Efficacy and safety of subanesthetic doses of esketamine combined with propofol in painless gastrointestinal endoscopy: a prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial

Intravenous esketamine as a detumescence agent for intraoperative penile erection during urological surgeries: a retrospective clinical analysis

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative penile erection (IPE) is an uncommon yet complex issue, and numerous approaches to achieving detumescence fall short of providing consistently satisfactory outcomes. Esketamine, with its sympathomimetic properties, may offer a promising solution for managing this condition. The present study aimed to evaluated the efficiency and safety of intravenous esketamine in addressing IPE.

METHODS

We conducted a review of 3,848 patients who underwent endourological, penile or testicular surgeries under general anesthesia from 2021 to 2023, and cases with IPE and received pharmacological intervention were included in this study. Intravenous esketamine or ephedrine were preferred for managing IPE. The primary outcomes evaluated were the rate of successful penile detumescence, time to detumescence, rapid response rate, remedial measures, intraoperative hypertension, tachycardia and neuropsychiatric adverse events. Additionally, data regarding age, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, type of surgeries, anesthesia methods, medication dosage, and recovery time were documented. We performed meticulously statistical analyses to evaluate the endpoints.

RESULTS

Overall, 37 cases with IPE were assigned to an esketamine group (K group, n = 27) or an ephedrine group (E group, n = 10) based on intraoperative medication. No statistically significant differences were noted regarding age, BMI, ASA grade, type of surgeries, anesthesia methods, rate of successful penile detumescence (96.3% vs. 80.0%), recovery time or the occurrence of postoperative psychiatric complications such as dizziness, restlessness or delirium(P > 0.05). However, compared to ephedrine, esketamine produced a shorter time to detumescence (3.0 ± 0.4 min vs. 5.5 ± 1.1 min, log-rank P = 0.006)), higher rapid response rate achieved detumescence ≤ 3 min (85.2% vs. 50%, P = 0.041), and a lower incidence of cardiovascular adverse events (intraoperative hypertension and tachycardia) (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Our research establishes intravenous esketamine as a practical and reliable therapeutic intervention for prompt resolution of IPE, demonstrating high clinical efficacy with rapid symptom alleviation.

Effect of Esketamine Compared with Sufentanil Combined with Propofol in Patients Undergoing First Trimester Surgical Abortion: A Randomized, Double-Blinded Clinical Trial

Background

We explored whether esketamine anesthesia during first-trimester surgical abortion can reduce intraoperative hemodynamic fluctuations and improve patients' respiratory function.

Methods

A total of 197 patients who underwent a first-trimester surgical abortion were included in the analysis. Patients were randomly assigned to either the esketamine anesthesia group (group E, n=98) or sufentanil anesthesia group (group S, n=99). The primary outcomes were systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean blood pressure (MBP), heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR) and end-tidal carbon dioxide partial pressure (PetCO2) during the surgery. Secondary outcomes included body movement, apnea, hypoxemia, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), dizziness, anesthesia recovery time, Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale (RASS) score, and postoperative pain.

Results

Patients in Group E had a more stable intraoperative SBP (p=0.001), DBP (p=0.014), MBP (p=0.003), and HR (p=0.001). There was no significant difference in intraoperative RR between the two groups (p=0.108); however, PetCO2 in group E remained at preoperative levels, whereas it increased in group S during surgery (p<0.001). The risk of apnea and hypoxemia in group E was lower (RR 0.32, 95% CI [0.13, 0.76], p=0.006; RR 0.13, 95% CI [0.03, 0.54], p=0.001). The incidence of intraoperative body movement (50% vs 27%, p=0.003), postoperative dizziness (45% vs 30%, p=0.024), and nausea (7% vs 0%, p=0.007) was higher in group E. There were no differences in anesthesia recovery time, postoperative RASS score, pain, or vomiting.

Conclusion

Compared with sufentanil, esketamine anesthesia during the first trimester surgical abortion can maintain stable intraoperative hemodynamics and respiratory function during surgery and reduce apnea and hypoxemia. Esketamine may increase the risk of dizziness and PONV after surgical abortion.

Application of Intravenous Chloroprocaine in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

While propofol is a commonly utilized medication for sedation during gastrointestinal endoscopy, it is associated with adverse effects such as hypotension and injection pain. This trial was conducted to test the hypothesis that chloroprocaine can reduce the requirement for propofol and alleviate injection pain during gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Methods

Sixty patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy were enrolled and randomly divided into study group (Group CP) and control group (Group C). Patients in Group CP received intravenous chloroprocaine 2 mg/kg, followed by continuous infusion at 6 mg·kg-1·h-1 until the end of examination. Patients in Group C received the same volume of saline. Subsequently, all patients were intravenously administered sufentanil at a dose of 0.05 μg/kg. Thirty seconds later, propofol was uniformly infused intravenously at a rate of 60 mL/min using an infusion pump. The primary outcome was the consumption of propofol. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of hypoxemia, hypotension, bradycardia, injection pain, and coughing/body movement during examination. The recovery time, PACU stay time, postoperative pain score, and endoscopists' satisfaction score were also recorded.

Results

Group CP demonstrated a significantly lower total requirement for propofol compared to Group C, with means of (119±14) mg and (148±18) mg respectively, P<0.001. This trend was also observed for both the first and supplemental doses. There were no significant differences between the two groups regarding intraoperative adverse events. The incidence of injection pain in Group CP was lower than that in Group C (P=0.007). The recovery time [(4.7±1.4) vs (6.6±1.3), P<0.001], PACU stay time [(13.0±2.9) vs (16.7±3.0), P<0.001] and postoperative pain score [(1.9±0.7) vs (2.5±0.7), P=0.002] in Group CP were lower than those in Group C.

Conclusion

Intravenous chloroprocaine reduces the requirement for propofol, alleviates propofol injection pain, and improves recovery in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy.

The 90% effective dose of ciprofol and propofol with S-ketamine for painless abortion: a randomized, double-blind, sequential dose-finding trial

Background

Unlike the propofol-opioids combination, a single dose of S-ketamine with propofol achieves the same anesthetic effects while effectively minimizing adverse reactions in painless abortion. Ciprofol, a novel analog of propofol, has distinct advantages, its application in painless abortion is underexplored.

Objectives

To investigate a 90% effective dose (ED90) of ciprofol and propofol with S-ketamine for painless abortion.

Design

This prospective biased coin up-and-down (BCUD) sequential dose-finding study aimed to estimate the ED90 of ciprofol when administered with 0.15 mg/kg S-ketamine in painless abortion while comparing adverse effects incidence with the ED90 of propofol when combined with the same dose of S-ketamine.

Methods

Eighty patients were recruited and randomly allocated to either ciprofol or propofol groups, with initial doses of 0.375 mg/kg and 1.5 mg/kg, respectively. The dose for the subsequent patient in the study was based on the response of the preceding patient, following the BCUD design. The study estimated the ED90 using isotonic regression. Secondary outcomes, including the incidence of injection pain, vital signs, and adverse events, were recorded and compared between the two groups.

Results

The ED90 of ciprofol with 0.15 mg/kg S-ketamine was 0.498 mg/kg (95% confidence interval: 0.498-0.510), while the ED90 of propofol with 0.15 mg/kg S-ketamine was 1.99 mg/kg (95% confidence interval: 1.98-2.16). Patients in the ciprofol group had a lower incidence of respiratory pause (7.5% vs 52.5%; p < 0.001). Other adverse events and recovery time were comparable between groups.

Conclusion

Compared to propofol and S-ketamine combination, ciprofol and S-ketamine are equally effective with reduced respiratory depression. Thus, clinicians should consider a dose of 0.5 mg/kg ciprofol with 0.15 mg/kg S-ketamine for painless abortion.

Trial registration

http://www.chictr.org.cn; ChiCTR2400086522; July 5, 2024.

Safety and efficacy of ciprofol versus propofol for gastrointestinal endoscopy: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The role of ciprofol as a novel anesthetic in gastrointestinal endoscopic surgery is unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ciprofol for gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients aged over 65 years and under 65 years, aiming to provide evidence-based information for clinical decision-making.

METHODS

We conducted a search for RCTs(randomized controlled trials) comparing ciprofol and propofol in gastrointestinal endoscopy on databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, (China National Knowledge Infrastructure)CNKI, Wanfang, and Vipro Chinese Journal Service up to September 15, 2024. The required information was screened and extracted, and the quality of the included research literatures was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias assessment tool, and Meta-analysis of outcome metrics was performed using Revman 5.4 and Stata software.

RESULTS

A total of 17 RCTs involving 2800 patients were included, with 1,450 patients in the ciprofol group and 1350 patients in the propofol group. The results of the meta-analysis indicated that there was no statistically significant difference in the sedation success rate or recovery time between the two groups across all age categories. In patients under 65 years old, the induction time of the ciprofol group (MD = 0.41 min, 95%CI: 0.04 min ∼ 0.78 min, P = 0.03) was longer than that in the propofol group. The incidences of hypotension (OR = 0.48, 95%CI: 0.32 ∼ 0.72, P = 0.004), bradycardia (OR = 0.66, 95%CI: 0.49 ∼ 0.87, P = 0.004), injection pain (OR = 0.08, 95%CI: 0.05 ∼ 0.15, P<0.0001), respiratory depression (OR = 0.21, 95%CI: 0.15 ∼ 0.30, P<0.0001), and hypoxemia (OR = 0.29, 95%CI: 0.20 ∼ 0.43, P<0.0001), in the ciprofol group were much lower than those in the propofol group.

CONCLUSION

Meta-analysis results indicate that, across various age groups, ciprofol demonstrates a higher safety profile and effectively reduces the incidence of postoperative (ADRs)adverse reactions compared to propofol. However, there is no significant difference in the sedative effects of the two agents. This study categorized elderly patients into subgroups, thereby providing a foundation for the application of ciprofol in gastrointestinal examinations of elderly patients. Consequently, we propose that ciprofol may serve as a safer alternative to intravenous anesthesia compared to propofol; However, this conclusion requires further validation through high-quality studies.

