Can sedation using a combination of propofol and dexmedetomidine enhance the satisfaction of the endoscopist in endoscopic submucosal dissection?
submitted 10 May 2017
accepted after revision 26 September 2017
12 January 2018 (online)
Background and study aims The aim of this pilot randomized controlled trial was to evaluate and compare the satisfaction of the endoscopist along with the effectiveness and safety of sedation between sedation protocol using a combination of propofol (PF) and dexmedetomidine (DEX) (Combination group) and sedation protocol using PF alone (PF group) during gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD).
Patients and methods Fifty-eight patients with gastric neoplasias scheduled for gastric ESD were enrolled and randomly assigned to the two groups. The satisfaction scores of the endoscopists and the parameters for the effectiveness and safety of sedation were evaluated by comparisons between the two groups.
Results The satisfaction scores of the endoscopists, which were measured using a visual analogue scale, were significantly higher in the Combination group than in the PF group (88 vs. 69, P = 0.003). The maintenance dose of PF was lower in the Combination group than in the PF group (2 mg/kg/h vs. 5 mg/kg/h, P < 0.001), and the number of rescue PF injections was fewer in the Combination group than in the PF group (2 times vs. 6 times, P < 0.001). The incidence of bradycardia (defined as a pulse rate ≤ 45 bpm) in the Combination group was higher than that in the PF group (37.9 % vs. 10.3 %, P = 0.029).
Conclusions This study suggests that gastroenterologist-directed sedation using a combination of PF and DEX during gastric ESD can enhance the satisfaction levels of endoscopists by providing stable sedation with an acceptable safety profile.
- 1 Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines 2010 (ver. 3). Gastric Cancer 2011; 14: 113-123
- 2 Yoo JH, Shin SJ, Lee KM. et al. Risk factors for perforations associated with endoscopic submucosal dissection in gastric lesions: emphasis on perforation type. Surg Endosc 2012; 26: 2456-2464
- 3 Toyokawa T, Inaba T, Omote S. et al. Risk factors for perforation and delayed bleeding associated with endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric neoplasms:analysis of 1123 lesions. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2012; 27: 907-912
- 4 Qadeer MA, Vargo JJ, Khandwala F. et al. Propofol versus traditional sedative agents for gastrointestinal endoscopy: A meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2005; 3: 1049-1056
- 5 Kiriyama S, Gotoda T, Sano H. et al. Safe and effective sedation in endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer: a randomized comparison between propofol continuous infusion and intermittent midazolam injection. J Gastroenterol 2010; 45: 831-837
- 6 Sasaki T, Tanabe S, Azuma M. et al. Propofol sedation with bispectral index monitoring is useful for endoscopic submucosal dissection: a randomized prospective phase II clinical trial. Endoscopy 2012; 44: 584-589
- 7 Nishizawa T, Suzuki H, Matsuzaki J. et al. Propofol versus traditional sedative agents for endoscopic submucosal dissection. Dig Endosc 2014; 26: 701-706
- 8 Takimoto K, Ueda T, Shimamoto F. et al. Sedation with dexmedetomidine hydrochloride during endoscopic submucosal dissection of gastric cancer. Dig Endosc 2011; 23: 176-181
- 9 Kim N, Yoo YC, Lee SK. et al. Comparison of the efficacy and safety of sedation between dexmedetomidine-remifentanil and propofol-remifentanil during endoscopic submucosal dissection. World J Gastroenterol 2015; 21: 3671-3678
- 10 Nonaka T, Inamori M, Miyashita T. et al. Feasibility of deep sedation with the combination of propofol and dexmedetomidine hydrochloride for esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection. Dig Endosc 2016; 28: 145-151
- 11 Cohen LB, Delegge MH, Aisenberg J. et al. AGA Institute review of endoscopic sedation. Gastroenterol 2007; 133: 675-701
- 12 Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) CKD Work Group. KDIGO 2012 clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and management of chronic kidney disease. Kidney Inter 2013; 3: 1-150
- 13 Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese classification of gastric carcinoma: 3rd English edition. Gastric Cancer 2011; 14: 101-112
- 14 Standards of Practice Committee of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Lichtenstein DR, Jagannath S. et al. Sedation and anesthesia in GI endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2008; 68: 815-826
- 15 Brignole M, Menozzi C, Del Rosso A. et al. New classification of haemodynamics of vasovagal syncope: beyond the VASIS classification. Analysis of the pre-syncopal phase of the tilt test without and with nitroglycerin challenge. Vasovagal Syncope International Study. Europace 2000; 2: 66-76
- 16 Bloor BC, Ward DS, Belleville JP. et al. Effects of intravenous dexmedetomidine in humans. II. Hemodynamic changes. Anesthesiology 1992; 77: 1134-1142
- 17 Khan ZP, Ferguson CN, Jones RM. Alpha-2 and imidazoline receptor agonists. Their pharmacology and therapeutic role. Anaesthesia 1999; 54: 146-165
- 18 Shelly MP. Dexmedetomidine: a real innovation or more of the same?. Br J Anaesth 2001; 87: 677-678
- 19 Nishizawa T, Suzuki H, Sagara S. et al. Dexmedetomidine versus midazolam for gastrointestinal endoscopy: a meta-analysis. Dig Endosc 2015; 27: 8-15
- 20 Venn RM, Bradshaw CJ, Spencer R. et al. Preliminary UK experience of dexmedetomidine, a novel agent for postoperative sedation in the intensive care unit. Anaesthesia 1999; 54: 1136-1142
- 21 American Society of Anesthesiologists. Task Force on Sedation and Analgesia by Non-Anesthesiologists. Practice guidelines for sedation and analgesia by non-anesthesiologists. Anesthesiology 2002; 96: 1004-1017