Fentanyl For Sedation Research Articles

EP.05A.01 Efficacy and Safety of Midazolam with Fentanyl for Sedation During EBUS-TBNA: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III Study

EP.05A.01 Efficacy and Safety of Midazolam with Fentanyl for Sedation During EBUS-TBNA: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III Study

COMPARISON OF THE EFFECTIVENESS AND SAFETY BETWEEN INTRAVENOUS DEXMEDETOMIDINE WITH FENTANYL VERSUS INTRAVENOUS PROPOFOL WITH FENTANYL FOR SEDATION IN DIAGNOSTIC UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness and safety of intravenous dexmedetomidine with fentanyl versus intravenous propofol with fentanyl for sedation in diagnostic upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy. Methods: 50 patients of ASA grade I, II, or III scheduled for GI endoscopy were randomly divided into two groups of 25 patients each. Group D received intravenous fentanyl and intravenous dexmedetomidine, and Group P received intravenous fentanyl and intravenous propofol. Hemodynamic variables, level of sedation using the Ramsay sedation score (RSS), patient satisfaction, and surgeon satisfaction using the visual analog scale (VAS) were recorded. Results: There was no significant difference in the demographic parameters (age, gender, weight, ASA class) between the two groups. The mean time to reach RSS 4–5 was less in group P (27.60±6.44 s) when compared to group D (521.56±39.13 sec; p=0.0004). Patient satisfaction was higher in group D (7.9±0.7) as compared to group P (7.3±0.8; p=0.0069). While there was no significant difference in the surgeon’s satisfaction regarding difficulty during the procedure (8.3±0.9 and 7.9±1.3 in group D and group P, respectively; p=0.2120). Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine with fentanyl resulted in a better hemodynamic profile, respiratory profile, patient satisfaction, and quicker recovery than propofol with fentanyl. Whereas propofol with fentanyl provided quicker onset and more efficient sedation compared to dexmedetomidine with fentanyl.

Comparison of intravenous ketamine and fentanyl sedation in duration of mechanical ventilation in intensive care unit

Background and aims: To compare the duration of mechanical ventilation in patients receiving ketamine compared to fentanyl for sedation in mechanically ventilated patients in intensive care unit. Methods: One hundred and six patients requiring mechanical ventilation were randomized to receive continuous intravenous infusion of either ketamine (1 mg/kg bolus followed by 0.4 to 0.8 mg/kg/h) or fentanyl (1mcg/kg bolus followed by 0.3-0.5 mcg/kg/min) with the dose titrated to achieve Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) score of 0 to -1 and Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) score of 3 to 7. The primary outcome was the duration of mechanical ventilation. Secondary outcomes were sedation score, analgesia score and need of vasopressors. Results: The mean duration of ventilation was 2.5±0.6 days and 2.2±1.0 days (p=0.1) in patients receiving ketamine and fentanyl respectively. More patients required vasopressors: 27 (50.9%) vs 9 (17%) in patients receiving fentanyl compared to ketamine (p<0.05). There were no significant changes in hemodynamic variables after the initiation of the study drug in both the groups. Infusion was discontinued for adverse effects in seven (13%) patients in both the groups. Conclusion: When compared with fentanyl, continuous ketamine infusion was tolerated similarly by critically ill adults, with similar duration of mechanical ventilation. Ketamine sedation was associated with decreased requirement for vasopressors.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of intranasal and intramuscular administration of naloxone in working dogs administered fentanyl.