Effect of Esketamine on Cognitive Recovery After Propofol Sedation for Outpatient Colonoscopy: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Purpose

While esketamine shows promise as an adjunct in procedural sedation, its impact on postoperative cognitive recovery remains incompletely characterized. This study investigated the effects of esketamine on multiple dimensions of recovery, particularly cognition, in patients undergoing colonoscopy with propofol-based sedation.

Patients and Methods

We conducted this randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial from January 6, 2023, to May 20, 2024, at two hospitals in China. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either esketamine 0.2 mg/kg (n = 126) or placebo (n = 126), followed by propofol 1 mg/kg. We administered additional propofol boluses (0.5 mg/kg) to maintain sedation. The study assessed cognitive recovery on postoperative day 3 as the primary outcome, measured by the Postoperative Quality of Recovery Scale (PostopQRS). Secondary outcomes included overall recovery, recovery in other PostopQRS domains, time to discharge, and adverse events.

Results

Esketamine significantly enhanced cognitive recovery compared to placebo on postoperative day 3 (95.2% vs 83.3%, relative risk = 1.14; 95% confidence interval: 1.05-1.25, P = 0.002). Discharge times were comparable between groups (odds ratio = 0.70; 95% confidence interval: 0.43-1.16, P = 0.163). The esketamine group demonstrated higher satisfaction (P = 0.003) and significantly reduced incidences of hypotension (14.3% vs 36.5%, P < 0.001), bradycardia (5.6% vs 15.1%, P = 0.013), hypoxemia (2.4% vs 8.7%, P = 0.028), and injection site pain (21.4% vs 48.4%, P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Adding esketamine 0.2 mg/kg to propofol for colonoscopy sedation improved postoperative cognitive recovery, enhanced patient satisfaction, and reduced cardiopulmonary adverse events without prolonging discharge time. These findings establish low-dose esketamine as a beneficial adjunct to propofol in procedural sedation for colonoscopy.

Comparative Efficacy of Esketamine vs Sufentanil with Propofol for Sedation in EUS: A Randomized, Controlled Study

Purpose

This randomized, controlled trial aimed to assess the sedative effects of esketamine and sufentanil combined with propofol during EUS.

Patients and Methods

Three hundred and forty patients undergone EUS were randomly divided into two groups to receive esketamine 0.25 mg/kg combined with propofol (esketamine group) or sufentanil 0.1 μg/kg combined with propofol (sufentanil group). The primary outcome measure was respiratory depression incidence. The secondary outcomes included the incidence of body movements, propofol dosage, lowest SPO2 during the operation, and management of airway obstruction. In addition, other procedures and anesthesia-related outcomes, and postoperative complications were recorded.

Results

A total of 340 patients underwent randomization. Of these, 172 were assigned to the esketamine group and 168 were assigned to the sufentanil group. 1 patient in the esketamine group was lost in the follow-up. During the EUS, 9 patients (5.3%) in the esketamine group and 26 (15.5%) in the sufentanil group developed respiratory depression; this difference was statistically significant (P = 0.002). Regarding secondary outcomes, the incidence of body movements, induction dosage, supplemental times, and total dosage of propofol were much higher in the sufentanil group than in the esketamine group (P < 0.05). In addition, the lowest SPO2 during the operation, occurrence rate of airway intervention, and management of airway obstruction were significantly different (P < 0.05). Compared to the sufentanil group, the induction time of sedation in the esketamine group was shorter, and the hemodynamics were more stable (P < 0.05). In addition, there were significant differences in the PACU incidence rates of nausea or vomiting between the two groups (P < 0.05), whereas the following day's complications showed no statistical difference.

Conclusion

Esketamine combined with propofol for sedation during EUS can decrease respiratory depression, reduce the dosage of propofol and PONV, and provide a more stable hemodynamic state. Consequently, esketamine could be considered as a potential alternative to sufentanil for sedation during EUS.

Pretreatment with Esketamine Reduces Etomidate-Induced Myoclonus During the Induction of Anesthesia: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Myoclonus is a common problem during induction of anesthesia with etomidate. A variety of agents, including opioids and lidocaine, reduced the incidence of myoclonus. However, there is no reported literature evaluating the effect of esketamine pretreatment on etomidate-induced myoclonus. We investigated the influence of pretreatment with esketamine on the incidence of etomidate-induced myoclonus.

Methods

This is a prospective, double-blind, and randomized controlled trial. One hundred patients aged 18-65 scheduled for elective surgery under general anesthesia (including urology surgery, gynaecology surgery, general surgery, and thoracic surgery) were randomly allocated into two groups, each consisting of 50 patients. Esketamine was pretreated with 0.1 mg/kg 60 s before the initiation of etomidate in Group ESK, while normal saline was administered as the placebo (Group C). During the first 1 minute after etomidate administration, myoclonus incidence and severity were assessed. In addition, we measured the hemodynamic changes and side effects of esketamine before administering etomidate.

Results

In group ESK, 14 patients (28%) had myoclonus (degrees of myoclonus: mild 2, moderate 7, severe 5), and 32 patients (64%) in group C (mild 6, moderate 5, severe 21) (P< 0.001). In group ESK, myoclonus incidence and severity were significantly lower than in group C (P< 0.001).

Conclusion

Esketamine 0.1mg/kg IV pretreatment significantly reduce the incidence and the severity of severe myoclonus of etomidate-induced myoclonus without significant adverse effects.

A Comparative Study of Esketamine-Propofol and Sufentanil-Propofol for Analgesia and Sedation During Breast Minimally Invasive Rotary Resection with Local Anesthesia: A Randomized Double-Blind Clinical Trial

Purpose

Minimally invasive rotary resection (MIRR) is crucial for diagnosing and treating breast tumors, but the optimal intravenous anesthesia regimen is unclear. Esketamine, an NMDA receptor antagonist with anesthetic, analgesic, and sympathomimetic properties, may provide an ideal adjunct to propofol sedation. This study aims to compare the safety and efficacy of esketamine versus sufentanil as adjuncts to propofol for analgesia and sedation during breast MIRR.

Patients and Methods

A total of 90 patients undergoing elective breast MIRR were randomly assigned to receive either sufentanil-propofol or esketamine-propofol for analgesia and sedation. The primary outcome was the occurrence of hypoxia (SpO2 < 92% for >10s or exhibiting a persistent downward trajectory). Other outcomes included incidence of subclinical respiratory depression (92% ≤ SpO2 < 95% for >10s), number of airway interventions, awakening time, satisfaction scores, postoperative exhaust time, hemodynamic parameters, and side events.

Results

Finally, 41 patients were assigned to the sufentanil group and 40 to the esketamine group. The occurrence of hypoxia was significantly lower in the esketamine group (17.5%) than in the sufentanil group (39%) (P = 0.032). Subclinical respiratory depression occurred in 32.5% of the esketamine group and 56.1% of the sufentanil group (P = 0.033). The sufentanil group required more airway interventions than the esketamine group (P = 0.032), and patients in the sufentanil group experiencing hypoxia received more mask-assisted ventilation (P = 0.029). Hemodynamic stability was better in the esketamine group. No significant differences were observed in awakening time, satisfaction score, postoperative exhaust time, or side events between groups.

Conclusion

Esketamine-propofol anesthesia significantly reduces the risk of hypoxia (SpO2 < 92%) compared to sufentanil-propofol, while maintaining similar awakening time, satisfaction, postoperative exhaust time, and side events. Its hemodynamic advantages make it valuable for clinical use, especially in procedures requiring respiratory and hemodynamic stability.

Efficacy and safety of esketamine combined with propofol for conscious sedation in painless colonoscopy: a prospective, randomized, double-blind controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

We explored the efficacy and safety of esketamine combined with propofol for conscious sedation in painless colonoscopy.

METHODS

A total of 195 patients who underwent painless colonoscopy surgery were randomly divided into three groups: the propofol deep sedation group (group DS), the sufentanil combined with propofol for conscious sedation (group CS1) and the esketamine combined with propofol for conscious sedation (group CS2). The primary outcomes of this study included the incidence of hypoxemia, hypotension, hypertension, and bradycardia and excellent and good rates of anaesthesia during colonoscopy. The secondary outcomes included perioperative changes in vital signs (MAP, HR, and SpO2), anaesthesia induction time, dischargeable time, patient and endoscopist satisfaction scores, and incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), drowsiness, dizziness, propofol injection pain, assisted ventilation and vasoactive medications.

RESULTS

The incidence of intraoperative hypoxemia in the DS group was significantly greater than that in the CS1 and CS2 groups (χ2 = 7.081, P = 0.029). The incidence of hypotension in the CS2 group was significantly lower than that in the DS and CS1 groups (χ2 = 16.278, P < 0.001). The risk of hypoxemia was 5.727 times higher in Group DS than in Group CS2 (OR 5.727; 95%CI 1.203-27.273), and the risk of hypotension was 9.864 times higher in Group DS than in Group CS2 (OR 9.864; 95%CI 2.770-35.120). The risk of hypotension in Group CS1 was 5.167 times that in Group CS2 (OR 5.167; 95%CI 1.396-19.117). The incidence of propofol injection pain, assisted ventilation, ephedrine usage and drowsiness in the DS group was significantly greater than that in the CS1 and CS2 groups (χ2 = 57.618, P < 0.001; χ2 = 9.544, P = 0.008; χ2 = 14.820, P = 0.001; χ2 = 37.257, P < 0.001). The incidence of dizziness during recovery in the CS1 group was significantly greater than that in the DS and CS2 groups (χ2 = 6.594, P = 0.037). The dischargeable time in the DS group was significantly greater than that in the CS1 and CS2 groups (F = 53.039, P < 0.001). The satisfaction scores of the endoscopist and patients in the DS group were significantly lower than those in the CS1 and CS2 groups (F = 17.390, P < 0.001; F = 19.282; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, esketamine combined with propofol for conscious sedation can be safely and effectively used for painless colonoscopy and has fewer complications.It is recommended for painless colonoscopy.

