Of Alertness/Sedation Scale Research Articles

Observation on the Analgesic Effect of Different Doses of a Combination of Esketamine and Dexmedetomidine Administered for Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Discectomy: A Randomized, Double-Blind Controlled Trial.

Percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy (PETD) is an effective method for treating lumbar disc herniation, and is typically performed under local anesthesia. However, inadequate analgesia during the procedure remains a concern, prompting the search for a medication that can provide optimal pain control with minimal impact on the respiratory and circulatory systems. The aim of this study was to observe the effects of different doses of esketamine combined with dexmedetomidine on reducing visual analog scale (VAS) scores during surgical interventions. One hundred two patients who underwent PETD were randomly divided into a control group (group C: normal saline + dexmedetomidine), an E1 group (0.1 mg kg-1 esketamine + dexmedetomidine), and an E2 group (0.2 mg kg-1 esketamine + dexmedetomidine). The primary outcome was the maximum visual analogue scale (VAS) (score: 0 = no pain and 10 = worst pain) at six time points. The secondary outcomes included the Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale (OAA/S) score and mean arterial pressure (BP), heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR), and oxygen saturation (SpO2) at 11 time points. The incidence of adverse reactions during and 24 h after the operation and patient satisfaction with the anesthesia were also recorded. Compared with those in group C, the VAS scores of patients in groups E1 and E2 were lower at T6, T7, and T9 (P < 0.05). From T4 to T10, the OAA/S scores of the E1 and E2 groups were both lower than those of group C (P < 0.05), and at the T4-T6 time points, the OAA/S score of the E2 group was lower than that of group E1 (P < 0.05). At T4 and T5, the HR and BP of patients in groups E1 and E2 were greater than those in group C (P < 0.05). Compared with those in group C, the incidences of intraoperative illusion, floating sensation, postoperative dizziness, and hyperalgesia in groups E1 and E2 were significantly greater (P < 0.01). There was no significant difference in patient RR, SpO2, or postoperative satisfaction with anesthesia among the three groups (P > 0.05). The combination of esketamine and dexmedetomidine can reduce VAS scores during certain stages of this type of surgery; it has minimal impact on respiration and circulation. However, this approach is associated with increased incidences of postoperative dizziness and psychiatric side effects, which may also affect patients' compliance with surgical instructions from medical staff. Patient satisfaction was not greater with dexmedetomidine combined with esketamine than with dexmedetomidine alone. http://www.chictr.org.cn . Identifier: ChiCTR2300068206. Date of registration: 10 February 2023.

Comparison between patient state index, bispectral index, and clinical parameters for propofol induction in Indian patients: A prospective study.

Patient state index (PSI) and bispectral index (BIS) are depth of anesthesia monitors utilized for the dosage of propofol usage for induction. We compare PSI, BIS, and Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale (OAA/S) for propofol dose usage for induction. Seventy-four ASA I and II patients, aged 18-65 years scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy were included and divided into groups to titrate the drug dosage of propofol needed for induction of anesthesia, monitored by PSI (Group A), BIS (Group B), or clinical OAA/S (Group C). The drug dosage needed for induction was based on a PSI value of 25 ± 2, BIS value of 48 ± 2, and OAA/S value of ≤2 as the endpoint of induction in respective groups. Intraoperative hemodynamic variables and any complications were compared. The mean doses of propofol needed for induction were 2.23 mg/kg (Group A), 2.05 mg/kg (Group B), and 2.11 mg/kg (Group C). A significantly decreased dose was needed to achieve the desired end in Group B compared to Group A (P = 0.01). The hemodynamic variables such as heart rate, systolic blood pressure, and diastolic blood pressure among the three groups were comparable. The clinical method of titrating the dose of propofol for induction and anesthetic depth by the loss of verbal response is comparable to both BIS and PSI monitoring.

A Review of Current Literature of Interest to the Office-Based Anesthesiologist.

A Review of Current Literature of Interest to the Office-Based Anesthesiologist.

