Respiratory investigation · 2020
Sedation with fentanyl and midazolam without oropharyngeal anesthesia compared with sedation with pethidine and midazolam with oropharyngeal anesthesia in ultrathin bronchoscopy for peripheral lung lesions.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Sumi Toshiyuki, Kamada Koki, Sawai Takeyuki, Shijubou Naoki, Yamada Yuichi, Nakata Hisashi, Mori Yuji, Chiba Hirofumi
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: In advanced lung cancer, precision medicine requires repeated biopsies via bronchoscopy at therapy change. Since bronchoscopies are often stressful for patients, sedation using both fentanyl and midazolam is recommended in Europe and America. In Japan, bronchoscopies are generally orally performed under midazolam and oropharyngeal anesthesia. Nasal intubation creates a physiological route to the trachea, causing less irritation to the pharynx than intubation via the oral cavity; however, the necessity of oropharyngeal anesthesia remains unclear. We aimed to compare the safety, patient discomfort, and diagnostic rates for oropharyngeal anesthesia and sedation with pethidine and midazolam (Group A) and sedation with midazolam and fentanyl without oropharyngeal anesthesia (Group B) for ultrathin bronchoscopy of peripheral pulmonary lesions (PPLs) via nasal intubation.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 74 consecutive potential lung cancer patients who underwent ultrathin bronchoscopies at the Hakodate Goryoukaku Hospital between July 2019 and June 2020. We reviewed the following: diagnostic rates; cumulative doses of lidocaine, midazolam, and fentanyl; hemodynamic changes; procedural complications in both groups. Pharyngeal anesthesia in group A was administered by spraying 2% (w/v) lidocaine into the pharynx. The chi-squared test was used for statistical analyses.
RESULTS: There were no significant changes in hemodynamic parameters and complications. The mean level of discomfort for bronchoscopic examinations was significantly lower in Group B (2.39 vs. 1.64; P = 0.014), with no significant inter-group difference in the diagnostic yields for PPLs (63.0% vs. 71.4%; P = 0.46).
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate the advantages of sedation with fentanyl and midazolam without oropharyngeal anesthesia for ultrathin bronchoscopy through nasal intubation.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 74 consecutive potential lung cancer patients who underwent ultrathin bronchoscopies at the Hakodate Goryoukaku Hospital between July 2019 and June 2020. We reviewed the following: diagnostic rates; cumulative doses of lidocaine, midazolam, and fentanyl; hemodynamic changes; procedural complications in both groups. Pharyngeal anesthesia in group A was administered by spraying 2% (w/v) lidocaine into the pharynx. The chi-squared test was used for statistical analyses.
RESULTS: There were no significant changes in hemodynamic parameters and complications. The mean level of discomfort for bronchoscopic examinations was significantly lower in Group B (2.39 vs. 1.64; P = 0.014), with no significant inter-group difference in the diagnostic yields for PPLs (63.0% vs. 71.4%; P = 0.46).
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate the advantages of sedation with fentanyl and midazolam without oropharyngeal anesthesia for ultrathin bronchoscopy through nasal intubation.