Detailed Information

Cited 0 time in webofscience Cited 0 time in scopus
Metadata Downloads

Assessing the Stability and Safety of Procedure during Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection According to Sedation Methods: A Randomized Trialopen access

Authors
Park, Chan HyukShin, SeokyungLee, Sang KilLee, HyukLee, Yong ChanPark, Jun ChulYoo, Young Chul
Issue Date
Mar-2015
Publisher
PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
Citation
PLOS ONE, v.10, no.3, pp.1 - 14
Indexed
SCIE
SCOPUS
Journal Title
PLOS ONE
Volume
10
Number
3
Start Page
1
End Page
14
URI
https://scholarworks.bwise.kr/hanyang/handle/2021.sw.hanyang/157827
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0120529
ISSN
1932-6203
Abstract
Background Although endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is routinely performed under sedation, the difference in ESD performance according to sedation method is not well known. This study attempted to prospectively assess and compare the satisfaction of the endoscopists and patient stability during ESD between two sedation methods. Methods One hundred and fifty-four adult patients scheduled for ESD were sedated by either the IMIE (intermittent midazolam/propofol injection by endoscopist) or CPIA (continuous propofol infusion by anesthesiologist) method. The primary endpoint of this study was to compare the level of satisfaction of the endoscopists between the two groups. The secondary endpoints included level of satisfaction of the patients, patient's pain scores, events interfering with the procedure, incidence of unintended deep sedation, hemodynamic and respiratory events, and ESD outcomes and complications. Results Level of satisfaction of the endoscopists was significantly higher in the CPIA Group compared to the IMIE group (IMIE vs. CPIA; high satisfaction score; 63.2% vs. 87.2%, P = 0.001). The incidence of unintended deep sedation was significantly higher in the IMIE Group compared to the CPIA Group (IMIE vs. CPIA; 17.1% vs. 5.1%, P = 0.018) as well as the number of patients showing spontaneous movement or those requiring physical restraint (IMIE vs. CPIA; spontaneous movement; 60.5% vs. 42.3%, P = 0.024, physical restraint; 27.6% vs. 10.3%, P = 0.006, respectively). In contrast, level of satisfaction of the patients were found to be significantly higher in the IMIE Group (IMIE vs. CPIA; high satisfaction score; 85.5% vs. 67.9%, P = 0.027). Pain scores of the patients, hemodynamic and respiratory events, and ESD outcomes and complications were not different between the two groups. Conclusion Continuous propofol and remifentanil infusion by an anesthesiologist during ESD can increase the satisfaction levels of the endoscopists by providing a more stable state of sedation.
Files in This Item
Appears in
Collections
서울 의과대학 > 서울 내과학교실 > 1. Journal Articles

qrcode

Items in ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Related Researcher

Researcher Park, Chan Hyuk photo

Park, Chan Hyuk
COLLEGE OF MEDICINE (DEPARTMENT OF INTERNAL MEDICINE)
Read more

Altmetrics

Total Views & Downloads

BROWSE