Working dogs exposed to narcotics might require reversal in the field. To explore the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic effects of naloxone administered intramuscularly (IM) or intranasally (IN) to reverse fentanyl sedation in working dogs. Ten healthy, working dogs aged 1.7 ± 1 year and weighing 26 ± 3 kg. In this randomized, controlled cross-over study dogs received either 4 mg of naloxone IN or IM 10 minutes after fentanyl (0.3 mg IV) administration. Sedation was assessed at baseline and 5 minutes after fentanyl administration, then at 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 60 and 120 minutes after reversal with naloxone. Blood samples for naloxone detection were obtained at 0, 5, 10, 30, 60 and 120 minutes. Pharmacokinetic parameters and sedation scores were compared between IM and IN naloxone groups. There was a significant increase in sedation score from baseline (0.25 [-4 to 1] IM; 0 [-2 to 1] IN) after fentanyl administration (11 [5-12] IM; 9.25 [4-11] IN), followed by a significant reduction at 5 (0.5 [-0.5 to 1.5] IM; 1.25 [-1.5 to 4.5] IN) through 120 minutes (-0.5 [-2 to 1] IM; 0 [-4.5 to 1] IN) after reversal with naloxone. Route of administration had no significant effect on sedation score. Maximum plasma concentration was significantly lower after IN administration (11.7 [2.8-18.8] ng/mL IN, 36.7 [22.1-56.4] ng/mL IM, P < .001) but time to reach maximum plasma concentration was not significantly different from IM administration. Although IM administration resulted in higher naloxone plasma concentrations compared to IN, reversal of sedation was achieved via both routes after administration of therapeutic doses of fentanyl.

S737 Safety and Efficacy of Diphenhydramine as an Adjunct to Midazolam and Fentanyl for Sedation in Patients Under the Age of 45 Undergoing Endoscopic Evaluation

S737 Safety and Efficacy of Diphenhydramine as an Adjunct to Midazolam and Fentanyl for Sedation in Patients Under the Age of 45 Undergoing Endoscopic Evaluation

Comparison between Effects of Fentanyl and Dexmedetomidine as Sedative in Elective Caesarean Section Under Subarachnoid Anaesthesia

Background: Regional anaesthesia has become an important anaesthetic technique now a days. The use of spinal (Subarachnoid) anaesthesia is often limited by the unwillingness of patients to remain awake during surgery. Pharmacologically induced tranquility improves acceptance of regional technique. This study compares Fentanyl and Dexmedetomidine in terms of onset and recovery of sedation, haemodynamic effects, respiratory effects and adverse effects of both the drugs during elective Caesarian section under spinal anaesthesia.&#x0D; Materials and methods: This randomized clinical trial included 60 ASA (American Society of Anaesthesiologists) grade I patients between age 20-40 years undergoing elective caesarean sections under subarachnoid anaesthesia during the period January 2022 to June 2022.Patients were randomly allocated to one of two groups: Fentanyl group (Group F, n=30), who received Fentanyl in a single dose of 0.5mcg/kg and Dexmedetomidine group (Group D, n=30), who received Dexmedetomidine in a single dose of 2mcg/kg. Spinal anaesthesia was conducted by injecting a hyperbaric solution of 0.5% bupivacaine 3ml through a 25G spinal needle at L3-4 level. All parameters were documented at 5 min intervals until arousal of the patient. The onset of sedation i.e. time from iv (Intravenous) injection of Fentanyl or Dexmedetomidine to closure of eye lids (OAA/S score of 3) and the arousal time from sedation i.e. time from closing of the eye lids to OAA/S score of 5 (Patient is awake clinically) were noted. Any complication during operation was documented. The patient’s satisfaction with the sedation was assessed by the 5 point ‘Likert verbal rating scale.’&#x0D; Results: There was no significant difference of mean blood pressure and mean heart rate between the two groups in different time intervals (p&gt;0.05). Time of onset of sedation was comparable between Fentanyl and Dexmedetomidine (p value 0.210). The arousal time i.e. duration of sedation was significantly longer with Dexmedetomidine than Fentanyl (p&lt;0.05). Fentanyl was associated with significantly higher incidence of some adverse effects like nausea, vomiting than Dexmedetomidine (46.66% vs 13.33%, p&lt;0.05). Significant percentage of patients was satisfied with Dexmedetomidine than Fentanyl (86.66% vs 20%,p&lt;0.001).&#x0D; Conclusion: The study showed that the arousal time i.e. duration of sedation was significantly longer with Dexmedetomidine which is beneficial for the patient in single dose technique for sedation. Moreover, Fentanyl was associated with high incidence of some adverse effects like nausea, vomiting. Thus it is recommended that Dexmedetomidine is a better choice than Fentanyl for sedation in single dose technique during subarachnoid block for caesarean section.&#x0D; Chatt Maa Shi Hosp Med Coll J; Vol.22 (1); January 2023; Page 48-52

Combination of ketamine and fentanyl (KetaFent) for safe insertion of ultrasound-guided central venous catheters in infants.