Effect of different doses of esketamine on the median effective concentration of propofol for inhibiting body movement during hysteroscopy

The objective of this study is to investigate the effects of various doses of esketamine on the median effective concentration (EC50) of propofol required for inhibiting body movement during hysteroscopy. Additionally, this research aims to explore the pharmacodynamic interactions between esketamine and propofol. Prospective, double-blind, up-down sequential allocation study. Operating room, post-anesthesia care unit (PACU), and general ward. A total of 90 patients were allocated into three groups in a randomized, double-blinded manner as follows: 0.1 mg/kg esketamine combined with propofol intravenous injection (EP0.1) group, 0.2 mg/kg esketamine combined with propofol intravenous injection (EP0.2) group, 0.3 mg/kg esketamine combined with propofol of intravenous injection (EP0.3) group. For the initial patient in each group, the starting effector target concentration of propofol was set at 4 µg/ml. Each patient received an initial intravenous injection of 0.04 mg/kg midazolam, followed by the administration of the appropriate dose of esketamine. Ten seconds after the esketamine injection, propofol was administered intravenously to achieve the target concentration. In accordance with the sequential method principle, the concentration of propofol for the subsequent patient was adjusted based on the response of the previous patient. Effective inhibition of body movement was defined as the absence of any involuntary body movements throughout the entire surgical process. If the previous patient exhibited body movements, the propofol concentration for the next patient was increased by 0.5 µg/ml; conversely, if no movements were observed, it was decreased by 0.5 µg/ml. The up-down sequential allocation method and probit regression were used to calculate the EC50 of propofol. Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Anxiety (HADS-A) and Depression (HADS-D) score, adverse events, hemodynamic changes, demographic data and clinical characteristics. The EC50 of propofol was 3.849 μg/ml (95% CI: 3.419-4.281) in the EP0.1 group, 3.641 μg/ml (95% CI: 2.807-4.200) in the EP0.2 group, and 3.417 μg/ml (95% CI: 2.845-3.852) in the EP0.3 group. These findings suggest that esketamine can dose-dependently reduce the EC50 of propofol. Esketamine can dose-dependently reduce the EC50 of propofol in hysteroscopy, while concurrently lowering patients' HADS-A and HADS-D scores 24 h post-operation. It is concluded that the optimal dose of esketamine, when combined with propofol for hysteroscopy, is 0.3 mg/kg.

Using Clinical-based Discharge Criteria to Discharge Patients After Endoscopy Procedures Under Drug-induced Intravenous Sedation in the Outpatient Care Unit: An Observational Study

PURPOSE

To verify the feasibility of clinical-based discharge (CBD) criteria and to find out the reasons for the delayed discharge of outpatients after endoscopy procedures under drug-induced intravenous sedation.

DESIGN

A prospectively observational study conducted at a tertiary endoscopy center.

METHODS

Medical records were collected from outpatients admitted for endoscopy procedures under drug-induced intravenous sedation from June 1, 2021 to December 30, 2021. Patients were scheduled to discharge at least 30 minutes based on the time-based discharge (TBD) method. Postanesthetic discharge scoring system in the outpatient post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) recorded the time of patients discharged home on the CBD criteria. Postoperative complications were recorded in the PACU and within 24 hours after discharge. Multivariate analysis was applied to identify the factors relating to late discharges.

FINDINGS

10,597 patients were safely and successfully discharged home, and we were informed of no serious emergency or accidental readmissions to the hospital. The mean CBD time (21.77 ± 11.35 minutes) was compared with the TBD time (30 minutes) and actual TBD discharge time (61.56 ± 4.93 minutes), which were statistically significant, without changes in the patient's vital signs (P < .01). Primarily, further univariate and multivariate analyses showed that abdominal pain and fatigue were key factors accountable for delay in PACU discharge (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The study concluded that in patients undergoing ambulatory endoscopy procedures with drug-induced intravenous sedation, discharge times based on physiological scoring systems can efficiently and safely guide ambulatory patient discharge as compared to the traditional TBD method. Postoperative fatigue and pain were the main factors affecting patients discharge associated with a relatively long PACU length of stay.

An observational study on the modulation of anxiety, depression, and adverse event incidence in painless colonoscopy patients through venous access nursing

To investigate the clinical significance of venous access nursing in modulating anxiety, depression, and adverse event incidence among patients undergoing painless colonoscopy. Sixty patients who underwent painless colonoscopy in our hospital from September 2021 to September 2022 were selected as the control group (CG, receiving routine perioperative nursing). Sixty patients who underwent painless colonoscopy in our hospital from October 2022 to August 2023 were taken as the study group (SG, receiving venous access nursing modulation). After nursing, patients in the SG exhibited lower scores of the Self-Rating Anxiety Scale and the Self-Rating Depression Scale than those in the CG (P < .05). The SG showed significantly lower mean Ottawa Bowel Preparation Score, but exhibited higher adequacy of bowel preparation compared with the CG (P < .05). The colonoscopy insertion time was (7.18 ± 1.02) minutes in the SG and (8.69 ± 1.00) minutes in the CG, and the colonoscopy withdrawal time was (4.66 ± 1.66) minutes in the SG and (5.64 ± 1.06) minutes in the CG, which showed statistically significant differences between the 2 groups (P < .05). The total incidence of adverse events did not have statistical significance between the 2 groups (P > .05). Application of venous access nursing in patients undergoing painless colonoscopy may help alleviate adverse emotions and shorten colonoscopy insertion time and colonoscopy withdrawal time, thus warranting recognition for its safety and efficacy.

Painless colonoscopy: fact or fiction?

Although colonoscopy is a routinely performed procedure, it is not devoid of challenges, such as the potential for perforation and considerable patient discomfort, leading to patients postponing the procedure with several healthcare risks. This review delves into preprocedural and procedural solutions, and emerging technologies aimed at addressing the drawbacks of colonoscopies. Insufflation and sedation techniques, together with various other methods, have been explored to increase patient satisfaction, and thereby, the quality of endoscopy. Recent advances in this field include the prevention of loop formation, encompassing the use of variable-stiffness endoscopes, computer-guided scopes, magnetic endoscopic imaging, robotics, and capsule endoscopy. An autonomous endoscope that relies on self-propulsion to completely avoid looping is a potentially groundbreaking technology for the next generation of endoscopes. Nevertheless, critical techniques need to be refined to ensure the development of effective and efficient endoscopes.

Comparison Between Esketamine and Alfentanil for Hysteroscopy: A Prospective, Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

This study aimed to establish the 95% effective dose (ED95) of esketamine in combination with propofol for hysteroscopy and then to evaluate its efficacy and safety profile.

Patients and Methods

This prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial consisted of two cohorts. In cohort 1, 45 women aged 18-65 years undergoing hysteroscopy were randomly assigned to either group E (esketamine + propofol) or group A (alfentanil + propofol). Dixon's up-and-down method was used to determine the ED95 of esketamine and alfentanil. In cohort 2, 86 patients were randomized to group E and group A, with the calculated ED95 dose of the study drugs used for induction. The success rate of anesthesia using the ED95% dose, along with parameters related to anesthesia induction, recovery, and adverse events were also recorded.

Results

The ED95 of esketamine was 0.254 mg/kg (95% CI: 0.214-1.004), while that of alfentanil was 9.121 μg/kg (95% CI: 8.479-13.364). The anesthesia success rate was 93.0% in group E and 95.2% in group A (p = 0.664). After resuscitation, both groups achieved a 100% success rate. The induction time was significantly shorter in group E (60.0 [55.0-70.0] s) compared to group A (67.0 [61.0-79.3] s) (p = 0.006). Group E had lower rates of respiratory depression (p < 0.001), hypoxia (p = 0.006), minimum perioperative SpO2 (p = 0.010), and hypotension (p = 0.001). Esketamine had less effect on respiratory rate, heart rate, mean blood pressure, and end-tidal carbon dioxide compared to alfentanil (all p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in postoperative pain between the two groups.

Conclusion

This study determined the ED 95 dose of esketamine for intravenous general anesthesia during hysteroscopy. Esketamine showed less respiratory and hemodynamic depression, as well as fewer adverse effects compared to alfentanil. Esketamine is an ideal anesthetic agent compared to alfentanil for hysteroscopic anesthesia.

Trial Registration

www.chictr.org.cn, (ChiCTR2300077283); registered November 3, 2023.

Intravenous esketamine as an adjuvant for sedation/analgesia outside the operating room: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

This study was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intravenous esketamine as an adjuvant for sedation or analgesia outside the operating room in adults and children.

Method

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science, and Scopus were searched for potential randomized controlled studies randomized controlled trials comparing drug combinations of esketamine to any other single or combination drug regimens for sedation or analgesia outside the operating room.

Results

Twenty-five studies with a total of 3,455 participants were included in this review. The pooled results of adults showed that compared with drug regimens of the control group, intravenous esketamine combinations were significantly associated with decreased risk of oxygen desaturation (RR = 0.49, 95% CI = [0.34, 0.70]); hypotension (RR = 0.38, 95% CI = [0.31, 0.46]); bradycardia (RR = 0.23, 95% CI = [0.12, 0.43]); injection pain (RR = 0.37, 95% CI = [0.25, 0.53]); body movement (RR = 0.60, 95% CI = [0.41, 0.88]); and propofol consumption (SMD = -1.38, 95% CI = [-2.64, -0.11]), but an increased risk of psychiatric symptoms (RR = 3.10, 95% CI = [2.11, 4.54]) (RR = relative risk; CI = confidence intervals; SMD = standardized mean difference). Subgroup analysis showed that only the combination of esketamine and propofol significantly reduced the above incidence of respiratory and cardiovascular adverse events in adults. In addition, the pooled results of children showed that compared with drug regimens of the control group, esketamine and propofol co-administration significantly reduced the risk of hypotension (RR = 0.59, 95% CI = [0.37, 0.95]) but increased the risk of visual disturbance (RR = 6.62, 95% CI = [2.18, 20.13]) and dizziness (RR = 1.99, 95% CI = [1.17, 3,37]). Subgroup analysis indicated that esketamine>0.5 mg/kg significantly reduced the incidence of hypotension, but increased the risk of dizziness in children.

