Safety and efficacy of etomidate and propofol anesthesia in elderly patients undergoing gastroscopy: A double-blind randomized clinical study

被引:35
|
作者
Meng, Qing-Tao [1 ]
Cao, Chen [2 ]
Liu, Hui-Min [1 ]
Xia, Zhong-Yuan [1 ]
Li, Wei [1 ]
Tang, Ling-Hua [1 ]
Chen, Rong [1 ]
Jiang, Meng [1 ]
Wu, Yang [1 ]
Leng, Yan [1 ]
Lee, Chris C. [3 ]
机构
[1] Wuhan Univ, Dept Anesthesiol, Renmin Hosp, 238 Jiefang Rd, Wuhan 430060, Hubei, Peoples R China
[2] Third Hosp Wuhan, Dept Med, Wuhan 430060, Hubei, Peoples R China
[3] Washington Univ, Sch Med, Dept Anesthesiol, St Louis, MO 63110 USA
关键词
anesthesia; gastroscopy; elderly patients; etomidate; propofol; UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY; ADRENOCORTICAL FUNCTION; CONTROLLED-TRIAL; SEDATION; COMPLICATIONS; RISK;
D O I
10.3892/etm.2016.3475
中图分类号
R-3 [医学研究方法]; R3 [基础医学];
学科分类号
1001 ;
摘要
The aim of the present study is to compare the safety, efficacy and cost effectiveness of anesthetic regimens by compound, using etomidate and propofol in elderly patients undergoing gastroscopy. A total of 200 volunteers (65-79 years of age) scheduled for gastroscopy under anesthesia were randomly divided into the following groups: P, propofol (1.5-2.0 mg/kg); E, etomidate (0.15-0.2 mg/kg); P+E, propofol (0.75-1 mg/kg) followed by etomidate (0.075-0.1 mg/kg); and E+P, etomidate (0.075-0.01 mg/kg) followed by propofol (0.75-1 mg/kg). Vital signs and bispectral index were monitored at different time points. Complications, induction and examination time, anesthesia duration, and recovery and discharge time were recorded. At the end of the procedure, the satisfaction of patients, endoscopists and the anesthetist were evaluated. The recovery (6.1 +/- 1.2 h) and discharge times (24.8 +/- 2.8 h) in group E were significantly longer compared with groups P, P+E and E+P (P<0.05). The occurrence of injection pain in group P+E was significantly higher compared with the other three groups (P<0.05). In addition, the incidence of myoclonus and post-operative nausea and vomiting were significantly higher in group P+E compared with the other three groups (P<0.05). There was no statistical difference among the four groups with regards to the patients' immediate, post-procedure satisfaction (P>0.05). Furthermore, there was no difference in the satisfaction of anesthesia, as evaluated by the anesthetist and endoscopist, among the four groups (P>0.05). The present study demonstrates that anesthesia for gastroscopy in elderly patients can be safely and effectively accomplished using a drug regimen that combines propofol with etomidate. The combined use of propofol and etomidate has unique characteristics which improve hemodynamic stability, cause minimal respiratory depression and less side effects, provide rapid return to full activity and result in high levels of satisfaction.
引用
收藏
页码:1515 / 1524
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparative efficacy and safety of ciprofol, propofol, and propofol and etomidate mixture, and ciprofol and etomidate mixture in patients undergoing painless gastroscopy: A randomized, double-blind controlled clinical trial
    Liu, Yanlong
    Qian, Yihong
    Zhang, Lilan
    Guo, Shanliang
    Fan, Longcheng
    Zhang, Mingsheng
    Liu, Zhongyu
    MEDICINE, 2024, 103 (36)
  • [2] Combination of propofol and dezocine to improve safety and efficacy of anesthesia for gastroscopy and colonoscopy in adults: A randomized, double-blind, controlled trial
    Xue-Ting Li
    Chao-Qun Ma
    Si-Hua Qi
    Li-Min Zhang
    World Journal of Clinical Cases, 2019, (20) : 3237 - 3246
  • [3] Combination of propofol and dezocine to improve safety and efficacy of anesthesia for gastroscopy and colonoscopy in adults: A randomized, double-blind, controlled trial
    Li, Xue-Ting
    Ma, Chao-Qun
    Qi, Si-Hua
    Zhang, Li-Min
    WORLD JOURNAL OF CLINICAL CASES, 2019, 7 (20) : 3237 - 3246
  • [4] A comparison of anesthetic regimens using etomidate and propofol in patients undergoing first-trimester abortions: double-blind, randomized clinical trial of safety and efficacy
    Wu, Jing
    Yao, Shanglong
    Wu, Zhouyang
    Wu, Zhiling
    Chu, Shujuan
    Xia, Geqing
    Deng, Feitao
    CONTRACEPTION, 2013, 87 (01) : 55 - 62
  • [5] Comparison of propofol-esketamine versus propofol for anesthesia in gastroscopy: a double-blind, randomized controlled clinical trial
    Liu, Xiaoli
    Xiao, Qingyu
    Zhuang, Shaohui
    FRONTIERS IN MEDICINE, 2023, 10
  • [6] Comparison of Propofol, Etomidate, and Thiopental in Anesthesia for Electroconvulsive Therapy A Randomized, Double-blind Clinical Trial
    Canbek, Ozge
    Ipekcioglu, Derya
    Menges, Okan Oktay
    Atagun, Murat Ilhan
    Karamustafalioglu, Nesrin
    Cetinkaya, Ozlem Zekiye
    Ilnem, Mehmet Cem
    JOURNAL OF ECT, 2015, 31 (02) : 91 - 97
  • [7] The efficacy and safety of ciprofol and propofol in patients undergoing colonoscopy: A double-blind, randomized, controlled trial
    Gao, Shi-Hui
    Tang, Qian-Qian
    Wang, Chang-Ming
    Guan, Zhan-Ying
    Wang, Ling-Ling
    Zhang, Jing
    Yan, Zeng-Long
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ANESTHESIA, 2024, 95
  • [8] 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
    Zheng, Longbin
    Wang, Yiteng
    Ma, Qing
    Liang, Wenbo
    Zhang, Xiaojing
    Ren, Zhiqiang
    Qin, Weimin
    Meng, Fan
    Li, Yuhong
    Fan, Guoxiang
    Yin, Ning
    DRUG DESIGN DEVELOPMENT AND THERAPY, 2023, 17 : 1347 - 1356
  • [9] Cardiovascular effects of anesthesia in ECT: A randomized, double-blind comparison of etomidate, propofol, and thiopental
    Rosa, Moacyr Alexandro
    Rosa, Marina O.
    Marcolin, Marco A.
    Fregni, Felipe
    JOURNAL OF ECT, 2007, 23 (01) : 6 - 8
  • [10] The efficacy and safety of ciprofol versus propofol in patients undergoing painless hysteroscopy: a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial
    Aijun Li
    Ning Li
    Lei Zhu
    Zige Xu
    Yifan Wang
    Junjie Li
    Gerong Zhang
    BMC Anesthesiology, 24 (1)