Efficacy and Safety of Deep Sedation and Anaesthesia for Complex Endoscopic Procedures—A Narrative Review

Young, Healthy, Underweight Women Require Higher Effective Doses of Propofol for Successful Gastroscope Insertion: a Dose-Finding Study Using Dixon's Up-and-Down Method

Purpose

The number of young women undergoing painless gastroscopy is rising annually. However, the lack of studies on the effective doses of propofol sedation for young, underweight women, presents a clinical challenge. Our study aimed to determine and compare the effective doses of propofol required for successful gastroscope insertion in normal-weight and underweight young women.

Patients and Methods

Chinese women aged 18-35 years who were of normal weight (18.5 ≤ body mass index (BMI) < 25 kg/m²) or underweight (BMI < 18.5 kg/m²) and were undergoing painless gastroscopy were included. The initial induction dose of propofol was 2.0 mg/kg, and subsequent doses were adjusted using the modified Dixon's up-and-down method (step size: 0.1 mg/kg). The 50% and 95% effective dose of propofol (ED50 and ED95), defined as the doses required for successful gastroscope insertion in 50% and 95% of patients, respectively, were determined using the modified Dixon's up-and-down method and isotonic regression analysis. All adverse events were documented.

Results

Thirty patients were included in each group. The modified Dixon's up-and-down method was used, and the ED50 of propofol was found to be significantly higher in patients in the underweight group (2.72 ± 0.23 mg/kg) than those in the normal-weight group (2.03 ± 0.13 mg/kg) (P < 0.001). The ED50 and ED95 in the normal-weight group extrapolated using isotonic regression analysis were 2.00 (83% confidence interval [CI], 1.900-2.100) mg/kg and 2.30 (83% CI, 2.300-2.400) mg/kg, respectively. In the underweight group, these values increased to 2.80 (83% CI, 2.700-2.900) mg/kg and 3.00 (83% CI, 3.000-3.100) mg/kg, respectively. The nonoverlapping CIs indicated significant differences between patients in the normal-weight and underweight groups.

Conclusion

Young, healthy, underweight women require higher effective doses of propofol for deep sedation for successful gastroscope insertion compared with young, healthy, normal-weight women.

Efficacy and safety of remimazolam for sedation during endoscopic procedures in Japanese: A prospective phase III clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

Remimazolam is a general anesthetic with a short elimination half-life and its pharmacokinetics are less affected by liver and kidney function. It may be useful for sedation during endoscopic procedures in patients. This single-arm clinical trial aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of remimazolam for sedation in patients undergoing endoscopic procedures.

METHODS

Patients undergoing endoscopic procedures were included in this study. Remimazolam was administered intravenously with opioid analgesics, and the endoscopic procedure was started after an efficient level of sedation (Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation score ≤3) was achieved. The primary end-point for efficacy was the sedation success rate during the endoscopic procedures. Data on adverse events were collected for safety evaluation.

RESULTS

Sixty-two patients were included in the analysis. The sedation success rate of 93.5% (84.3-98.2%) exceeded the threshold success rate of 80% (P = 0.004). In all, 98.4% of patients were appropriately sedated before endoscope insertion. The median time from the first dose of remimazolam to achieving sedation was 4.0 min, while the median time from the end of the endoscopic procedure to being deemed ready to leave the room was 2.0 min. Adverse events were observed in 22 cases (35.5%). The severity of adverse events was moderate in five cases (8.1%), mild in 17 cases (27.4%), and there was no severe case.

CONCLUSION

Sedation with remimazolam plus opioid analgesics was effective and well tolerated, regardless of endoscopic procedure site. These findings suggest that remimazolam is a useful sedative during endoscopic procedures.

Evaluation of deep sedation effects and respiratory aspects of remimazolam besylate in elderly patients undergoing fiberoptic bronchoscopy

Background

The geriatric population, especially individuals over 65 years old with comorbidities classified by the ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) grading system, requires careful sedation management during flexible bronchoscopy (FB) to reduce the heightened risks of complications. Hypoxemia is a particularly critical concern in this demographic, leading to considerable morbidity, mortality, and increased healthcare costs. This study focuses on comparing the incidence of sedation-related hypoxemia and other adverse events between remimazolam besylate and propofol during FB procedures, aiming to enhance patient safety and optimize sedation practices in this vulnerable population.