Conclusion

Intravenous use of esketamine, particularly in combination with propofol, may improve the safety and efficacy of sedation and analgesia outside the operating room, although the potential for psychiatric side effects warrants attention. Future research is recommended to investigate the role of esketamine with agents other than propofol.

Comparison of propofol-esketamine versus propofol-sufentanil for deep sedation and analgesia in children with autism: A randomized double-blind clinical trial

Propofol sedation, routinely used for endoscopic procedures, is safe and acceptable for children. Adjuvants, such as esketamine or sufentanil, are commonly added to improve the efficacy and safety of propofol sedation. This study aimed to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of propofol-esketamine (PE) versus propofol-sufentanil (PS) for deep sedation and analgesia in children with autism undergoing colonoscopy procedure. One hundred and twenty-four children with autism undergoing colonoscopy procedure were included in the study. Patients were randomly assigned to receive one of the two adjuvants: esketamine (0.3 mg/kg) or sufentanil (0.2 μg/kg), subsequently administered propofol 2.0 mg/kg to induce anesthesia. Additional doses of propofol (0.5-1.0 mg/kg) were administered as needed to ensure patient tolerance for the remaining duration of the procedure. Movement during the procedure, hemodynamic variables, the total dose of propofol, recovery time, and adverse events were recorded. The PE group exhibited a significantly lower incidence of severe movement during the procedure compared with the PS group (14.52% vs. 32.26%, p = 0.020). The PE group showed significantly lower incidence of respiratory depression, hypotension, and severe injection pain of propofol than the PS group during the procedure (all p < 0.05). The mean arterial pressure (MAP) decreased significantly after anesthesia induction in the PS group and remained lower than baseline (all p < 0.05). Compared with the combination of low-dose sufentanil (0.2 μg/mg) with propofol, the low-dose esketamine (0.3 mg/kg) combined with propofol provided more stable hemodynamics, higher quality of sedation, and fewer adverse events in children with autism undergoing colonoscopy procedure.

A study of hemodynamic effects, postoperative recovery, and safety of esketamine (right handed) during flexible bronchoscopy under general anesthesia

OBJECTIVE

Flexible bronchoscopy during general anesthesia has become an indispensable tool. Anesthetics are widely utilized in flexible bronchoscopy (FB). This study delved into the application value of a subanesthetic dose of esketamine (ES) (right handed) in flexible bronchoscopy during general anesthesia.

METHODS

A sample of 160 patients who underwent flexible bronchoscopy during general anesthesia were selected as study subjects and were equally divided into the control and ES groups, with clinical baseline data (age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists grading) collected. Hemodynamic parameters (mean artery pressure, heart rate, pulse blood oxygen saturation) at different time points, the onset time of anesthesia, surgery time, analgesia maintenance time, anesthesia awakening time, and perioperative adverse reactions were recorded. Visual analogue scale (VAS), Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), and quality of recovery-40 (QoR-40) scales were utilized for assessing post-surgery satisfaction, cognitive function, and post-surgery early recovery quality.

RESULTS

The hemodynamics were stable at each time point, but patients in the ES group were more stable than those in the control group. Patients in the ES group exhibited faster onset and awakening time of anesthesia, longer duration of analgesia, and lower total incidence of adverse reactions versus the control group. The patients' QoR-40 total scores in the ES group were improved versus the control group at 1 day after surgery.

CONCLUSION

Compared with fentanyl, the use of ES (right handed) in flexible bronchoscopy during general anesthesia produces more stable hemodynamics, faster onset and recovery time of anesthesia, longer duration of analgesia, lower incidence of adverse reactions, and improved early postoperative recovery quality in patients.

Efficacy and safety of esketamine for pediatric gastrointestinal endoscopy: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

Objective

The role of esketamine in pediatric gastrointestinal endoscopy is still unclear. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of esketamine for pediatric gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Methods

Clinical trials of esketamine for pediatric gastrointestinal endoscopy were searched in eight common databases, up to October 2023. These clinical trials were included in the meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA). The risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) were used as the effect sizes for dichotomous variables and continuity variables, respectively. When the heterogeneity test showed I2 < 50%, the fixed effects model was used for the meta-analysis and TSA; Otherwise, the random effects model was used for them.

Results

In terms of efficacy endpoints, the meta-analysis showed that compared with placebo or blank, esketamine significantly decreased recovery time by 2.34 min (WMD -2.34; 95% Confidence interval [CI] -3.65, -1.02; p = 0.0005) and propofol consumption by 0.70 mg/kg (WMD -0.70; 95% CI -0.98, -0.43; p < 0.00001), and increased mean heart rate by 4.77 beats/min (WMD 4.77; 95% CI 2.67, 6.87; p < 0.00001) and mean arterial pressure by 3.10 mmHg (WMD 3.10; 95% CI 1.52, 4.67; p = 0.0001), while induction time and mean blood oxygen remained comparable. TSA indicated conclusive evidence for these benefits. In terms of safety endpoints, the meta-analysis revealed that esketamine significantly reduced involuntary movements by 59% (RR 0.41; 95% CI 0.22, 0.76; p = 0.005) and choking by 51% (RR 0.49; 95% CI 0.26, 0.92; p = 0.03), while significantly increasing dizziness by 98% (RR 1.98; 95% CI 1.11, 3.56; p = 0.02) and there were no significant differences in total adverse events, respiratory depression, and vomiting. TSA demonstrated conclusive evidence for involuntary movements and dizziness. Low-dose analysis showed that esketamine at ≤0.3 mg/kg significantly reduced recovery time, propofol consumption and involuntary movements, and significantly increasing mean heart rate, with no increase in dizziness. The Begg's test (p = 0.327) and the Egger's test (p = 0.413) indicated no significant publication bias, yet the funnel plot suggested potential publication bias.

Conclusion

Esketamine is an effective adjuvant anesthesia for children undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy. However, the general dose of esketamine may increase the risk of dizziness, which can be avoided by administering a low dose (≤0.3 mg/kg).

Effectiveness and safety of remimazolam combined with alfentanil in hysteroscopic examination: A prospective, randomized, single-blind trial

BACKGROUND

Remimazolam is a novel, ultrashort-acting benzodiazepine. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of remimazolam and propofol for hysteroscopic examination, to determine the optimal dose of remimazolam combined with alfentanil for painless hysteroscopy, and to calculate its median effective dose (ED50).

METHODS

Step 1: A total of 208 patients undergoing hysteroscopic examination were prospectively included in this study. Patients were randomized into 4 groups: 0.2 mg/kg remimazolam (group A), 0.25 mg/kg remimazolam besylate (group B), 0.3 mg/kg remimazolam (group C), and 2 mg/kg propofol (group D), with 52 patients in each group. One minute after losing consciousness, patients received an intravenous injection of alfentanil at 5 µg/kg, followed by a continuous infusion of alfentanil at 0.5 µg/kg/min. If patients showed frowning, movement, or MOAA/S > 1, sedatives were added: 0.05 mg/kg/dose of remimazolam for groups A, B, and C, and 0.5 mg/kg/dose of propofol for group D. Step 2: Dixon's up-and-down method was used to calculate the ED50 of remimazolam combined with alfentanil during hysteroscopic examination.

MAIN RESULTS

The sedation success rates of the remimazolam groups were 88.46%, 94.23%, and 98.08%, respectively, compared to 96.15% in the propofol group, with no significant difference (P = .175). MAP in groups A and B was higher than in group D (P < .05), and significantly higher in group C than in group D (P = .0016). SpO2 values in groups A, B, and C were higher than in group D at T2 to T3 (P < .001). HR in groups A, B, and C was significantly higher than in group D (P < .001). The ED50 of remimazolam combined with alfentanil in hysteroscopy was 0.244 mg/kg, 95%CI (0.195-0.22) and ED95 was 0.282 mg/kg, 95%CI (0.261-1.619).

CONCLUSION

In hysteroscopy, the sedative effect of remimazolam is like that of propofol, with 0.25 mg/kg remimazolam showing better safety and efficacy, and less impact on the respiratory and circulatory systems. Additionally, under the influence of alfentanil, the ED50 of remimazolam in hysteroscopy is 0.244 mg/kg, with no severe adverse reactions observed.

