Respiration; international review of thoracic diseases · 2009
Sedation during flexible bronchoscopy in patients with pre-existing respiratory failure: Midazolam versus Midazolam plus Alfentanil.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Dreher Michael, Ekkernkamp Emelie, Storre Jan Hendrik, Kabitz Hans-Joachim, Windisch Wolfram
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The use of sedation during flexible bronchoscopy (FB) is undisputed; however, the combination of benzodiazepines and opiates, although reasonable, is suggested to cause hypoventilation, particularly in patients with pre-existing respiratory failure.
OBJECTIVES: To assess respiratory function during FB.
METHODS: Transcutaneous PCO(2 )(PtcCO(2)), oxygen saturation, patients' tolerance, time after FB until recovery and application of drug dosage were assessed in patients receiving either midazolam with alfentanil (n = 15) or midazolam alone (n = 15) for sedation for FB.
RESULTS: There were no differences in PtcCO(2) values during FB between the two groups (all p > 0.05). However, PtcCO(2 )significantly increased over time in both groups (both p < 0.001; RM-ANOVA on ranks). Minimum oxygen saturation (SaO(2)) [89 (interquartile range 79.8/92.8) vs. 86 (interquartile range 82.3/87.8)%; p = 0.46] and the duration until recovery, i.e., achieving an ALDRETE score of > or =9 [30 (interquartile range 10/90) vs. 10 (interquartile range 10/105) min; p = 0.68] were comparable for monosedation and combined sedation, respectively. The total amount of midazolam [4.0 (interquartile range 4.0/4.0) vs. 2.0 (interquartile range 2.0/2.0) mg; p < 0.001] was lower in patients receiving combined sedation. Significantly lower scores for pain and asphyxia, and a clear tendency to less nausea and cough were reported by patients receiving combined sedation.
CONCLUSIONS: Combined sedation during FB produced a comparable degree of desaturation and hypoventilation, and is associated with a comparable time to full recovery compared to monosedation in patients with pre-existing respiratory failure. Importantly, FB using combined sedation is better tolerated by patients despite only 50% midazolam consumption.
OBJECTIVES: To assess respiratory function during FB.
METHODS: Transcutaneous PCO(2 )(PtcCO(2)), oxygen saturation, patients' tolerance, time after FB until recovery and application of drug dosage were assessed in patients receiving either midazolam with alfentanil (n = 15) or midazolam alone (n = 15) for sedation for FB.
RESULTS: There were no differences in PtcCO(2) values during FB between the two groups (all p > 0.05). However, PtcCO(2 )significantly increased over time in both groups (both p < 0.001; RM-ANOVA on ranks). Minimum oxygen saturation (SaO(2)) [89 (interquartile range 79.8/92.8) vs. 86 (interquartile range 82.3/87.8)%; p = 0.46] and the duration until recovery, i.e., achieving an ALDRETE score of > or =9 [30 (interquartile range 10/90) vs. 10 (interquartile range 10/105) min; p = 0.68] were comparable for monosedation and combined sedation, respectively. The total amount of midazolam [4.0 (interquartile range 4.0/4.0) vs. 2.0 (interquartile range 2.0/2.0) mg; p < 0.001] was lower in patients receiving combined sedation. Significantly lower scores for pain and asphyxia, and a clear tendency to less nausea and cough were reported by patients receiving combined sedation.
CONCLUSIONS: Combined sedation during FB produced a comparable degree of desaturation and hypoventilation, and is associated with a comparable time to full recovery compared to monosedation in patients with pre-existing respiratory failure. Importantly, FB using combined sedation is better tolerated by patients despite only 50% midazolam consumption.