and delayed recovery from sedation. Total adverse events were 22 and 7 in DEX and propofol groups, respectively (P = 0.009).

Conclusion

Dexmedetomidine sedation during bronchoscopy did not show differences in oxygen saturation and transcutaneous CO2 level in comparison to propofol. Moreover, DEX sedation required a significantly higher number of rescue boluses, due to inadequate sedation and was associated with a higher rate of adverse events.

Trial registration NCT04211298, registration date: 26.12.2019.