The Efficacy and Safety of Dexmedetomidine for Sedation During Surgery Under Epidural or Spinal Anesthesia: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study

Only a few studies have been reported on the use of dexmedetomidine for sedating surgical patients requiring epidural or spinal anesthesia. We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study at 12 hospitals in Japan. Adult patients were randomly allocated to receive an intravenous administration of placebo or dexmedetomidine at 0.067, 0.25, 0.5 or 1.0 µg/kg over 10 min after epidural or spinal anesthesia. All dexmedetomidine groups received dexmedetomidine 0.2-0.7 µg/kg/h to maintain an Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale (OAA/S) score of ≤ 4; however, propofol was administered to rescue patients who exceeded this score. Surgery was then started 15 min after study drug infusion in patients with OAA/S score of ≤ 4. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients not requiring rescue propofol to achieve and maintain an OAA/S score of ≤ 4. Of the 120 enrolled and randomized patients, 119 were treated the study: 22 received placebo and 97 received dexmedetomidine (23-25 patients per dose). Significantly more patients did not require propofol in the dexmedetomidine 0.5 and 1.0 µg/kg groups (68.0% and 80.0%, respectively) compared to the placebo group (22.7%) (P = 0.003 and P < 0.001, respectively). Common adverse events (AEs) were protocol-defined respiratory depression, bradycardia and hypotension. There was no significant difference in the incidence of AEs between the dexmedetomidine and the placebo groups. We concluded that loading doses of 0.5 and 1.0 µg/kg dexmedetomidine, followed by an infusion at a rate of 0.2-0.7 µg/kg/h, provide effective and well-tolerated sedation for surgical patients during epidural or spinal anesthesia.

The Efficacy and Safety of Dexmedetomidine for Procedural Sedation in Patients Receiving Local Anesthesia Outside the Intensive Care Unit: A Prospective, Double-Blind, Randomized Clinical Phase III Trial in Japan.

Few studies (in other countries than the US) have reported on the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine for sedation of patients undergoing surgical or medical procedures under local anesthesia without intubation outside the intensive care unit. We performed a randomized, double-blind study in Japan. Adult patients were randomly allocated to receive placebo, dexmedetomidine 0.5 μg/kg (DEX 0.5 group), or dexmedetomidine 1.0 μg/kg (DEX 1.0 group) over 10 min. Then, both dexmedetomidine groups received dexmedetomidine 0.2-0.7 μg/kg/h for maintaining an Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale (OAA/S) score of ≤ 4; however, propofol was administered to rescue patients whose score exceeded this value. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients who did not require rescue propofol to achieve and maintain an OAA/S score of ≤ 4. In total, 162 patients were included in the placebo (n = 53), DEX 0.5 (n = 53), and DEX 1.0 (n = 56) groups. Propofol was not required in significantly more patients in the dexmedetomidine 0.5 and 1.0 μg/kg groups (52.8% and 57.1%, respectively) compared with the placebo group (1.9%) (P < 0.001 for both). Common adverse events were protocol-defined hypotension, respiratory depression and bradycardia. The incidence of bradycardia was significantly higher in the DEX 0.5 (26.4%) and DEX 1.0 (30.4%) groups than in the placebo group (9.4%) (P = 0.041 and P = 0.008, respectively). We concluded that a loading dose of 0.5 or 1.0 μg/kg dexmedetomidine followed by infusion at a rate of 0.2-0.7 μg/kg/h provided effective and well-tolerated sedation in patients undergoing surgical or medical procedures under local anesthesia without intubation.

Efficacy of dexmedetomidine in combination with morphine for pain management in patients with cesarean section