Efficacy and safety of low-dose esketamine for painless gastrointestinal endoscopy in adults: a systematic evaluation and meta-analysis

Object: The benefits of low-dose esketamine for painless gastrointestinal endoscopy remain unclear. As such, the present study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of low-dose esketamine for this procedure. Methods: Seven common databases were searched for clinical studies investigating low-dose esketamine for painless gastrointestinal endoscopy. Subsequently, a meta-analysis was performed to synthesize and analyze the data extracted from studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria. Results: Meta-analysis revealed that, compared with propofol, low-dose esketamine in combination with propofol significantly reduced recovery time by 0.56 min (mean difference [MD] -0.56%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.08 to -0.05, p = 0.03), induction time by 9.84 s (MD -9.84, 95% CI -12.93 to -6.75, p < 0.00001), propofol dosage by 51.05 mg (MD -51.05, 95% CI -81.53 to -20.57, p = 0.01), and increased mean arterial pressure by 6.23 mmHg (MD 6.23, 95% CI 1.37 to 11.08, p = 0.01). Meanwhile, low-dose esketamine reduced injection pain by 63% (relative risk [RR] 0.37, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.49, p < 0.00001), involuntary movements by 40% (RR 0.60, 95% Cl 0.42 to 0.85, p < 0.005), choking by 42% (RR 0.58, 95% Cl 0.38 to 0.88, p = 0.01), bradycardia by 68% (RR 0.32, 95% Cl 0.18 to 0.58, p = 0.0002), hypotension by 71% (RR 0.29, 95% Cl 0.21 to 0.40, p < 0.00001), respiratory depression by 63% (RR 0.37, 95% 0.26 to 0.51, p < 0.00001), additional cases of propofol by 53% (RR 0.47, 95% Cl 0.29 to 0.77, p = 0.002), and increased hypertension by 1000% (RR 11.00, 95% Cl 1.45 to 83.28, p = 0.02). There were no significant differences in mean heart rate, mean oximetry saturation, delirium, dizziness, vomiting, tachycardia, and hypoxemia. Subgroup analyses revealed that, compared with other dose groups, 0.25 mg/kg esketamine afforded additional benefits in recovery and induction time, mean arterial pressure, involuntary movements, hypoxemia, and respiratory depression. Conclusion: Low-dose esketamine was found to be safe and effective for providing anesthesia during gastrointestinal endoscopy, with 0.25 mg/kg identified as the optimal dose within the dosage ranges examined. However, caution should be exercised when administering this drug to patients with inadequate preoperative blood pressure control.

Efficacy and safety of esketamine combined with propofol for curative endoscopic resection in colorectum: a prospective, randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Curative endoscopic resection is widely used to treat colonic polyps and early stage cancers. The anesthetic strategy commonly involves the use of propofol combined with a small dose of opioids for sedation. Adverse respiratory or cardiovascular events such as hypotension often occur when attempting to achieve the necessary level of sedation. Several studies have suggested its advantages owing to the anesthetic, analgesic, and sympathomimetic properties of esketamine. However, there are no reports on curative colorectal endoscopic resection. We designed this randomized controlled trial to assess the efficacy and safety of esketamine combined with propofol for sedation in patients undergoing curative colorectal endoscopic resection.

METHODS

A total of 166 patients who underwent curative colorectal endoscopic resection were randomly assigned to groups A (propofol + fentanyl) or E (propofol + esketamine). Ideal sedation was assessed using the MOAA/S scale and was achieved using TCI-propofol with different doses of fentanyl and esketamine. The propofol consumption and vasoactive drug dosages were recorded. Sedation-related times, adverse events, and satisfaction were recorded.

RESULTS

Of the 160 patients, the total propofol consumption was significantly lower in group E (n = 81) (300 mg) than in group A (n = 79) (350 mg). Hypotension and bradycardia were significantly lower in Group E than in Group A. The groups showed no significant differences in other adverse events, induction time, recovery time, or patient or endoscopist satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

Compared to fentanyl, esketamine helps decrease propofol consumption and increases cardiovascular stability during curative colorectal endoscopic resection in American Society of Anesthesiologists Class I-III patients without affecting anesthesia, patient and endoscopist satisfaction, or other adverse events.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was retrospectively registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ( www.chictr.org.cn ; registration number: ChiCTR2300069014 on 03/03/2023).

Supplemental low-dose esketamine to propofol versus propofol alone on perioperative characteristics in children undergoing surgery: a prospective randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Limited data exist regarding the use of the esketamine-propofol combination (esketofol) in pediatric surgery. This study aimed to investigate the effect of esketofol versus propofol alone on the perioperative characteristics of children undergoing minor surgery.

METHODS

Eighty-four children aged two to six years were randomly assigned to either the propofol group or the esketofol group. Intraoperative outcomes included bispectral index, dosage of anesthetics, and extubation time. Postoperative outcomes comprised oropharyngeal airway usage, time to orientation, time to eye-opening, length of stay in the post-anesthesia care unit, the need for rescue opioids, pain rating using the Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability (FLACC) Scale, Pediatric Anesthesia Emergence Delirium Score, nausea and vomiting, and psychotomimetic symptoms. The FLACC pain score was the primary outcome, and the remaining parameters were considered secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

The FLACC Score (2 [1, 3.3] vs. 4 [3, 5.3], P<0.001) and frequency of rescue opioids (14.3% vs. 33.3%, P=0.040) were significantly lower, while Bispectral Index (BIS) was higher (P<0.001) in the esketofol group compared with the propofol group. Moreover, the time to orientation and length of stay in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) were significantly longer in the esketofol group compared with the propofol group (P=0.029 and P=0.025, respectively). The other outcomes were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Esketofol reduces postoperative pain and the need for rescue opioids, but it extends recovery time in the PACU and increases BIS without affecting other outcomes.

Comparison of remimazolam and propofol combined with low dose esketamine for pediatric same-day painless bidirectional endoscopy: a randomized, controlled clinical trial

Background: Remimazolam has shown similar or even superior properties to propofol in procedural sedation in adults, but few studies have been conducted in pediatric populations. Thus, we aimed to compare the effect and safety of remimazolam and propofol combined with low dose esketamine for pediatric same-day bidirectional endoscopy (BDE). Methods: Pediatrics <18 years scheduled for elective BDE under sedation were included and randomly assigned to remimazolam group (R group) or propofol group (P group). The primary outcome was the success rate of sedation. Secondary outcomes include sedation-related information and adverse events. Mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), and perfusion index (PI) were recorded during sedation. Results: A total of 106 patients were enrolled and analyzed. The success rate of sedation was 100% in both groups. Compared with the P group, the induction time of the R group was significantly prolonged (p < 0.001), and the incidence of injection pain, intraoperative respiratory depression, hypotension and bradycardia was significantly lower (p < 0.001). The changes in MAP, HR and PI were relatively stable in the R group compared with the P group. Additionally, awake time significantly decreased with age by approximately 1.12 index points for each increase in age in the P group (p = 0.002) but not in the R group (p > 0.05). Furthermore, the decline in PI and PI ratio during BDE was related to body movement in the P group. Conclusion: Remimazolam combined with low dose esketamine has a non-inferior sedative effect than propofol for pediatric BDE, with no injection pain, less respiratory depression, more stable hemodynamics. Moreover, early detection of the decline in PI may avoid harmful stimulation under light anesthesia. Clinical trial registration: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05686863?id=NCT05686863&rank=1, NCT05686863.

Esketamine use is associated with shortened postoperative hospital stay in patients after knee arthroscopic surgery: a propensity score-matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have examined anesthetics to improve postoperative prognosis after knee arthroscopic surgery. However, it is currently unknown whether perioperative anesthetics can influence postoperative hospital stay. We investigated the impact of esketamine after knee arthroscopic surgery on post-operative length of stay, fever and surgical site infection.

METHODS

This study included 455 patients who underwent knee surgery between January2020 and August 2021at a tertiary hospital in China. Patient characteristics, preoperative laboratory values, intra-operative anesthetic data, and postoperative outcomes were collected. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses with or without propensity score matching were performed to identify factors related to post-operative discharge within 3 days(PD3).

RESULTS

A total of 297 cases met our inclusion criteria. The mean age of patients was 42 ± 14 years, mean body mass index, 24.1 ± 3.5 kg/m2, 157(53%) patients were male. Meniscus-related procedures accounted for the most part of all the procedures with a percentage of 40.4%, followed by combined procedures of 35.4%. After we adjusted for demographic and intraoperative characteristics with propensity score matching, esketamine use was significantly associated with PD3 with the highest odds ratio of 2.28 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.18-4.41, p = 0.014).

CONCLUSION

Esketamine use was associated with PD3 in patients underwent knee arthroscopic surgery. The findings of this study will be useful to anesthesiologists in making informed decisions regarding the choice of anesthetics for knee joint diseases.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee (Approval No.:2023-041-01) of the Eighth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University and retrospectively registered.

Role and mechanism of esketamine in improving postoperative cognitive dysfunction in aged mice through the TLR4/MyD88/p38 MAPK pathway

Postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) is a significant concern for the elderly population worldwide. This study explored the effects of esketamine on aged mice with POCD and investigate its mechanism of action involving the TLR4/MyD88/MAPK pathway. We administrated esketamine, along with lipopolysaccharide or anisomycin, to the aged POCD mouse models. We assessed their cognitive function using the Morris water maze test. Additionally, we evaluated histopathological changes/neuronal apoptosis in the mouse hippocampal CA1 area through HE/TUNEL stainings. Furthermore, we measured IL-1β/IL-6/TNF-α/TLR4/MyD88/MAPK (p-p38/p38) levels in mouse hippocampal tissues using ELISA/RT-qPCR/Western blotting. Lastly, we analyzed the interaction between TLR4 and MyD88 using a co-immunoprecipitation assay. Our findings showed that esketamine effectively mitigated POCD in aged mice. This was evident from the improved cognitive performance observed in the Morris water maze test, characterized by reduced escape latency/increased number of platform crossing/a higher percentage of time spent in the target quadrant. Furthermore, esketamine exhibited a protective effect against neuronal apoptosis and reduced the levels of inflammatory factors. These findings suggest that esketamine exerts an anti-inflammatory effect by downregulating TLR4/MyD88, thereby attenuating the inflammatory response associated with POCD. Additionally, esketamine suppressed the p38 MAPK pathway by inhibiting the TLR4/MyD88 signaling cascade. Esketamine demonstrated its efficacy in improving postoperative inflammation and cognitive impairment in aged mice by inhibiting the TLR4/MyD88 pathway. The activation of p38 MAPK signaling diminished the beneficial effects of esketamine in aged POCD mice. Collectively, the underlying mechanism of esketamine in mitigating POCD in aged mice involves the suppression of the TLR4/MyD88/p38 MAPK pathway.