Methods

This prospective observational cohort study compared the incidence of hypoxemia and sedation-related adverse events between remimazolam besylate and propofol in 69 elderly patients (ASA I-III). Rigorous inclusion/exclusion criteria, clinical monitoring, and alongside comprehensive monitoring of clinical parameters and statistical analyses to ensure the validity of the results.

Results

Hypoxemia occurred in 44.90% overall, with significantly lower incidence in remimazolam besylate cohort (29.42% vs. 60.00%; OR = 2.10, 95% CI 1.18-3.74, p = 0.017). Recovery to full alertness was prolonged with remimazolam (median 15[12.5-20] vs. 8[5.5-10] min; p < 0.001). A trend toward reduced hypotension was observed (17.65% vs. 37.14%, p = 0.0699), with no other significant safety differences.

Conclusion

Remimazolam besylate demonstrates superior safety for elderly FB sedation, significantly reducing hypoxemia risk and accelerating recovery. These findings support its preferential use in geriatric sedation protocols, warranting further investigation to optimize clinical implementation strategies.

Establishing the first ever pediatric procedural sedation clinic in a low-income country: Assessment of the safety and efficacy

BACKGROUND

Pediatric sedation clinics are rare in low-income countries. Our aim is to describe the establishment of the first-ever pediatric sedation clinic in Ethiopia and provide an assessment of its safety and efficacy over the 5 years since its establishment.

METHODS

A multi-phase approach was undertaken. In the first phase, we analyzed barriers to procedural pain management through repeated focus group discussions with stakeholders. Subsequently, we conducted a modified sedation provider course from the Society for Pediatric Sedation (SPS) with pre and post-training testing to document course effectiveness. Finally, we developed a procedural sedation clinic at Tikur Anbessa Specialized Hospital. In the second phase, we prospectively collected outcome data over a 5-year period from patients receiving procedural sedation at the clinic. This included assessing the efficacy of sedation and documenting any adverse events that occurred during the procedures.

RESULT

One hundred three providers completed the procedural sedation course. There was a 13.4% improvement in knowledge between baseline and post-course testing. A total of 2,820 patients underwent procedural sedation over the 5-year period from 2016 through 2021, and data selected from 475 (16.8%) patients were analyzed. The most common procedure performed was bone marrow aspiration/biopsy in 384 subjects (80.8%). The most common procedural sedation used was the combination of ketamine and propofol in 60.6%. The mean pain score during the procedure was 0.28/10, which was significantly lower than the pre-procedural pain score (p-value < 0.001). A total of 9 (1.9%) patients had adverse events and there was no mortality.

CONCLUSION

Based on our experience, development of a safe and effective sedation clinic is possible in resource-limited settings as evidenced by low procedural pain scores, and low adverse events rates. Provider training based on a modification of the SPS course improved overall procedural sedation knowledge.

A meta-analysis and systematic review based on perioperative management of elderly patients: is ciprofol an alternative to propofol?

PURPOSE

With the rising number of elderly surgical patients, selecting an appropriate anesthetic tailored to their specific needs is essential. Ciprofol, a novel intravenous anesthetic, has garnered attention due to its low injection pain rate and minimal impact on the circulatory system. This meta-analysis aims to examine the efficacy and safety profile of ciprofol during perioperative management of elderly patients.

METHODS

Comprehensive searches of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, and VIP databases from inception to March 23, 2024, were conducted. Eligible studies were included, data extracted, quality assessed using the ROB2 tool, and analyses performed with Stata 17.0.

RESULTS

Analysis of eleven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comprising 1715 patients demonstrated that ciprofol outperformed propofol regarding injection pain (RR: 0.13, 95% CI: 0.09-0.20, p < 0.001), hypotension (RR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.56-0.94; p = 0.014), bradycardia (RR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.48-0.85, p = 0.002), respiratory depression (RR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.19-0.43, p < 0.001), hypoxemia (RR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.26-0.55, p < 0.001), and body movement (RR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.56-0.96, p = 0.022). No significant differences were observed in induction time(SMD: 0.11,95% CI: -0.39-0.61, p = 0.655), sedative success rate(RR:1.01,,:95% CI:0.97-1.06, p = 0.669)), time of leaving the operating room(SMD-0.21,95% CI: -0.83-0.40, p = 0.497), bucking(RR:0.56,:95% CI:0.27-1.17, p = 0.134)), nausea and vomiting(RR:0.69,95% CI:0.43-1.11, p = 0.143)).