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background &amp;amp; Objectives:&lt;/strong&gt; Intraspinal morphine shows a high analgesic efficacy but high incidence of adverse events and dexmedetomidine (Dex) improves anesthesic actions and anesthesia-related adverse reactions. This study compares the efficacy and safety of intravenous Dex and epidural morphine administration versus morphine alone for post-caesarean analgesia.&lt;/p&gt;&#x0D; &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods:&lt;/strong&gt; Eighty women receiving caesarean sections were assigned to the Dex-morphine combination group and morphine group. Subjects in both groups were given morphine after caesarean sections. After delivery, women in the combination group were given Dex, while subjects in the morphine group were given physiological saline. Serum cortisol, renin and potassium was measured before anesthesia, immediately and 24 hours after caesarean sections, and the visual analog scale (VAS) and observer&amp;rsquo;s assessment of alertness/sedation scale (OAA/S) scores were assessed 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours after caesarean sections. In addition, post-operative adverse events were recorded, and intraoperative urine volume and urine 24-hour volume after caesarean sections were measured.&lt;/p&gt;&#x0D; &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results: &lt;/strong&gt;Lower cortisol and renin was measured in the combination group than in the morphine group immediately after caesarean sections (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt; &amp;lt; 0.05), while no significant differences were found in serum potassium between two groups at each time point (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt; &amp;gt; 0.05). Lower VAS scores were measured in the combination group than in the morphine group 12 and 24 hours after caesarean sections (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt; &amp;lt; 0.05); however, no significant differences were seen in the OAA/S score (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt; &amp;gt; 0.05). Lower incidence of shivering and nausea/vomiting was seen in the combination group than in the morphine group after caesarean sections, and greater intraoperative urine volume and urine volume within 24 hours after caesarean sections were measured in the combination group than in the morphine group (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt; &amp;lt; 0.05).&lt;/p&gt;&#x0D; &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusion:&lt;/strong&gt; Dex-morphine combinations achieve a higher efficacy and lower incidence of adverse events than morphine alone for post-caesarean analgesia.&lt;/p&gt;

Propofol Target-Controlled Infusion in Emergency Department Sedation (ProTEDS): a multicentre, single-arm feasibility study

BackgroundProcedural sedation is a core skill of the emergency physician. Bolus administration of propofol is widely used in UK EDs. Titrated to an end point of sedation, it has a...

Effect of baseline cognitive impairment on association between predicted propofol effect site concentration and Bispectral index or sedation score

BackgroundThis study determined whether the relationship between predicted propofol effect site concentration (Ce) and observer’s assessment of alertness/sedation scale (OAA/S) or Bispectral Index (BIS) was similar comparing cognitively intact vs impaired patients undergoing hip fracture repair with spinal anesthesia and sedation.MethodsFollowing informed consent baseline mini-mental status exam (MMSE), Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) and geriatric depression scale (GDS) were obtained. Intraoperatively OAA/S, BIS, and propofol (timing and exact amounts) administered were recorded. Cerebrospinal fluid was collected for Alzheimer’s (AD) biomarkers. Mean Ce level (AvgCe) during surgery was calculated using the area under the Ce measurement series from incision to closure, divided by surgical time. Average OAA/S (AvgOAA/S), and BIS (AvgBIS) were similarly calculated. Pearson correlations of AvgCe with AvgOAA/S and AvgBIS were calculated overall and by CDR. Nonparametric locally weighted scatterplot smoothing (LOWESS) fits of AvgOAA/S and AvgBIS on AvgCe were produced, stratified by CDR. Multivariable regression incorporating baseline cognitive measurements or AD biomarkers assessed AvgOAA/S or AvgBIS associations with AvgCe.ResultsIn 186 participants AvgBIS and AvgOAA/S correlated with AvgCe (Pearson ρ = − 0.72; p < 0.0001 and Pearson ρ = − 0.81; p < 0.0001, respectively), and remained unchanged across CDR levels. Association patterns of AvgOAA/S or AvgBIS on AvgCe guided by LOWESS fits and modeled through regression, were similar when stratified by CDR (p = 0.16). Multivariable modeling found no independent effect on AvgBIS or AvgOAA/S by MMSE, CDR, GDS, or AD biomarkers after accounting for AvgCe.ConclusionsWhen administering sedation in conjunction with spinal anesthesia, cognitive impairment does not affect the relationship between predicted propofol AvgCe and AvgOAA/S or AvgBIS.

Efficacy of the bispectral index and Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale in monitoring sedation during spinal anesthesia: A randomized clinical trial.

