...
首页> 外文期刊>Endoscopy: Journal for Clinical Use Biopsy and Technique >A prospective, randomized controlled trial of sedation vs. no sedation in outpatient diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.
【24h】

A prospective, randomized controlled trial of sedation vs. no sedation in outpatient diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.

机译:门诊上消化道内镜检查中镇静与不镇静的前瞻性,随机对照试验。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: The majority of gastrointestinal endoscopists in the United Kingdom routinely use intravenous sedation prior to diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. We conducted a prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial to help determine whether the use of sedation influences the duration, safety, and tolerance of diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adults referred for outpatient diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy were invited to participate in the study. Patients with a history of previous upper gastrointestinal endoscopy or dysphagia were excluded. Patients were prospectively randomized to sedation with intravenous midazolam (5 mg for those under 65 years or 3 mg for those aged 65 or more), or no sedation. All patients were given topical oropharyngeal anaesthesia with 100 mg lignocaine spray. Outcome measures included duration of procedure, ease of procedure (as assessed by medical and nursing staff), tolerance of procedure (as assessed by patients), and incidence of complications. RESULTS: 100 patients were randomized to receive sedation or no sedation. The two groups were well matched for age, sex, and number of biopsies taken during the procedure. In the non-sedated group, the duration of endoscopy tended to be reduced and the procedure tended to be easier according to the endoscopists' assessment (neither of these observations was significant). The sedated group reported greater comfort for the procedure (P < 0.001), although both groups tolerated the procedure well, and the majority in both groups preferred to have any future procedure repeated in the same manner. There were no serious adverse events in either group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients who are willing to contemplate upper gastrointestinal endoscopy without sedation, the avoidance of sedation may lead to faster and easier endoscopies, without any increased risk of procedural difficulties or adverse events.
机译:背景和研究目的:英国的大多数胃肠内镜医师在诊断上消化道内镜之前通常使用静脉镇静剂。我们进行了一项前瞻性,随机对照临床试验,以帮助确定镇静剂的使用是否会影响诊断性上消化道内镜的持续时间,安全性和耐受性。患者与方法:邀请接受门诊上消化道内镜检查的成人参加这项研究。既往有上消化道内镜检查或吞咽困难病史的患者被排除在外。前瞻性将患者随机分配接受静脉注射咪达唑仑镇静(65岁以下者5 mg,65岁以上者3 mg)或无镇静作用。所有患者均接受100 mg木质素卡因喷雾剂进行口咽局部麻醉。结果指标包括手术时间,手术的容易程度(由医护人员评估),手术的耐受性(由患者评估)以及并发症发生率。结果:100例患者被随机接受镇静或无镇静。两组在年龄,性别和手术过程中进行的活检次数方面均很匹配。根据内镜医师的评估,在非镇静组中,内窥镜检查的持续时间趋于减少,且操作过程趋于容易(这些观察结果均无统计学意义)。镇静剂组报告对手术的舒适性更高(P <0.001),尽管两组患者对手术的耐受性都很好,并且两组中的大多数人都希望以后以相同的方式重复进行任何手术。两组均无严重不良事件。结论:在愿意考虑不使用镇静剂的上消化道内窥镜检查的患者中,避免使用镇静剂可能会导致内镜检查更快,更容易,而不会增加手术困难或不良事件的风险。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号