Effects of Propofol on Perioperative Sleep Quality in Patients Undergoing Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Prospective Cohort Study

PURPOSE

Some patients experience sleep disturbances after endoscopy performed under sedation. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of propofol on sleep quality after gastrointestinal endoscopy (GE).

DESIGN

This study was a prospective cohort study.

METHODS

This study enrolled 880 patients who underwent GE. Patients who chose to undergo GE under sedation received intravenous propofol, whereas the control group did not. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) was measured before GE (PSQI-1) and 3 weeks (PSQI-2) after GE. The Groningen Sleep Score Scale (GSQS) was used before GE (GSQS-1) and 1 (GSQS-2) and 7 days (GSQS-3) after GE.

FINDINGS

There was a significant increase in GSQS scores from baseline to days 1 and 7 after GE (GSQS-2 vs GSQS-1, P < .001, GSQS-3 vs GSQS-1, P = .008). However, no significant changes were observed in the control group (GSQS-2 vs GSQS-1, P = .38, GSQS-3 vs GSQS-1, P = .66). On day 21, there were no significant changes in the baseline PSQI scores over time in either group (sedation group, P = .96; control group, P = .95).

CONCLUSIONS

GE with propofol sedation negatively affected sleep quality for 7 days after GE but not 3 weeks after GE.

Remimazolam versus propofol in combination with esketamine for surgical abortion: A double-blind randomized controlled trial

Remimazolam is a new benzodiazepine with a short half-life, good efficacy, and safety profiles in general anesthesia. Combining esketamine with propofol (P + E) could reduce propofol consumption and injection pain. It is, however, unclear if a low dose of remimazolam co-administrated with esketamine (R + E) is comparable to the increasingly used P + E for surgical abortion with general anesthetic. We conducted a double-blind randomized controlled trial to compare the efficacy and safety of R + E and P + E. Two hundred patients scheduled for a surgical abortion were randomized to receive remimazolam 0.3 mg/kg plus esketamine 0.3 mg/kg (R + E), and propofol 2 mg/kg plus esketamine 0.3 mg/kg (P + E). Sedative effectiveness was evaluated by measuring the time to lose consciousness (LOC), recovery time, and successful sedation rate. Safety was assessed by hemodynamics and adverse events during and postoperation. The time to LOC and recovery time in R + E was 5 s shorter and 1 min longer than that in P + E, respectively (both p < 0.001). Success sedation rate did not differ between groups (p = 0.73). Bradycardia incidence and injection site pain were less frequent in the R + E group than that in the P + E group. More rash was observed in the R + E group compared with the P + E group (32% vs. 5%, p < 0.001), but all were mild (only chest rash) and resolved subsequently. Low dose of remimazolam when combined with esketamine has favorable profiles with rapid onset and recovery, but mild hemodynamic side effects and adverse events. It can be used as an alternative for surgical abortion with general anesthetic.

Effect of intravenous induction with different doses of Esketamine combined with propofol and sufentanil on intraocular pressure among pediatric strabismus surgery: a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

It is well-established that maintaining stable intraocular pressure (IOP) within the normal range during ophthalmic surgery is important. Esketamine is a commonly used drug in pediatric general anesthesia due to its good analgesic and sedative effects. However, its application in ophthalmic surgery is limited because it can increase IOP. The effect of esketamine combined with other common anesthetics on IOP has been underinvestigated. This study aimed to investigate the effect of different doses of esketamine combined with propofol and sufentanil on IOP during intravenous induction of general anesthesia for pediatric strabismus surgery.

METHODS

A total of 181 children with strabismus undergoing unilateral eye surgery under general anesthesia were recruited. Intravenous induction included the use of sufentanil 0.1 µg/kg, propofol 3 mg/kg, and esketamine. Base on the dosage of esketamine, the patients were randomly allocated into three groups: esketamine low (EL) group with 0.25 mg/kg (n = 62), esketamine high (EH) group with 0.5 mg/kg (n = 60), and normal saline (NS) group (n = 59). Hemodynamic parameters, respiratory parameters, and IOP of the non-surgical eye were recorded and compared among the three groups at different time points: before induction (T0), 1 min after induction but before laryngeal mask insertion (T1), immediately after laryngeal mask insertion (T2), and 2 min after laryngeal mask insertion (T3).

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in age, gender, body mass index (BMI), and respiratory parameters among the three groups at T0. The IOP at T1, T2, and T3 was lower than that at T0 in all three groups. The EH group (12.6 ± 1.6 mmHg) had a significantly higher IOP than the EL group (12.0 ± 1.6 mmHg) and the NS group (11.6 ± 1.7 mmHg) at T1. However, no difference was found between the EL and NS groups at any time point. Systolic blood pressure (SBP) and heart rate (HR) at T1, T2, and T3 were lower than at baseline, and SBP and HR were higher at T2 than at T1. Additionally, the EH group had a significantly higher HR at T1 than the other two groups. There was no significant difference in diastolic blood pressure (DBP) among the three groups at any time point.

CONCLUSION

Propofol combined with sufentanil significantly decreased IOP during the induction of general anesthesia. Although a dose of 0.5 mg/kg esketamine elevated IOP compared to the low-dose and control groups after induction, the IOP remained lower than baseline. 0.25 mg/kg esketamine combined with propofol and sufentanil had little effect on IOP. Therefore, we advocate that a maximum dose of 0.5 mg/kg esketamine combined with propofol and sufentanil will not elevate IOP compared to baseline in pediatric strabismus surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The registration number is ChiCTR2200066586 at Chictr.org.cn. Registry on 09/12/2022.

Comparison of propofol-esketamine versus propofol for anesthesia in gastroscopy: a double-blind, randomized controlled clinical trial

Objective

To compare the effects of propofol-esketamine and propofol in gastroscopy in adults.

Methods

This randomized controlled clinical trial was performed from January 2021 to March 2021. Eighty patients were enrolled and allocated into normal saline group (group N) and esketamine group (group E). The primary outcome was total amount of propofol. Secondary outcomes included incidences of injection pain, involuntary movement, hemodynamic and respiratory adverse events during examination, total examination time, recovery time and postoperative adverse effects.

Results

Total amount of propofol was significantly smaller in group E (101.64 ± 32.64 mg) than in group N (129.55 ± 36.34 mg, p = 0.001). Incidences of injection pain, involuntary movement and hypotension was significantly lower in group E than in group N. Incidences of hypertension and tachycardia was higher in group E than in group N. There was no significant difference in incidences of laryngospasm or hypoxemia, total examination time, recovery time, incidences of postoperative adverse effects between two groups.

Conclusion

Combination of propofol with 0.2 mg/kg esketamine reduced total amount of propofol, provided a more stable hemodynamic status and did not affect recovery time in gastroscopy.

Clinical trial registration

http://www.chictr.org, identifier ChiCTR2100042406.

Analysis of the efficacy of subclinical doses of esketamine in combination with propofol in non-intubated general anesthesia procedures - a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The number of non-intubated general anesthesia outside the operating room is growing as the increasing demand for comfort treatment. Non-intubated general anesthesia outside the operating room requires rapid onset of anesthesia, smoothness, quick recovery, and few postoperative complications. Traditional anesthetic regimens (propofol alone or propofol and opioids/dezocine/midazolam, etc.) have severe respiratory and circulatory depression and many systemic adverse effects. In this paper, we compare the effectiveness and safety of propofol and subclinical doses of esketamine with other traditional regimens applied to non-intubated general anesthesia through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, and Sinomed databases for the period from January 2000 to October 2022. We rigorously screened the literature according to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, while risk assessment of the studies was performed using The Cochrane Collaboration's tool, and statistical analysis of the data was performed using RevMan 5.4 software. The main outcome indicators we evaluated were the various hemodynamic parameters and incidence of various adverse effects between the experimental and control groups after induction of anesthesia.

RESULTS

After a rigorous screening process, a total of 14 papers were included in the final meta-analysis. After risk bias assessment, three of the papers were judged as low risk and the others were judged as having moderate to high risk. Forest plots were drawn for a total of 16 indicators. Meta-analysis showed statistically significant differences in HR' WMD 3.27 (0.66, 5.87), MAP' WMD 9.68 (6.13, 13.24), SBP' WMD 5.42 (2.11, 8.73), DBP' WMD 4.02 (1.15, 6.88), propofol dose' SMD -1.39 (-2.45, -0.33), hypotension' RR 0.30 (0.20, 0.45), bradycardia' RR 0.33 (0.14, 0.77), hypoxemia or apnea' RR 0.45 (0.23, 0.89), injection pain' RR 0.28 (0.13, 0.60), intraoperative choking' RR 0.62 (0.50, 0.77), intraoperative body movements' RR 0.48 (0.29, 0.81) and overall incidence of adverse reactions' RR 0.52 (0.39, 0.70).The indicators that were not statistically different were time to wake up' WMD - 0.55 (-1.29, 0.19), nausea and vomiting 0.84' RR (0.43, 1.67), headache and dizziness' RR 1.57 (0.98, 2.50) and neuropsychiatric reaction' RR 1.05 (0.28, 3.93). The funnel plot showed that the vast majority of studies fell within the funnel interval, but the symmetry was relatively poor.

CONCLUSION

In non-intubated general anesthesia, the combination of subclinical doses of esketamine and propofol did reduce circulatory and respiratory depression, injection pain, and other adverse effects, while the incidence of esketamine's own side effects such as neuropsychiatric reactions did not increase, and the combination of the two did not cause the occurrence of new and more serious adverse reactions, and the combination of the two was safe and effective.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPREO registration number: CRD 42022368966.