ObjectiveThe bispectral index (BIS) has been used to monitor sedation during spinal anesthesia. We evaluated the correlation between BIS and the Observer’s Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale (OAA/S) in patients sedated with dexmedetomidine, propofol, or midazolam.MethodsThis prospective, randomized study included 46 patients scheduled for knee arthroplasty under spinal anesthesia with sedation. The patients were randomized to receive sedation with dexmedetomidine (n = 15), propofol (n = 15), or midazolam (n = 16). Correlation between BIS and OAA/S was assessed during sedation in the three groups.ResultsA linear correlation was observed between BIS and OAA/S, and there was no significant difference in BIS score between the groups during mild to moderate sedation status (OAA/S 3–5). During deep sedation (OAA/S 1–2), the BIS score in the midazolam group was significantly higher than that in the propofol and dexmedetomidine groups (74.4 ± 11.9 vs 67.7 ± 9.5 vs 62.6 ± 12.2).ConclusionsBIS values differed at the same level of sedation between different sedative agents. Objective sedation scores should therefore be used in combination with BIS values for the assessment of sedation levels during spinal anesthesia.

Effects of ultrasound-guided paravertebral nerve block combined with general anesthesia on hemodynamics and recovery in thoracic surgery

Objective To compare the effects of combined paravertebral nerve block and general anesthesia on hemodynamics and recovery period in thoracic surgery. Methods Eighty patients undergoing elective thoracic surgery with American Society of Anesthesiologists(ASA) Ⅱ or Ⅲ were randomly divided into 2 groups with 40 cases in each group. Paravertebral nerve block combined general anesthesia group (TPVB group) and traditional general anesthesia control group (C group). Two groups of patients were induced with the same procedure. Sevoflurane inhalation, propofol, and remifentanil were administered intravenously to maintain anesthesia. Hemodynamic parameters before surgery (T0), after induction (T1), 3 min after the operation (T2), after the end of surgery (T3) and the number of interventions requiring vasoactive drugs and dosage of analgesic drugs were measured. The time of anesthesia, operation time, and recovery time, extubation time and pain score were recorded. The recovery of consciousness was assessed by using Observer′s Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale (OAA/S) score. Results Systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and heart rate were significantly lower in TPVB group than in group C at the T2 timepoint. SBP and DBP were significantly higher, and heart rate was significantly lower in TPVB group than in group C at the T3 timepoint (P<0.05). The number of 4 vasoactive drugs and remifentanil dosage were significantly less in TPVB group than in group C (P<0.05). The time of blinking, extubating time and pain score of TPVB group were significantly better than those of group C (P<0.05). Postoperative opening the eyes by prompting time, extubating time, and pains cores were significantly better in TPVB group than in group C (P<0.05). The OAA/S scores before and after extubating were significantly higher in TPVB group than in group C (P<0.05). Conclusions Combination of paravertebral nerve block with general anesthesia leads to more stable hemodynamics, earlier time for extubation, and less postoperative pain scores in patients undergoing thoracic surgery. Key words: Paravertebral nerve block; Anesthesia, general; Hemodynamics

Propofol-sparing effect of different concentrations of dexmedetomidine : Comparison of gender differences.

BackgroundThe pharmacodynamics of propofol are closely linked to gender. Dexmedetomidine can decrease propofol needs during propofol anesthesia. The aim of this study was to compare the gender differences on the calculated effect site median effective concentration (EC50) of propofol for loss of consciousness (LOC) after pretreatment with different concentrations of dexmedetomidine.MethodsIn this study 60 male and 60 female patients were randomly allocated to receive dexmedetomidine at target plasma concentrations of 0.0 ng/ml (0.0 group), 0.4 ng/ml (0.4 group), 0.6 ng/ml (0.6 group) and 0.8 ng/ml (0.8 group). Propofol was administered after dexmedetomidine had been intravenously infused for 15 min. The propofol infusion was targeted to provide an initial effect-site concentration of 1.0 μg/ml, followed by increments by 0.2 μg/ml when the effect-site concentration and target concentration of propofol were in equilibrium until LOC was established, where LOC was defined by the observer’s assessment of alertness/sedation scale (OAA/S) score < 2.ResultsThe calculated effect-site EC50 of propofol LOC was higher in males than in females in the 0.0, 0.4, 0.6, and 0.8 groups (2.43 vs. 2.17, 1.99 vs. 1.82, 1.72 vs. 1.56 and 1.50 vs. 1.32 μg/ml, respectively, all p < 0.05). The hypnotic interaction between dexmedetomidine and propofol could be described with an additive model of pharmacodynamic interaction.ConclusionGender significantly influenced the calculated effect-site EC50 of propofol for LOC after pretreatment with different concentrations of intravenous dexmedetomidine. It was concluded that an additive interaction could describe the results seen. Thus, gender has to be considered when these drugs are co-administered.

