Detailed Information

Cited 8 time in webofscience Cited 10 time in scopus
Metadata Downloads

Efficacy and safety of etomidate-midazolam for screening colonoscopy in the elderly: A prospective double-blinded randomized controlled study

Authors
Lee, Jung MinMin, GeehoLee, Jae MinKim, Seung HanChoi, Hyuk SoonKim, Eun SunKeum, BoraJeen, Yoon TaeChun, Hoon JaiLee, Hong SikKim, Chang DuckPark, Jong-JaeLee, Beom JaeChoi, Seong JiKim, Woojung
Issue Date
May-2018
Publisher
LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
Keywords
colonoscopy; elderly; etomidate; midazolam; sedation
Citation
MEDICINE, v.97, no.20
Indexed
SCIE
SCOPUS
Journal Title
MEDICINE
Volume
97
Number
20
URI
https://scholarworks.korea.ac.kr/kumedicine/handle/2020.sw.kumedicine/3588
DOI
10.1097/MD.0000000000010635
ISSN
0025-7974
Abstract
Background and aims:Recent studies have shown that etomidate is associated with fewer serious adverse events than propofol and has a noninferior sedative effect. We investigated whether etomidate-midazolam is associated with fewer cardiopulmonary adverse events and has noninferior efficacy compared to propofol-midazolam for screening colonoscopy in the elderly.Methods:A prospective, single-center, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial was performed. Patients aged over 65 years who were scheduled to undergo screening colonoscopy were randomized to receive either etomidate or propofol based on midazolam. The primary outcome was all cardiopulmonary adverse events. The secondary outcomes were vital sign fluctuation (VSF), adverse events disturbing the procedure, and sedation-related outcomes.Results:The incidence of cardiopulmonary adverse events was higher in the propofol group (72.6%) than in the etomidate group (54.8%) (P=.040). VSF was detected in 17 (27.4%) and 31 (50.0%) patients in the etomidate and propofol groups, respectively (P=.010). The incidence rate of adverse events disturbing the procedure was significantly higher in the etomidate group (25.8%) than in the propofol group (8.1%) (P=.008). Moreover, the incidence rate of myoclonus was significantly higher in the etomidate group (16.1%) than in the propofol group (1.6%) (P=.004). There was no statistical significance between the 2 groups with respect to sedation times and sedation-related outcomes including patients' and endoscopist's satisfaction. In the multivariate analysis, the etomidate group had significantly low odds ratio (OR) associated with VSF (OR: 0.407, confidence interval: 0.179-0.926, P=.032).Conclusions:We recommend using etomidate-midazolam in patients with high ASA score or vulnerable to risk factors; propofol-midazolam may be used as a guideline in patients with low ASA score.
Files in This Item
There are no files associated with this item.
Appears in
Collections
2. Clinical Science > Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology > 1. Journal Articles

qrcode

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

Related Researcher

Researcher Chun, Hoon Jai photo

Chun, Hoon Jai
Anam Hospital (Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Anam Hospital)
Read more

Altmetrics

Total Views & Downloads

BROWSE