Safety and efficacy of the combination of esketamine and propofol in procedural sedation/analgesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

This review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessed the side effects and efficacy of esketamine combined with propofol in procedural sedation and analgesia.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant studies occurring between their inceptions and September 2022. The primary outcome was the incidence of sedation-related adverse events. Secondary outcomes included recovery time, total consumption of propofol and body movement.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Data from a total of seven RCTs enrolling 808 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Pooling of data showed that compared with other drug regimens, the esketamine and propofol combination was associated with a reduction in the risk of hypotension (relative risk [RR]: 0.37, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.25 to 0.56) and bradycardia (RR: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.15 to 0.80) as well as an increase in the risk of agitation (RR: 6.29, 95% CI: 1.15 to 34.32). The results also indicated a decrease in propofol consumption (standardized mean difference: -1.45, 95% CI: -2.39 to -0.50) with the use of the esketamine and propofol combination. No significant difference was observed between the two groups in respiratory depression, nausea/vomiting, recovery time or body movement.

CONCLUSIONS

Esketamine combined with propofol has an advantage in reducing the incidence of hypotension and bradycardia during procedural sedation and analgesia, but it may increase the risk of agitation in the recovery phase. More studies of high quality are needed before the widespread adoption of the combination of esketamine and propofol.

Efficacy and safety of esketamine for sedation among patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients who undergo gastrointestinal endoscopy often require propofol-based sedation combined with analgesics. At present, the efficacy and safety of esketamine as an adjunct to propofol for sedation during endoscopic procedures in patients remains controversial. Moreover, there is no universal agreement regarding the appropriate dose of esketamine supplementation. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of esketamine as an adjunct to propofol for sedation during endoscopic procedures in patients.

METHODS

Seven electronic databases and three clinical trial registry platforms were searched and the deadline was February 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy of esketamine for sedation were included by two reviewers. Data from the eligible studies were combined to calculate the pooled risk ratio or standardized mean difference.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies with 1962 esketamine participants were included in the analysis. As an adjunct to propofol, the administration of esketamine reduced the recovery time compared to normal saline (NS). However, there was no significant difference between the opioids group and ketamine group. For propofol dosage, the administration of esketamine required a lower propofol dosage compared to the NS group and opioids group].For complications, the esketamine group had fewer complications compared to the NS group and opioid group in patients, but there were no significant differences between the esketamine group and ketamine group. Notably, the coadministration of esketamine was associated with a higher risk of visual disturbance compared to the NS group. In addition, we used subgroup analysis to investigate whether 0.2-0.5 mg/kg esketamine was effective and tolerable for patients.

CONCLUSION

Esketamine as an adjunct to propofol, is an appropriate effective alternative for sedation in participants undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy. However, considering the possibility of its psychotomimetic effects, esketamine should be used with caution.

The Effect of Different Doses of Ciprofol in Patients with Painless Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

Background

Ciprofol is currently used for painless gastrointestinal endoscopy and anesthesia induction. However, whether it is superior to propofol and its optimal dose remains unknown.

Methods

A total of 149 patients, 63 males and 86 females, aged 18-80 years, BMI 18-28 kg/m2, ASA I-III, were divided randomly into four groups: propofol group (group P, n = 44), ciprofol 0.2mg/kg group (group C2, n = 38), ciprofol 0.3mg/kg group (group C3, n = 36) and ciprofol 0.4 mg/kg group (group C4, n = 31). Groups C2, C3 and C4 had injected IV with ciprofol 0.2, 0.3 and 0.4 mg/kg, respectively. Group P had injected IV with propofol 1.5mg/kg. The time for disappearance of the eyelash reflex, gastrointestinal endoscopy time, recovery time, and the Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (MOAA/S) score at awakening (T1), 15 minutes after awakening (T2) and 30 minutes after awakening (T3) were recorded.

Results

Compared with group P, the time to fall asleep was significantly shortened, and the incidence of nausea and vomiting and injection pain was significantly lower in groups C2, C3 and C4 (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in recovery time and recovery quality between each group (P > 0.05). Compared with group P and C4, the incidence of hypotension and respiratory depression was significantly lower in groups C2 and C3 (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

The appropriate dose of ciprofol for painless gastrointestinal endoscopy is more advantageous than propofol in hemodynamics and respiratory stability, with less injection pain and nausea and vomiting, which is worthy of clinical promotion.

Effect of modified ShengYangYiwei decoction on painless gastroscopy and gastrointestinal and immune function in gastric cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Painless gastroenteroscopy is a widely developed diagnostic and treatment technology in clinical practice. It is of great significance in the clinical diagnosis, treatment, follow-up review and other aspects of gastric cancer patients. The application of anesthesia techniques during manipulation can be effective in reducing patient fear and discomfort. In clinical work, the adverse drug reactions of anesthesia regimens and the risk of serious adverse drug reactions are increased with the increase in propofol application dose application dose; the application of opioid drugs often causes gastrointestinal reactions, such as nausea, vomiting and delayed gastrointestinal function recovery, after examination. These adverse effects can seriously affect the quality of life of patients.

AIM

To observe the effect of modified ShengYangYiwei decoction on gastrointestinal function, related complications and immune function in patients with gastric cancer during and after painless gastroscopy.

METHODS

A total of 106 patients with gastric cancer, who were selected from January 2022 to September 2022 in Xiamen Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital for painless gastroscopy, were randomly divided into a treatment group (n = 56) and a control group (n = 50). Before the examination, all patients fasted for 8 h, provided their health education, and confirmed if there were contraindications to anesthesia and gastroscopy. During the examination, the patients were placed in the left decubitus position, the patients were given oxygen through a nasal catheter (6 L/min), the welling needle was opened for the venous channel, and a multifunction detector was connected for monitoring electrocardiogram, oxygen saturation, blood pressure, etc. Naporphl and propofol propofol protocols were used for routine anesthesia. Before anesthesia administration, the patients underwent several deep breathing exercises, received intravenous nalbuphine [0.nalbuphine (0.025 mg/kg)], followed by intravenous propofol [1.propofol (1.5 mg/kg)] until the palpebral reflex disappeared, and after no response, gastroscopy was performed. If palpebral reflex disappeared, and after no response, gastroscopy was performed. If any patient developed movement, frowning, or hemodynamic changes during the operation (heart rate changes during the operation (heart rate increased to > 20 beats/min, systolic blood pressure increased to > 20% of the base value), additional propofol [0.propofol (0.5 mg/kg)] was added until the patient was sedated again. The patients in the treatment group began to take the preventive intervention of Modified ShengYangYiwei decoction one week before the examination, while the patients in the control group received routine gastrointestinal endoscopy. The patients in the two groups were examined by conventional painless gastroscopy, and the characteristics of the painless gastroscopies of the patients in the two groups were recorded and compared. These characteristics included the total dosage of propofol during the examination, the incidence of complications during the operation, the time of patients' awakening, the time of independent activities, and the gastrointestinal function of the patients after examination, such as the incidence of reactions such as malignant vomiting, abdominal distension and abdominal pain, as well as the differences in the levels of various immunological indicators and inflammatory factors before anesthesia induction (T0), after conscious extubation (T1) and 24 h after surgery (T2).

RESULTS

There was no difference in the patients’ general information, American Society of Anesthesiologist classification or operation time between the two groups before treatment. In terms of painless gastroscopy, the total dosage of propofol in the treatment group was lower than that in the control group (P < 0.05), and the time of awakening and autonomous activity was significantly faster than that in the control group (P < 0.05). During the examination, the incidence of hypoxemia, hypotension and hiccups in the treatment group was significantly lower than that in the control group (P < 0.01). In terms of gastrointestinal function, the incidences of nausea, vomiting, abdominal distension and abdominal pain in the treatment group after examination were significantly lower than those in the control group (P < 0.01). In terms of immune function, in both groups, the number of CD4+ and CD8+ cells decreased significantly (P < 0.05), and the number of natural killer cells increased significantly (P < 0.05) at T1 and T2, compared with T0. The number of CD4+ and CD8+ cells in the treatment group at the T1 and T2 time points was higher than that in the control group (P < 0.05), while the number of natural killer cells was lower than that in the control group (P < 0.05). In terms of inflammatory factors, compared with T0, the levels of interleukin (IL) -6 and tumor necrosis factor-alpha in patients in the two groups at T1 and T2 increased significantly and then decreased (P < 0.05). The level of IL-6 at T1 and T2 in the treatment group was lower than that in the control group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The preoperative use of modified ShengYangYiwei decoction can optimize the anesthesia program during painless gastroscopy, improve the gastrointestinal function of patients after the operation, reduce the occurrence of examination-related complications.

Thrifty effect of subanesthetic-dose S-ketamine on postoperative opioids and its safety and analgesic effectiveness: A prospective, triple-blind, randomized controlled, polycentric clinical trial

Aim

To investigate the thrifty effects of subanesthetic-dose S-ketamine on postoperative opioids and its safety and analgesic efficacy.

Methods

Four-hundred and twenty patients were divided into the control group (CON group), the S-ketamine 0.2 mg/kg group (ES0.2 group), and the S-ketamine 0.3 mg/kg group (ES0.3 group) randomly. Major indicators include the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), the times of compression with analgesic pumps after surgery, and analgesic drug consumption from anesthesia induction to 48 h after surgery. Minor records include vital signs, the use of vasoactive drugs, the Ramsay scores, the occurrence of adverse events including nervous system reaction, and the patient's satisfaction with anesthesia.

Results

Compared with the CON group, VAS scores decreased in the ES0.2 and ES0.3 groups (p < 0.05). At 10 min after extubation, the VAS scores of the ES0.3 group were lower than that of the ES0.2 group (p < 0.05). The total number of compression with analgesic pumps of the ES0.3 group was lower than that of the CON group (p < 0.05). The opioid consumption after surgery of the ES0.3 group was lower than those of the CON group and the ES0.2 group (p < 0.05). The ES0.3 group's heart rate (HR) was faster but the use of vasoactive, drug consumption was less than the other two groups (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in the incidence of postoperative adverse events and anesthetic satisfaction among the three groups.

Conclusion

Subanesthetic-dose S-ketamine at 0.2-0.3 mg/kg especially the 0.3 mg/kg in general anesthesia induction can safely and effectively reduce postoperative pain and save postoperative opioid consumption.