Effects of patient-controlled intravenous analgesia using hydromorphone supplement with dexmedetomidine on patients undergoing transcatheter arterial chemoembolization

Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficiency of patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) using hydromorphone supplement with dexmedetomidine on patients undergoing transcatheter arterial chemoembolization. Methods: One hundred and eighty patients, age ranged from 40 to 65 years, body mass index from 18 to 25 kg/m(2,) ASA physical status Ⅱ-Ⅲ, who were scheduled for transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) under monitor anesthesia care (MAC) were randomly divided into 3 groups: hydromorphone group (H group), hydromorphone supplement with dexmedetomidine 1 μg/kg group (D1 group), hydromorphone supplement with dexmedetomidine 2 μg/kg group (D2 group), 60 patients in every group. All the groups of patients received PCIA pump, in the H group, the PCIA reagent was composed of 120 μg/kg hydromorphone and 5 mg tropisetron in 100 ml of normal saline. In comparison, PCIA regiment was composed of 120 μg/kg hydromorphone, 1 μg/kg dexmedetomidine and 5 mg tropisetron in 100 ml of normal saline in the D1 group, while 120 μg/kg hydromorphone, 2 μg/kg dexmedetomidine and 5 mg tropisetron in 100 ml of normal saline in the D2 group. The visual analogue scale (VAS) score, the observer's assessment of alertness/sedation scale (OAA/S) score, patients' satisfaction index, consumption of hydromorphone, the additional dose of morphine, the effective pressing times of PCIA and adverse reactions were recorded in detail at 0, 0.5, 1, 4, 12 and 24 hours after the patients underwent TACE. Results: The total consumptions of hydromorphone were (4.3±0.1), (4.1±0.1), and (3.8±0.1) mg in group H, D1, and D2, respectively, and the effective pressing times were 13±3, 6±2 and 2±1, the additional doses of morphine were (30±5), (15±3), and (3±1) mg, and adverse reaction rates were 45.0%, 28.3%, and 10.0%, respectively. The manifestations mentioned above in D2 group were significantly lower than those in group H and group D1 (P<0.05). Immediately and 5 min after embolization, at the end of surgery and 0.5, 1, 4, 12 and 24 h after surgery, the VAS scores in the D2 group were 1.9±0.2, 2.1±0.3, 1.8±0.4, 1.8±0.3, 1.7±0.3, 1.6±0.3, 1.3±0.2, 1.3±0.3, respectively, lower than those in group H and group D1 (P<0.05); The satisfaction index in D2 group at these times were 8.7±1.1, 8.9±0.8, 9.2±0.9, 9.0±0.7, 9.1±0.8, 9.0±0.6, 9.1±0.7, 9.2±0.9, respectively, higher than those in group H and group D1 (P<0.05). No breath depression happened in these three groups. Conclusion: The formula of hydromorphone combined with dexmedetomidine to patients undergoing TACE is greatly safe and efficient, with advantages in alleviating pain, reducing hydromorphone consumption and the incidence of adverse reaction of hydromorphone, and without breath depression.

Feasibility and validity of dexmedetomidine as a drug to induce sleep for fibrolaryngoscopy assay in patients with sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome: a randomized controlled trial