Centrally inserted central catheters (CICCs) are placed by ultrasound guided puncture of the internal jugular or brachio-cephalic vein. It is crucial to achieve a good level of sedation and analgesia in order to keep the babies still thus reducing the risk of procedural failure. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of the combination of ketamine and fentanyl during the CICC placement procedure. We retrospectively collected data from 72 infants who underwent CICC insertion after sedation with KetaFent protocol. The primary outcome was to assess the success of the procedure defined as CICC placement. Secondary outcome was intubation during the procedure in non-ventilated infants (noninvasive ventilation or spontaneous respiration), need for repeat doses of study medications to complete the procedure, time to complete the procedure, the level of analgesia assessed using vital parameters. The procedure was completed in 100% of cases. There were no cases of hypotension during and at the end of the procedure. No intubation was performed on non-ventilated infants. The combination of ketamine and fentanyl for sedation and analgesia in infants requiring insertion of a CICC is 100% successful. It is associated with a low risk of side effect like apnea and intubation. Insertion of a central venous catheter is a painful procedure for infants. Adequate sedation is mandatory to keep the baby still thus reducing the risk of procedural failure.

Comparison of the safety and effectiveness of dexmedetomidine with a combination of midazolam and fentanyl for sedation during awake fibreoptic nasotracheal intubation

Introduction: Several drugs have been used to enhance patient comfort during awake nasal fibreoptic intubation (AFOI) process. Most of these can cause dangerous airway or haemodynamic compromise. This study compared combination of midazolam and fentanyl against dexmedetomidine. Methods: Thirty two adults undergoing AFOI were randomly allocated into group MF (1mg midazolam and 1 µg/kg fentanyl) or group D (dexmedetomidine 1µg/kg over 10 minutes). Following standard airway topicalisation technique, the study drugs were administered and AFOI was performed. Results: The demographic data, patient comfort score, post intubation score, endoscopy and intubation times were comparable. The endoscopy was observed to be easy in all patients except 2 in MF group while intubation was easy in all (group D) versus 12 patients in group MF (P value 0.03). Significant haemodynamic response was observed in group MF while patients were more stable in group D. Postoperatively, 10 and two patients in groups D and MF respectively felt sedation was excellent (P value 0.02) while increased need for sedation was felt by one and three patients in groups D and MF respectively (P value 0.028). AFOI was remembered by six and one patients in groups D and MF respectively (P value 0.003). Two in group D and three in group MF had moderate discomfort. None experienced severe discomfort. The overall satisfaction score was comparable. There were no serious adverse events during the study. Conclusions: Dexmedetomidine provides better intubating conditions and patient satisfaction without adversely affecting the airway or haemodynamic stability during AFOI

Evaluating the outcomes of Sudanese septic patients who necessitated invasive mechanical ventilation

Background: Sepsis is a complicated disorder highlighted by the concurrent acceleration of coagulation and inflammation as a consequence of microbial assault. It has an important influence on hospitalized patients' need for mechanical ventilation and ICU admission. Objectives: The study's primary goal is to determine whether septic patients who require invasive mechanical ventilation fared well and whether their clinical condition improved or worsened after being connected to mechanical ventilation. The research also attempts to evaluate how additional medical interventions and other comorbidities affect the patient's prognosis. Material and methods: From November 2017 to May 2018, 160 patients with severe sepsis or septic shock were taken part in a prospective cross-sectional trial. The information was gathered using a straightforward, standardized questionnaire that included questions regarding the admission, progress, and outcome of septic patients who received mechanical ventilation in an intensive care unit. Results: 58 (36%) of the 160 patients were female, with 102 (64%) of the patients being male. In the age range of 60 to 70 years, 41 of them (or 25.6%) were detected. The majority of patients (59/369) had sepsis from a chest infection. Most of the patients, 87 (54.4%), got a combination of midazolam and fentanyl for sedation and analgesia. The majority of the patients, 85 (53%) had SIM/PS ventilation. Ultimately, 71 patients (44.4%) died, 80 patients (50%) were extubated, and 9 patients (5.6%) remained stationary and had a tracheostomy. Additionally, age, reasons, sedative type, and duration of stay were all substantially linked with the MV consequences (P 0.05). Conclusion: The better the outcome, the earlier septic patients who need IMV were identified and attached to IMV. It has been demonstrated that receiving IMV decreased mortality in septic patients by around 50%. The findings suggest that this intervention should be made more widely available and more reasonably priced by the authorities, along with the training of additional staff and the development of standard protocols for treating patients with such a condition. Focusing on health education awareness, establishing a focused outpatient department, and promptly screening patients who necessitate early referral to a tertiary care facility are the three most crucial aspects.