CONCLUSION

Ciprofol demonstrates comparable efficacy to propofol in general anesthesia for elderly patients, with an enhanced safety profile, making it a viable clinical alternative. Further well-designed large RCTs are required to substantiate its safety profile.

Training and Resources Related to the Administration of Sedation by Nurses During Digestive Endoscopy: A Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

The healthcare professional who performs sedation for digestive endoscopy procedures is usually the nurse. Therefore, knowledge and training on the part of the nurse is an important factor for the correct sedation of the patient and may affect, among other factors, the quality of health care and the recovery and well-being of the patient.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the training opportunities and resources available to the specialists involved in digestive endoscopy services in hospitals in Spain in which sedation is performed by the nursing staff.

METHODS

This was a descriptive cross-sectional study performed in the Digestive Endoscopy Service at Toledo University Hospital and nearby hospitals in central Spain. The sample consisted of 75 nurses who administer sedation in digestive endoscopic procedures.

RESULTS

Regarding the training of nurses, the vast majority were generalist nurses, and only a small percentage obtained specialized training through ongoing training. Most had been working in the service for more than two years, and very few had previous experience in sedation, although the vast majority currently applied sedation. Life support training was also critical. There were significant differences in the availability of resources between different hospitals.

CONCLUSIONS

The training of nurses who perform sedation in digestive endoscopy services could be improved since there is a high proportion of personnel without specific training in sedation before starting to work in the service. It is crucial to implement targeted and ongoing training programs to improve competencies in this area, as they are essential to ensure the safety and effectiveness of the procedure. Given the variability in resources and personnel training that exists between different hospitals, it seems important to establish standards at the institutional level.

Propofol versus Dexmedetomidine for Sedation of Cancer Patients Undergoing Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography: Randomized Single-Blinded Controlled Study

Background

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a primary diagnostic and therapeutic option for pancreaticobiliary pathologies.

Objectives

This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine versus propofol during ERCP in cancer patients.

Methods

This randomized controlled single-blinded trial was conducted with 202 cancer patients aged 21 to 60 years, of both sexes, with a body mass index of 18.5 to 30 kg/m2, and classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class II - III, who were undergoing ERCP. The patients were randomly assigned to two equal groups. The Propofol Group (n = 101) received a loading dose of propofol (1 - 2 mg/kg over 30 seconds) followed by an infusion (0.05 - 0.1 mg/kg/hour). The Dexmedetomidine Group (n = 101) received a loading dose of dexmedetomidine (1 μg/kg over 10 minutes) followed by an infusion (0.2 - 0.7 μg/kg/hour). The maintenance dose was adjusted during the procedure based on vital signs, Bispectral Index (BIS), and oxygen saturation.

Results

The Dexmedetomidine group showed a significantly lower incidence of intra-procedural hypoxemic events (14.9% vs. 26.7%, P = 0.037) and a comparable incidence of hypotension (17.8% vs. 13.9%, P = 0.441). Dexmedetomidine also demonstrated significantly lower intraoperative pain scores according to the Facial Pain Score (P < 0.05), significantly lower postoperative Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores (P < 0.05), and a lower frequency of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) compared to the Propofol group. Additionally, there was a significantly higher frequency of endoscopist satisfaction in the Dexmedetomidine group compared to the Propofol group (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

Dexmedetomidine can be used as a safe and effective alternative to propofol for deep sedation of cancer patients undergoing ERCP. It is associated with a lower incidence of hypoxemic events, effective intraoperative sedation, quicker recovery, and superior analgesic effects both intraoperatively and postoperatively compared to propofol.

Safety and efficacy of a low-dose combination of midazolam, alfentanil, and propofol for deep sedation of elderly patients undergoing ERCP

BACKGROUND

Proper sedation of patients, particularly elderly individuals, who are more susceptible to sedation-related complications, is of significant importance in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). This study aims to assess the safety and efficacy of a low-dose combination of midazolam, alfentanil, and propofol for deep sedation in elderly patients undergoing ERCP, compared to a group of middle-aged patients.