Objective To evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of dexmedetomidine (Dex) induced sleep for fibrolaryngoscopy in patients with sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome. Methods Eighty-eight inpatients with sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome (SAHS) were randomly divided into 2 groups: Propofol group (group P) and Dex group(group D). Each group had 44 cases. In group P, patients were intravenously injected with 2 mg/kg propofol, while in group D, 1 μg/kg dex was intravenously administered with a pump over 15 min. The MAP, HR, and SpO2 of patients were recorded before administration of the drug(T0), immediately after falling asleep(T1) and after fibrolaryngoscopy operation(T2), and by the end of fibrolaryngoscopy assay(T3). Additional parameters were also analyzed, such as, time to fall asleep, observer's assessment of alertness/sedation scale(OAA/S), time of endoscopic examination, time to wake up after examination, the number of patients required mask ventilation, the satisfaction of patients and examiners, and false-positive cases of fibrolaryngoscopy assay. Results Compared with patients in group D, patients in group P fell asleep faster, exhibited lower MAP and SpO2 immediately after falling asleep (P<0.05), but longer time to finish fibrolaryngoscopy and longer time to wake up after examination. More group P patients required mask ventilation and needed further assessment to exclude false-positive signs in fibrolaryngoscopy. Conclusions Dex may be a better intervention to induce sleep for fibrolaryngoscopy assay of sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome in term of safety and validity of the examination. Key words: Dexmedetomidine; Sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome; Fibrolaryngoscopy

Awake orotracheal fibre-optic intubation: Comparison of two different doses of dexmedetomidine on intubation conditions in patients undergoing cervical spine surgery.

Background and Aims:Awake fibre-optic intubation (AFOI) is an integral part of anaesthetic management of difficult airways. Conscious sedation is essential to assist AFOI. This study compared two different doses of dexmedetomidine in combination with topical spray and airway blocks for awake orotracheal fibre-optic intubation in patients undergoing elective cervical spine surgery with rigid cervical collar in situ.Methods:A randomized, prospective, comparative study design was conducted in sixty patients divided into two groups: Group (L) (n = 30) patients received low dose of dexmedetomidine (0.5 μg/kg) along with airway blocks and Group (H) (n = 30) patients received standard dose of dexmedetomidine (1 μg/kg) along with airway blocks. Both the groups received dexmedetomidine infusion over 10 min followed by airway block. Quantitative data were analysed by applying Student's t-test whereas qualitative data were analysed with Chi-square test. The objectives were to compare patients' Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation scale (OAA/S) as primary outcome and other variables such as endoscopy, intubation condition, tolerance and haemodynamic stability among low and standard doses of dexmedetomidine.Results:Group H had more favourable OAA/S score than that of Group L, but endoscopy and intubation time, patient tolerance, vocal cord and limb movement and satisfaction score did not differ significantly between the groups. There were no significant haemodynamic differences between the two groups.Conclusion:The 0.5 μg/kg dose of dexmedetomidine was found optimal and effective in combination with topical spray and airway blocks for awake orotracheal fibre-optic intubation for patients undergoing elective cervical spine surgery.

Effect of Different Dosages of Intravenous Midazolam Premedication on Patients Undergoing Head and Neck Surgeries- A Double Blinded Randomized Controlled Study.

Benzodiazepines primarily acts on the central nervous system. Most patients are extremely anxious in the pre-operative period. Excessive anxiety adversely influences anaesthetic induction and often leads to functional impairment and poor recovery after surgery. To determine whether amnesia, anxiety, sedation and cardio respiratory symptoms are affected while administering two different doses of intravenous midazolam (0.02 mg/kg & 0.06 mg/kg). Two forty patients posted for head and neck surgeries were involved in this double blinded prospective randomised controlled trial. The patients were randomized into two main groups, Group 1 receiving 0.02 mg/kg and Group 2 receiving 0.06 mg/kg midazolam intravenously as premedication. Visual recognition and recall were tested using eight laminated A4 size posters pre-operatively and four further images were shown at the postoperative interview. Anxiety was evaluated by a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and sedation depth was determined by the Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale (OAAS) scale. Vital signs including heart rate, respiratory rate, mean blood pressure and arterial oxygen saturation (SpO2) were monitored. Statistical analysis was done using paired Student's t-test and Chi-square test. VAS scores were lower in Group 2 (0.06 mg/kg) than in Group 1 (0.02 mg/kg) at T15 (15 minutes after the injection of midazolam). Comparison of OAAS scores among Group 1 and Group 2 showed that more patients in Group 1 were alert at T15 compared to Group 2. Recall of events was significantly lower in Group 2 compared to Group 1. There was no significant statistical variation in haemodynamic parameters between the groups except for decreased diastolic blood pressure and room air saturation in Group 2. A higher dosage of midazolam improves the quality of anxiolysis and sedation with lesser rates of intraoperative recall and maintains haemodynamic stability.