A COMPARISON OF EFFECTS OF DEXMEDETOMIDINE VERSUS MIDAZOLAM-FENTANYL ON POST-OPERATIVE RECOVERY, SEDATION, ANALGESIA AND HEMODYNAMIC PARAMETERS IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING MIDDLE EAR SURGERY UNDER LOCAL ANESTHESIA

Objective: The objective of the study was to compare the effects of dexmedetomidine versus midazolam-fentanyl on post-operative recovery, sedation, analgesia, and hemodynamic parameters in patients undergoing middle ear surgery under local anesthesia. Methods: Seventy-two patients were randomly divided into two equal groups - Group D (dexmedetomidine) and Group MF (midazolam and fentanyl). Intra operative heart rate, mean blood pressure, respiratory rate (RR), and SPO2 were recorded every 15 min for the 1st 30 min and then at every 30 min interval till the end of the surgery. In post-operative period, hemodynamic parameters, Aldrete score and pain were assessed at every 30 min till the patient was discharged from post anesthesia care unit (PACU). Post-operative sedation of the patient was checked at 1 h, 2 h, 4 h, and 8 h. Observations: Midazolam and fentanyl combination caused more fall in Aldrete scores as compared to dexmedetomidine initially, but readiness to discharge from PACU was similar in both the groups. Patients of MF group had significantly higher sedation scores at post op 2 h, but overall duration of sedation was similar in both the groups. Post-op pain was significantly more in MF group patients, as compared to dexmedetomidine patients at 1.5 h. More number of patients of MF group demanded rescue analgesia in PACU. Both group of drugs caused similar changes in hemodynamic parameters during surgery but in post-operative period, dexmedetomidine produced less decline in RR and oxygen saturation as compared to midazolam and fentanyl combination. Conclusion: The present study concluded that dexmedetomidine seems to be a better alternative to the combination of midazolam plus fentanyl sedation for patients undergoing middle ear surgeries done under local anesthesia due to better analgesia and lesser derangement of hemodynamic parameters in post-operative period.

Bilateral sensorineural hearing loss after opioid overdose in an adolescent male.

Opioid-induced hearing loss has been described as a form of sudden sensorineural hearing loss that can occur with chronic or acute opioid use. Here, we report a case of a 16-year-old patient with sudden onset hearing loss after opioid overdose requiring prolonged intubation with fentanyl sedation.

A Novel Sacral Erector Spinae Block Reduces Opioid Use After Gender-affirming Vaginoplasty