Evaluating efficacy and safety of sub-anesthetic dose esketamine as an adjuvant to propofol/remifentanil analgosedation and spontaneous respiration for children flexible fibreoptic bronchoscopy: a prospective, double-blinded, randomized, and placebo-controlled clinical trial

Background: Flexible fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FFB) for children is widely performed under sedation. Currently, the optimal sedation regimen remains unclear. Esketamine is an N-methyl-D-aspartic acid (NMDA) receptor antagonist, which has stronger sedative and analgesic effects and exerts less cardiorespiratory depression than other sedatives. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether a subanesthetic dose of esketamine as an adjuvant to propofol/remifentanil and spontaneous ventilation compared with control reduces the procedural and anesthesia-related complications of FFB in children. Materials and methods: Seventy-two children ≤ 12 years of age who were scheduled for FFB were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to the esketamine-propofol/remifentanil (Group S, n = 36) or to the propofol/remifentanil group (Group C, n = 36). All children were retained spontaneous ventilation. The primary outcome was the incidence of oxygen desaturation (respiratory depression). Perioperative hemodynamic variables, blood oxygen saturation (SPO₂), end-tidal partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PetCO₂), respiratory rate (R), and the Bispectral index (BIS), induction time, procedural time, recovery time, the time to the ward from the recovery room, consumption of propofol and remifentanil during the procedure and the appearance of adverse events, including paradoxical agitation following midazolam administration, injection pain, laryngospasm, bronchospasm, PONV, vertigo, and hallucination were also compared. Results: The incidence of oxygen desaturation was significantly lower in Group S (8.3%) compared to Group C (36.1%, p = 0.005). The perioperative hemodynamic profile including SBP, DBP, and HR were more stable in Group S than that in Group C (p < 0.05). Consumption of propofol and remifentanil was lower in Group S than in Group C (p < 0.05). Furthermore, PAED scores, cough scores and injection pain were lower in the Group S than in Group C (p < 0.05). The recovery time of Group S was slightly longer than that of Group C (p < 0.05). Nobody happened paradoxical agitation following midazolam administration, PONV, vertigo, and hallucinations in both groups (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Our findings indicate that a subanesthetic dose of esketamine as an adjuvant to propofol/remifentanil and spontaneous respiration is an effective regimen for children undergoing FFB. Our findings will provide a reference for clinical sedation practice during these procedures in children. Clinical Trail Registration: Chinese clinicaltrials.gov registry (identifier: ChiCTR2100053302).

Efficacy and Safety of a Subanesthetic Dose of Esketamine Combined with Propofol in Patients with Obesity Undergoing Painless Gastroscopy: A Prospective, Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

Patients with obesity are more susceptible to hypoxemia. Anesthetic management for patients with obesity undergoing painless gastroscopy presents a severe challenge for anesthesiologists. Esketamine is a NMDA antagonist that has been proven to be beneficial for ameliorating respiratory depression owing to its sympathomimetic effect; however, there are no relevant reports on its use in patients with obesity. We designed a randomized controlled trial to evaluate whether esketamine can be the ideal adjuvant to propofol sedation in patients with obesity undergoing painless gastroscopy.

Patients and Methods

A total of 104 patients with obesity undergoing painless gastroscopy were randomly divided into group C (propofol+saline) and group S (propofol+esketamine 0.25 mg/kg). Anesthesia was induced by 2 mg/kg propofol with saline or esketamine. The consumption of propofol, hemodynamic parameters, duration of procedure, induction time, postoperative awakening time, and orientation recovery time were recorded. Adverse events and satisfaction scores were also recorded.

Results

Propofol consumption was 274.4±22.6 mg and 201.3±16.6 mg in groups C and S, respectively. The induction time of groups C and S were 25.4±2.3 s and 17.8±1.9 s, respectively. The postoperative awakening times of groups C and S were 6.2±1.1 min and 4.8±1.3 min, respectively. Hemodynamic parameters were more stable in group S than in group C. The incidence of adverse events such as injection pain, hypoxemia, hypotension, bradycardia, choking, and body movement were significantly lower in group S. The satisfaction scores of the endoscopist and anesthesiologist were (4.58±0.49 vs 3.71±0.83) and (4.75±0.44 vs 3.33±0.92), respectively.

Conclusion

The combination of propofol and esketamine (0.25 mg/kg) improves the safety and reduces the incidence of adverse events in patients with obesity during painless gastroscopy. Thus, this method is worthy of clinical application.

Clinical Trials Registration

ChiCTR 2200062547.

Effect of Subanesthetic Dose of Esketamine on Perioperative Neurocognitive Disorders in Elderly Undergoing Gastrointestinal Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Perioperative neurocognitive disorders (PND), including delayed neurocognitive recovery (dNCR) and postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD), are common postoperative complications in elderly patients and adversely affect their prognosis. The study was designed to explore the effects of esketamine on postoperative cognitive function in elderly patients who underwent gastrointestinal surgery under general anesthesia and its potential mechanism.

METHODS

Eighty-four patients aged 65 and above undergoing gastrointestinal surgery were randomly divided into 2 groups: the esketamine group (group S) and the control group (group C). Group S received intravenous sub-anesthetic doses of esketamine (0.15 mg/kg) 5 minutes before the initiation of surgery, while group C received the same volume of saline. A battery of neuropsychological tests was used to assess cognitive function before surgery, 7 days, and 3 months after surgery. The primary outcome was the incidence of dNCR at 7 days postoperatively and POCD at 3 months postoperatively in both groups. The secondary outcome measures included changes in the levels of serum interleukin-6 (IL-6) and calcium-binding protein β (S100β) before and 1 day after surgery.

RESULTS

The incidence of dNCR in group S was lower than that of group C (18.15% vs 38.24% P=0.033). Contrarily, there was no difference in both groups regarding POCD 3 months postoperatively (6.06% vs 14.37% P=0.247). Plasma IL-6 and S100β levels were significantly elevated in both groups on postoperative day 1 (p<0.05), but esketamine pretreatment reduced these levels to some extent compared with group C (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Sub-anesthetic doses of esketamine might reduce the incidence of dNCR and improve early postoperative cognitive function in elderly patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery, which might be related to the anti-neuroinflammation effects of esketamine.

The median effective concentration of propofol in combination with different doses of esketamine during gastrointestinal endoscopy in adults

We designed a four-arm randomized controlled trial to investigate the median effective concentration (EC50) of propofol in combination with different doses of esketamine inducing appropriate depth of anaesthesia during gastrointestinal endoscopy in adults. One hundred patients aged 18-65 years planning for gastrointestinal endoscopy were divided into four groups randomly: esketamine 0, 0.15, 0.25 and 0.5 mg/kg groups (n = 25). Propofol doses followed the Dixon and Massey up-and-down method with different starting between groups. The primary endpoint was the EC50 of propofol. Secondary outcomes included the cumulative dose of propofol, the duration of the procedure, recovery time, and adverse effects. The EC50 (median, 95% confidence interval) of propofol was significantly less in the esketamine 0.5 mg/kg group compared with the esketamine 0, 0.15, and 0.25 mg/kg groups [1.34 (1.15, 1.54) vs. 3.48 (3.25, 3.71), 2.82 (2.58, 3.07), and 2.36 (2.11, 2.61), respectively; p < 0.001]. The total dose of propofol (mean ± SD) required for the whole procedure was significantly less in the esketamine 0.5 mg/kg group compared with the esketamine 0, 0.15, and 0.25 mg/kg groups [95.5 ± 43.1 vs. 277.4 ± 49.0, 207.8 ± 31.6, and 135.1 ± 27.7, respectively; p < 0.001]. The recovery time was significantly longer in esketamine 0 and 0.5 mg/kg group compared with other two groups (p < 0.001). More patients in the esketamine 0.5 mg/kg group experienced visual disturbance compared with the other groups (p = 0.016). Additionally, the incidence of hypotensionin the esketamine 0 mg/kg group after inducation was higher compared with other groups (p < 0.001). In summary, the administration of esketamine significantly and dose-dependently reduced the dose of propofol required to accomplish procedures.

Effective dose of propofol combined with a low-dose esketamine for gastroscopy in elderly patients: A dose finding study using dixon’s up-and-down method

Objective: This study aimed to determine the optimal dose of propofol combined with esketamine to inhibit the response to gastroscope insertion in elderly patients.

Methods: This is a prospective, non-controlled, non-randomized, single-center study. Elderly patients aged 65–80 years were enrolled in the study with the American society of anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I or II undergoing elective gastroscopy. All patients were administered propofol after an intravenous esketamine at the dosage of 0.3 mg/kg 30 s, the subsequent dose of propofol was determined by the response of the previous patient to gastroscope insertion (choking, body movement, etc.) using Dixon’s up-and-down method. The initial dose of propofol administered to the first elderly patient was 3.0 mg/kg, and the standard ratio of propofol dose in adjacent patients was 0.9. At least six crossover points were obtained before the conclusion of the study. By using Probit analysis the median effective dose (ED₅₀), 95% effective dose (ED₉₅), and the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) for propofol were determined.

Results: The study continued until we obtained seven crossover points and 32 elderly patients (17 males and 15 females) were collected. The ED₅₀ of propofol combined with esketamine inhibiting response to gastroscope insertion in elderly patients were found to be 1.479 mg/kg (95% CI 1.331–1.592 mg/kg), and ED₉₅ was found to be 1.738 mg/kg (95% CI 1.614–2.487 mg/kg).

Conclusion: According to the present study, propofol combined with 0.3 mg/kg esketamine is safe and effective for elderly patients undergoing gastroscopy. The ED₅₀ and ED₉₅ doses of propofol inhibiting response to gastroscope insertion in elderly patients when combined with 0.3 mg/kg esketamine were 1.479 and 1.738 mg/kg, respectively, without apparent adverse effects.