Effect of Different Sedation Regimes on Cognitive Functions in Colonoscopy.

Aim:To compare the effects of propofol/remifentanil and meperidine/midazolam on postprocedure cognitive function.Materials and methods:A total of 100 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score I to III patients undergoing elective colonoscopy were taken into the study and divided into two groups. Exclusion criteria were patient refusal, mini mental test (MMT) <26, The Amsterdam Preoperative Anxiety and Information Scale (APAIS) >10, advanced cardiopulmonary or psychiatric disease, chronic alcohol abuse, morbid obesity, and known allergy to study drugs. In group MM, 2 mg midazolam and 20 mg meperidine was given intravenously and additional 1 to 2 mg midazolam and 20 mg meperidine (with a maximum total of 5 mg midazolam and 50 mg meperidine) was given when bispectral index (BIS) was >80. In group RP, 100 μg/kg/minute propofol infusion and 1 μg/kg remifentanil bolus was administered and additional 0.5 μg/kg remifentanil bolus was given when BIS was >80. Observer’s Assessment of Alertness/Sedation scale (OAA/S) and Facial Pain Score (FPS) values were recorded. Cognitive function was measured by Trieger Dot Test (TDT) and Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST).Results:The study was concluded with 100 patients. Heart rate was slower and BIS values were lower in group RP throughout the procedure. Blood pressure was lower in group RP without clinical significance. There was no difference concerning recovery time and visual analog scores (VASs). In group MM, TDT scores were higher and DSST scores were lower. Satisfaction was higher in group RP.Conclusion:Propofol/remifentanil combination is better than meperidine/midazolam combination concerning cognitive function in sedation for colonoscopy.Clinical significance:The addition of BIS monitorization to evaluate the depth of sedation and the negative effects of midazolam meperidine combination on postprocedural cognitive function.How to cite this article: Ekmekci P, Erkan G, Yilmaz H, Kazbek BK, Koksoy UC, Doganay G, Tüzüner F. Effect of Different Sedation Regimes on Cognitive Functions in Colonoscopy. Euroasian J Hepato-Gastroenterol 2017;7(2):158-162.

Preoperative mannitol infusion improves perioperative cerebral oxygen saturation and enhances postoperative recovery after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Objectives:To test the effect of preoperative mannitol infusion on perioperative decreased cerebral oxygen saturation (rSO2) during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.Methods:Forty patients scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy were enrolled in this study conducted at Dammam Hospital of the University, Dammam, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia from December 2013 to June 2014. Patients received either 0.5 g/kg of 20% intravenous mannitol infusion over 10 minutes before induction of anesthesia (group M), or an equal volume of normal saline instead (group C). Primary outcome variable was rSO2. Other variables included extubation time, clinical assessment of consciousness recovery using the Modified Observer’s Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale (OAA/S), and the mini-mental state examination (MMSE) for cognitive evaluation.Results:Anesthesia induction increased rSO2 in both groups. Pneumoperitoneum decreased rSO2 in group C, but not in group M. This drop in rSO2 in the group C reached its maximum 30 minutes after extubation, and was significantly less than the preinduction value. Time to extubation in group M was significantly shorter compared to group C (p=0.007). The OAAS in group M at 10 min after extubation was significantly higher compared to group C. No differences were found between the 2 groups in cognitive function as measured by MMSE score.Conclusion:Preoperative mannitol infusion maintains perioperative rSO2 during laparoscopic cholecystectomy and shortens extubation time with earlier resurgence of OAAS.