ABSTRACT Introduction Surgeries that affirm a person's gender identity can be the ultimate end to the distress associated with the discordance between one's gender identity and sex assigned at birth. Gender-affirming vaginoplasty (GAV) is increasingly being performed as a critical component of gender transition for individuals assigned male at birth transitioning to female. As GAV becomes offered at more centers around the United States (US), it is important to understand and consider surgical outcomes that are unique to this operation without losing sight of the larger context of surgical care in the US. In this vain, it is known that post-surgery prescriptions for opioids are a catalyst for opioid addiction in nearly 1 in 16 surgery patients; furthermore, individuals with gender dysphoria are twice as likely to abuse prescription opioids. Regional anesthetic blocks have been adopted in many urologic surgeries to reduce opioid consumption both during and after surgery. The sacral erector spinae plane block (ESP) is a novel block that can block the S2-S4 pain levels in addition to some of the lumbar plexus with benefits over a neuraxial/epidural block including being a superficial block, no significant motor weakness, reduced risk of epidural hematoma, and less risk of intraoperative hemodynamic lability. Objective We sought to review complications and opioid usage after a novel sacral erector spinae plane block as an adjunct for pain control in the perioperative period in patients undergoing robotic-assisted penile inversion vaginoplasty. Methods We reviewed all charts of patients undergoing robotic-assisted penile inversion vaginoplasty or vulvoplasty at our institution. On the morning of surgery, patients were placed in a prone position and administered midazolam and fentanyl for sedation. Median sacral crests and the erector spinae muscle/plane (ESP) were identified using ultrasound guidance, and 0.2% ropivacaine was injected at the S4 and S2 sacral crest. Results A total of 13 patients received the ESP block. There were no complications either in the immediate post-block period or after surgery related to the block. Mean opioid consumption in the first 24 hours after surgery, 24-48hr, 48-72hr, 72-96hr, and 96-120 hours after surgery were 29.1, 50.9, 46.0, 36.5, and 38.7 oral morphine equivalents (OMEs), respectively. There was a significantly reduced amount of OME consumption in the 24 hours after surgery compared to the 24-48 hour period (p=0.017). Conclusions Sacral erector spinae plane block is a safe and efficacious way to reduce opioid consumption in the postoperative period after gender-affirming robotic-assisted penile inversion vaginoplasty or vulvoplasty. Disclosure No

The effects of midazolam or propofol plus fentanyl on ICU mortality: a retrospective study based on the MIMIC-IV database.

BackgroundPatients in the intensive care unit (ICU) are often under stress and fail to cooperate well with invasive treatments. Analgesia and sedation are of great significance for reducing the suffering of patients and ensuring the application and effectiveness of treatment. For better clinical choice, we aimed to explore the effect of the combination of propofol + fentanyl or midazolam + fentanyl on the short-term prognosis of hospitalized patients in the ICU.MethodsAccording to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, we retrospectively included patients in the MIMIC-IV database receiving midazolam + fentanyl or propofol + fentanyl analgesic and sedative treatment using Structured Query Language (SQL) to extract clinical data from the MIMIC-IV database. The primary endpoint was the death rate within 28 days after the patient was admitted to the ICU. Doubly robust estimation was used to infer the relationship between sedation and analgesia and 28 days outcome. The gradient boosted model (GBM) was used to estimate the propensity score (PS) of the patient’s sedation and analgesia program, PS was used as the weight, and the inverse probabilities weighting (IPW) model was used to generate a weighted cohort.ResultsIn total, 4,188 cases were included, with 2,174 (51.9%) in the propofol group and 2,014 (48.1%) in the midazolam group. In the PS score matching cohort, the 28-day mortality of patients in the midazolam group was 30.8%, and the 28-day mortality of patients in the propofol group was 25.5%. The adjusted odds ratio (OR) value was 1.421 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.118–1.806, P<0.001]. Patients in the propofol group did not use vasoactive drugs for a longer period of time than the midazolam group, and patients in the propofol group received significantly more fluids than those in the midazolam group in the first three days after admission to the ICU.ConclusionsCompared with midazolam combined with fentanyl, propofol combined with fentanyl for sedation and analgesia can reduce the risk of short-term death in ICU patients.