METHODS

The medical records of 610 patients with common bile duct stones who underwent elective ERCP under deep sedation with a three-drug regimen, including midazolam, alfentanil, and propofol at Shandong Provincial Third Hospital from January 2023 to September 2023 were retrospectively reviewed in this study. Patients were categorized into three groups: middle-aged (50-64 years, n = 202), elderly (65-79 years, n = 216), and very elderly (≥ 80 years, n = 192). Intraoperative vital signs and complications were compared among these groups.

RESULTS

The three groups showed no significant difference in terms of intraoperative variation of systolic blood pressure (P = 0.291), diastolic blood pressure (P = 0.737), heart rate (P = 0.107), peripheral oxygen saturation (P = 0.188), bispectral index (P = 0.158), and the occurrence of sedation-related adverse events including hypotension (P = 0.170) and hypoxemia (P = 0.423).

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that a low-dose three-drug regimen consisting of midazolam, alfentanil, and propofol seems safe and effective for deep sedation of elderly and very elderly patients undergoing ERCP procedures. However, further studies are required to verify these findings and clarify the benefits and risks of this method.

Outpatient percutaneous image-guided microwave ablation with monitored anesthesia care: An exploratory study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the feasibility, safety, and periprocedural perception of pain for a combination approach of moderate and deep sedation for image-guided percutaneous microwave ablation of both primary and secondary malignant lesions.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of 33 image-guided percutaneous microwave ablation procedures performed on 33 patients in an outpatient-based interventional radiology center. We used a combination of midazolam, fentanyl, propofol, and/or ketamine to achieve mild to moderate sedation for the procedure, and also to achieve deeper sedation as needed for the ablation portion.

RESULTS

Technical success was achieved in all image-guided percutaneous microwave ablation procedures. Mean procedural time was 49.4 min. There were no major complications. Intraprocedural pain was absent in all patients. All 33 patients were deemed fit for discharge within 30 min following the procedure.

CONCLUSION

The combination approach of moderate and deep sedation for anesthesia during image-guided percutaneous microwave ablation is an advantageous option. This approach has a strong safety profile, good technical success, short procedure times, low levels of intraprocedural and post-procedural pain, and short recovery from anesthesia.

A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the efficacy and safety of ciprofol (HSK3486) versus propofol for anesthetic induction and non-ICU sedation

Background: Ciprofol (HSK3486) is a novel intravenous anesthetic agent that bears structural similarity to propofol and displays favorable pharmacodynamic characteristics such as rapid onset and offset. The meta-analysis aimed at comparing the efficacy and safety of ciprofol versus propofol in clinical practice. Methods: Medline, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library were searched from inception to April 2023. The primary outcome was success rate of sedation/anesthetic induction and differences in sedation/induction time. The secondary outcomes included risks of hemodynamic instability, respiratory complications, and pain on injection, as well as recovery profiles, satisfaction score, and top-up dose requirement. Results: Twelve RCTs (sedation: n = 6, anesthetic induction, n = 6, all conducted in China) involving 1,793 patients (age: 34-58 years) published from 2021 to 2023 were analyzed. Pooled results revealed no differences in success rate [risk ratio (RR) = 1, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.99 to 1.01, I2 = 0%, 1,106 patients, p = 1] and time required for successful anesthetic induction/sedation [mean difference (MD) = 7.95 s, 95% CI: -1.09 to 16.99, I2 = 97%, 1,594 patients, p = 0.08]. The risks of top-up dose requirement (RR = 0.94, p = 0.48), cardiopulmonary complications [i.e., bradycardia (RR = 0.94, p = 0.67), tachycardia (RR = 0.83, p = 0.68), hypertension (RR = 1.28, p = 0.2), hypoxemia/pulmonary depression (RR = 0.78, p = 0.24)], and postoperative nausea/vomiting (RR = 0.85, p = 0.72), as well as discharge time (MD = 1.39 min, p = 0.14) and satisfaction score (standardized MD = 0.23, p = 0.16) did not differ significantly between the two groups. However, the ciprofol group had lower risks of hypotension (RR = 0.85, p = 0.02) and pain on injection (RR = 0.17, p < 0.00001) than the propofol group. The time to full alertness was statistically shorter in the propofol group (i.e., 0.66 min), but without clinical significance. Conclusion: Our results demonstrated similar efficacy between ciprofol and propofol for sedation and anesthetic induction, while ciprofol was associated with lower risks of hypotension and pain on injection. Future studies are warranted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ciprofol in pediatric or the elderly populations. Systematic Review Registration: (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/), identifier (CRD42023421278).