A comparison of propofol vs. dexmedetomidine for sedation, haemodynamic control and satisfaction, during esophagogastroduodenoscopy under conscious sedation

Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is a common diagnostic procedure which requires sedation for most patients. We undertook a prospective, randomized, double-blinded study to compare the effect of propofol vs. dexmedetomidine on the sedation of outpatients during EGD. Prior to the procedure, outpatients received either propofol at 0·6 mg/kg, with additional doses of 10-20 mg until the Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale (OAA/S) score reached 2-4, or dexmedetomidine at a loading dose of 1 μg/kg over a 10-min period followed by a 0·5 μg/kg/h infusion until the OAA/S score reached 2-4. Vital signs, sedation level, adverse events, patients' and endoscopist's satisfaction score, and an evaluation of the recovery time were assessed. Negligible haemoglobin oxygen saturation (SpO2 ) and respiratory rate variations were observed in both groups, although respiratory depression occurred in two cases (5·9%) in the propofol group. Mean arterial pressure (MAP) in the propofol group decreased during the procedure compared with baseline (P < 0·05) and was also lower in comparison with the dexmedetomidine group (P < 0·05). Heart rate (HR) decreased after the loading dose in the dexmedetomidine group (P < 0·05). More patients in the propofol group underwent deeper sedation at the beginning of the procedure (P < 0·05), although the recovery time was comparable between the two groups (P > 0·05). Three cases (9·1%) in the dexmedetomidine group were delayed because of dizziness, bradycardia and nausea. There was a higher satisfaction score among patients in the propofol group (P < 0·05), although the endoscopist's satisfaction score was comparable between the two groups (P > 0·05). Propofol and dexmedetomidine provide a relatively satisfactory level of sedation without clinically notable adverse effects during EGD. In addition, patients preferred propofol administration for the deeper sedation and rapid recovery, and dexmedetomidine exhibited minimal adverse effects on respiratory function.

Effects of oral premedication on cognitive status of elderly patients undergoing cardiac catheterization.

BackgroundSedatives and analgesics are often administered to achieve conscious sedation for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. Appropriate concerns have been raised regarding post procedure delirium related to peri-procedural medication in the elderly. The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of premedication on new onset delirium and procedural care in elderly patients.MethodsPatients ≥ 70 years old and scheduled for elective cardiac catheterization were randomly assigned to receive either oral diphenhydramine and diazepam (25 mg/5 mg) or no premedication. All patients underwent a mini mental state exam and delirium assessment using confusion assessment method prior to the procedure and repeated at 4 h after the procedure and prior to discharge. Patients' cooperation during the procedure and ease of post-procedure were measured using Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The degree of alertness was assessed immediately on arrival to the floor, and twice hourly afterwards using Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale (OAA/S).ResultsA total of 93 patients were enrolled. The mean age was 77 years, and 47 patients received premedication prior to the procedure. None of the patients in either group developed delirium. Patients' cooperation and the ease of procedure was greater and pain medication requirement less both during and after the procedure in the pre-medicated group (P < 0.05 for both). Nurses reported an improvement with patient management in the pre-medicated group (P = 0.08).ConclusionsIn conclusion, premedication did not cause delirium in elderly patients undergoing cardiac catheterization. The reduced pain medication requirement, perceived procedural ease and post procedure management favors premedication in elderly patients undergoing cardiac catheterization.

Dexmedetomidine Analgesia Effects in Patients Undergoing Dental Implant Surgery and Its Impact on Postoperative Inflammatory and Oxidative Stress.

The aim of the study was to determine whether or not dexmedetomidine- (DEX-) based intravenous infusion in dental implantation can provide better sedation and postoperative analgesia via suppressing postoperative inflammation and oxidative stress. Sixty patients were randomly assigned to receive either DEX (group D) or midazolam (group M). Recorded variables were vital sign (SBP/HR/RPP/SpO2/RR), visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores, and observer's assessment of alertness/sedation scale (OAAS) scores. The plasma levels of interleukin-6 (IL-6), tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α), antioxidant superoxide dismutase (SOD), and the lipid peroxidation product malondialdehyde (MDA) were detected at baseline and after 2, 4, and 24 h of drug administration. The VAS pain scores and OAAS scores were significantly lower for patients in group D compared to group M. The plasma levels of TNF-α, IL-6, and MDA were significantly lower in group D patients than those in group M at 2 h and 4 h. In group M, SOD levels decreased as compared to group D at 2 h and 4 h. The plasma levels of TNF-α, IL-6, and MDA were positively correlated with VAS pain scores while SOD negatively correlated with VAS pain scores. Therefore, DEX appears to provide better sedation during office-based artificial tooth implantation. DEX offers better postoperative analgesia via anti-inflammatory and antioxidation pathway.