Post-Discharge Effects and Parents' Opinions of Intranasal Fentanyl with Oral Midazolam Sedation in Pediatric Dental Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the post-discharge effects of oral midazolam with intranasal fentanyl sedation in pediatric patients who had dental treatment and to evaluate parents’ preference regarding sedation visits. Methods: A total of 32 uncooperative healthy pediatric patients aged 3–6 years old who met the inclusion criteria were included. In the first visit, one group received oral midazolam (0.7 mg/kg) with intranasal fentanyl (1 μg/kg) sedation (M/F) and the other group received oral midazolam with intranasal placebo (M), and in the second visit each group received the other type of sedation in a cross-over type. In this cross-sectional study, a post-discharge phone-call questionnaire was carried out 24 h after both sedation visits with the parents to evaluate the children’s behavior, function, balance, eating pattern, sleeping pattern, vomiting incidents, and any possible side effects, as well as parents’ satisfaction and preference. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to analyze the categorical variables, and the Chi-square test was performed to analyze the parents’ preference. Result: A total of 32 parents responded to the phone-call questionnaire after 64 sedation visits. All of them were mothers. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups with respect to recovery to normal function and balance, behavior, incidents of fever, vomiting, sleep disturbance, oversleeping, and adverse behavioral changes (p > 0.05). Children required a significantly longer amount of time until the first meal after M/F sedation (p = 0.04). No significant difference was found between parents’ preferences regarding the sedation visits (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Intranasal fentanyl added to oral midazolam sedation could have an effect on post-discharge adverse behavioral changes, prolonged sleeping, and prolonged recovery time. Children sedated with midazolam/fentanyl required a longer amount of time until the first meal. Vomiting and fever occurred similarly in both sedation regimens with a low incidence. There was no difference in parents’ preferences regarding the two sedation regimens.

Old Is (Not) Gold: Midazolam Monotherapy versus Midazolam Plus Fentanyl for Sedation during Cardiac Catheterization.

Objective We aimed to study the differences in perception of pain during cardiac catheterization with midazolam monotherapy compared to the current standard of midazolam plus fentanyl. Background Procedural sedation is important to ensure comfort and safety in patients undergoing left heart catheterization. Despite the widespread use of midazolam and fentanyl for procedural sedation, the effectiveness of this dual agent approach to sedation has never been studied in comparison to midazolam monotherapy. Methods A total of 129 patients undergoing sedation for outpatient elective cardiac catheterization were randomly assigned to either midazolam monotherapy (n = 69) or combination of midazolam and fentanyl (n = 60). The primary outcome was assessment of pain perception prior to discharge by patient completion of a pain questionnaire. Participants were asked if they experienced any pain during their procedure (yes/no) and, if yes, asked to rate their overall pain level using a 10-point Likert scale that ranged from 1 (minimal pain) to 10 (worst pain imaginable). Results Most patients (n = 94, 73%) reported no pain during their procedure. Patients sedated with midazolam monotherapy reported similar average pain scores compared to patients sedated with the combination of midazolam and fentanyl (1.1 vs. 1.1, p=0.95). Conclusions Among patients undergoing elective cardiac catheterization, no significant differences in pain scores were noted between sedation with midazolam alone compared to midazolam and fentanyl. Due to fentanyl's unfavorable interaction with P2Y12 agents, increased costs, and addiction potential, it is imperative that cardiologists revisit the role of effective procedural sedation with a single agent and avoid the use of fentanyl.

Comparison of Ketamine, Lignocaine, and Fentanyl on Dose Requirement of Propofol in Patients Undergoing ERCP: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Introduction: Propofol is the most common drug used for providing sedation due to its short duration of action and early recovery. However, it may be associated with hypotension, desaturations, and bradycardia and does not provide analgesia, due to which various adjuncts are used along with it. Lignocaine decreases the doses of propofol and inhalational agent when used for visceral surgeries. Thus, we conducted a study to compare the dose of propofol along with lignocaine, ketamine, and fentanyl for sedation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) procedure. Methods: A total of 105 patients were randomized into three groups. Sedation was provided by intravenous bolus injection of propofol 1 mg/kg in all patients followed by infusion of 0.5 mg/kg/hour. In group K bolus dose of intravenous ketamine was 0.5 mg/kg followed by infusion of 0.3 mg/kg/hour, in group L patients were given intravenous bolus of lignocaine 1.5 mg/kg followed by a infusion of 2 mg/kg/hour, in group F the matched volume of saline and 1 μ/kg fentanyl were administered. Intermittent boluses of propofol were given in all three groups in response to patients’ discomfort evidenced by grimaces, movement, or increase in heart rate or mean arterial pressure by >20% of baseline. The total dose of propofol consumed in the three groups was noted. Results: The total dose of propofol consumed and post-procedure abdominal pain was significantly higher in the fentanyl group but was comparable in lignocaine and ketamine groups. Conclusion: Lignocaine and ketamine were equally effective in deceasing propofol requirement and in preventing post-ERCP abdominal pain.