Up-to-date literature review and issues of sedation during digestive endoscopy

Sedation is common during digestive endoscopy to provide comfort and pain relief for patients. However, the use of sedation in endoscopy also poses potential risks, and recent issues have been raised regarding its safety and administration. This literature review paper will discuss the most recent developments in the field of sedation in digestive endoscopy, including the adverse events that might be associated with sedation and how to manage it, the legal issues associated with administration, the impact of COVID-19 on sedation practices, and sedation in special situations. It will also touch upon the current guidelines and recommendations for sedation, including the importance of patient selection and monitoring and the need for training and certification for endoscopists administering sedation. The review will also analyse studies evaluating the safety and efficacy of various sedation techniques, including propofol, midazolam, and others. It will examine the benefits and drawbacks of these agents.

Global Trends of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Anesthesia/Sedation: A Bibliometric Study (from 2001 to 2022)

Background

Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy becomes more and more common now in order to diagnose and treat GI diseases, and anesthesia/sedation plays an important role. We aim to discuss the developmental trends and evaluate the research hotspots using bibliometric methods for GI endoscopy anesthesia/sedation in the past two decades.

Methods

The original and review articles published from 2001 to December 2022 related to GI endoscopy anesthesia/sedation were extracted from the Web of Science database. Four different softwares (CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and Bibliometrix, Online Analysis Platform of Literature Metrology (Bibliometric)) were used for this comprehensive analysis.

Results

According to our retrieval strategy, we found a total of 3154 related literatures. Original research articles were 2855, and reviews were 299. There has been a substantial increase in the research on GI endoscopy anesthesia/sedation in recent 22 years. These publications have been cited 66,418 times, with a mean of 21.04 citations per publication. The US maintained a leading position in global research, with the largest number of publications (29.94%), and China ranked second (19.92%). Keyword burst and concurrence showed that conscious sedation, colonoscopy and midazolam were the most frequently occurring keywords.

Conclusion

Our research found that GI endoscopy anesthesia/sedation was in a period of rapid development and demonstrated the improvement of medical instruments and surgical options that had significantly contributed to the field of GI endoscopy anesthesia/sedation. The US dominates this field, and the selection and dosage of sedative regimens have always been the foci of disease research to improve comfort and safety, while adverse events and risks arouse attention gradually. In the past 20 years, hotspots mainly focus on upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, gastroscopy, and esophagogastroduodenoscopy. These data would provide future directions for clinicians and researchers regarding GI endoscopy anesthesia/sedation.

Ciprofol versus propofol for sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Painless gastrointestinal endoscopy is being increasingly practised in the clinical field. The management and choice of sedation are important during the endoscopy procedure to reduce patient discomfort and facilitate high disease detection rates. Ciprofol is principally an agonist of the γ-aminobutyric acid type A receptor; it comprises the active ingredient HSK3486, which is similar to the currently used intravenous anaesthetic propofol in clinical practice. A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing ciprofol and propofol will be conducted to assess their efficacy and safety during endoscopy. Before starting the study, we describe the specific protocol of this systematic review.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This protocol was prepared in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols 2015. The following databases will be searched: Embase, Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, Chinese Biomedical Literature Service System, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, China Science and Technology Journal Database and a clinical trial registry. The database search strategy will adopt a combination of subject words and free words. Randomised controlled trials related to ciprofol use for sedation during gastrointestinal endoscopy will also be included. Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, two researchers will independently screen the articles and extracted data. Following the qualitative evaluation of each study, analysis will be conducted using Review Manager software.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The protocol for this systematic review and meta-analysis involves no individual patient data; thus, ethical approval is not required. This will be the first meta-analysis to assess the sedation efficacy of ciprofol and provide evidence to clinicians for decision-making. The results will be disseminated through conference presentations and publications in peer-review journals related to this field.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022370047.