Регионарные методы обезболивания у детей с ДЦП при операциях на тазобедренном суставе

Patients with cerebral palsy (CP) experience pain through the lifespan. The hip joint is the main source of nociceptive input. Use of nonopioid adjuvant medication and regional anesthesia for hip surgeries can be an integral part of a perioperative strategy to decrease opioid use. Regional anesthesia can be delivered efficiently and safely for pediatric orthopedic patients. Objective To compare different regional anesthetic techniques used for multi-level lower limb orthopedic surgeries in children with moderate and severe CP. Material and methods A prospective randomized comparative clinical trial enrolled 101 CP patients who underwent unilateral multi-level lower limb surgery for spastic hip displacement or subluxation. According to a type of anesthesia used, patients were allocated into 3 groups: patients receiving prolonged epidural analgesia (PEA) and fentanyl for sedation (PEAF, n = 32); patients receiving PEA and benzodiazepine for sedation (PEAB, n = 37), and patients receiving a continuous femoral plus single-shot sciatic nerve block and benzodiazepines for sedation (FSNBB, n = 32). Hemodynamic findings, pain intensity, a need for opioids and additives (NSAIDs), the level of sedation and complication rate were evaluated. Results The use of NSAIDs (paracetamol) was significantly higher in PEAB and FSNBB groups as compared to PEAF patients with fentanyl administered, and there were no statistically significant differences in the level of pain recorded with the r-FLACC score among the study groups. There were no statistically significant differences in the level of sedation and agitation measured with the Ramsay Sedation Scale and Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) among the groups at early postoperative period. Apnoea as a complication was observed in a PEAF patient. Conclusion A continuous femoral plus single-shot sciatic nerve block and PEA added with NSAIDs (paracetamol) and benzodiazepines for sedation have shown the comparative effectiveness and safety for a perioperative analgesia of CP patients undergoing multi-level lower limb surgeries as compared to the use of PEA and fentanyl for sedation.

Airway Pressure and Respiratory Mechanics Variability with Different Body Positions in Mechanically Ventilated Critical Care Patients: A Prospective Comparative Clinical Study

Aim: This prospective comparative study aimed to investigate the effect of various body positions on changes of respiratory parameters mostly; the TV, oxygen saturation, airway pressure, and endotracheal tube cuff pressure in mechanically ventilated critical care patients. Background: Many patients who are admitted to the critical care unit require intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation for many reasons such as major trauma, medical causes, or post-operative major surgeries. Changing a patient’s position in the critical care unit is very important for the following benefits; to break through the routine monotonic delivery of mechanical ventilation, to favor the clearance of respiratory secretions, the prevention of pressure sores and ventilator acquired pneumonia, and finally the improvement in lung volume and oxygenation. Methods: A prospective, comparative study was carried out on 210 patients of both gender, aged between 21-70 years old admitted to ICU due to many reasons. After stabilization of patient condition and connection of monitors’ cables, supine position or semi setting position was chosen and this was documented in the patient’s chart. All patients were sedated to prevent them from breathing against the machine which causes the ETT cuff pressure and mean airway pressure to rise. Fentanyl sedation drug (Loading dose: 1–2 mic/kg/hour infused gradually. Maintenance dose: 1-4 mic/kg/hour) using continuous intravenous infusion typically in combination with Midazolam sedation (0.05-0.2 mg/kg/hour). The following parameters were recorded; tidal volume, mean airway pressure, PO2 /FIO2 , and ETT cuff pressure. Results: Our results show that about (58.1%) were male and (41.9%) were female. Concerning age, their mean was between (40.6 ± 8.9) years. Regarding diagnosis (50.5%) of patients were admitted with major trauma, (31.9%) due to medical causes, and (17.6%) admitted due to major chest and abdominal surgeries. The patient’s mean heart rate was (93.6 ± 7.5) b/m and the Mean Arterial Pressure was (67.7 ± 0.6)°C. Tables the Description, SOP2, Mean airway, and ETT cuff pressure of each body position in the study with the highest SPO2 98% and cuff pressure 19.2+41 in the prone position. The position checklist is illustrated in Table and Figure. The highest TV (520 ml) and PO2 /FIO2 ratio (410) were in prone poison and the lowest was in Lower Fowler position (460 ml and 320) respectively. Regarding outcome and ICU stay which were the best in both semi setting and prone position. Conclusion: Supine position (lying flat) or lateral position do not seem beneficial for critically ill patients in terms of respiratory mechanics. The semi-sitting position (with thorax angulation=30° from the horizontal plane) is associated with improvement of PO2/FIO2 , oxygenation, and tidal volume, and the effects of prone position on respiratory mechanics are very beneficial and this reflected on patient outcome and short ICU length of stay.

Patient Satisfaction of Propofol Versus Midazolam and Fentanyl Sedation During Colonoscopy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Colonoscopy is essential for optimal management of inflammatory bowel disease. However, many patients opt out due to unpleasantness related to this procedure. We investigated if Nurse Administered Propofol Sedation (NAPS) would improve patient satisfaction and attitude towards future colonoscopies. Randomized clinical trial of deep sedation with NAPS (n = 63) versus moderate midazolam and fentanyl sedation (n = 67). To assess the primary end point of patient satisfaction at discharge, we developed a Satisfaction Questionnaire comprising 13 items each rated by a 5-point Likert scale and with higher scores reflecting more positive outcomes (13-65 points). Fifty-six patients (43%) with ulcerative colitis, 48 (37%) with Crohn's disease, and 26 (20%) with high suspicion of inflammatory bowel disease were included. Most (88%) had previously had a colonoscopy and pre-procedure expectations were similar between groups. Patients receiving deep sedation had significantly higher satisfaction score (mean 60.1, SD 3.4) than those receiving moderate sedation (51.2, 8.4; P < .001). This was driven especially by less pain, more amnesia, sedation more to their liking, and better experience with the current than previous sedations. Importantly, these patients significantly more often preferred the same sedation for a future colonoscopy and were also inclined to accept more frequent colonoscopies. Assistance from another colonoscopist and disruption of the procedure due to pain occurred significantly more frequent in the moderate sedation group. There were no safety signals associated with NAPS. Patients with inflammatory bowel disease favor deep propofol sedation over moderate midazolam and fentanyl sedation. Availability of NAPS may facilitate patient adherence to endoscopy-based monitoring programs. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01934088.

Nurse-Administered Propofol Continuous Infusion Sedation: A New Paradigm for Gastrointestinal Procedural Sedation.

Nurse-Administered Propofol Continuous Infusion Sedation (NAPCIS) is a new nonanesthesia propofol delivery method for gastrointestinal endoscopy. NAPCIS is adopted from the computer-assisted propofol sedation (CAPS) protocol. We evaluated the effectiveness, efficiency, and safety of NAPCIS in low-risk subjects. Between December 2016 and July 2017, patients who underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy or colonoscopy with NAPCIS at our center were compared against 2 historical control groups of similar patients who had undergone procedures with CAPS or midazolam and fentanyl (MF) sedation. The mean age of the NAPCIS cohort (N = 3,331) was 55.2 years (45.8% male) for 945 esophagogastroduodenoscopies and 57.8 years (48.7% male) for 2,386 colonoscopies. The procedural success rates with NAPCIS were high (99.1%-99.2%) and similar to those seen in 3,603 CAPS (98.8%-99.0%) and 3,809 MF (99.0%-99.3%) controls. NAPCIS recovery times were shorter than both CAPS and MF (24.8 vs 31.7 and 52.4 minutes, respectively; P < 0.001). On arrival at the recovery unit, 86.6% of NAPCIS subjects were recorded as "Awake" compared with 82.8% of CAPS and 40.8% of MF controls (P < 0.001). Validated clinician and patient satisfaction scores were generally higher for NAPCIS compared with CAPS and MF subjects. For NAPCIS, there were only 4 cases of oxygen desaturation requiring transient mask ventilation and no serious sedation-related complications. These low complication rates were similar to those seen with CAPS (8 cases of mask ventilation) and MF (3 cases). NAPCIS seems to be a safe, effective, and efficient means of providing moderate sedation for upper endoscopy and colonoscopy in low-risk patients.