Dataset Information

Impact of propofol sedation versus opioid/benzodiazepine sedation on colonoscopy outcomes: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: Background and study aims? Choice of sedation (propofol vs opioid/benzodiazepine) has been studied in the literature and has shown variable outcomes. The majority of recent studies have evaluated propofol sedation (PS) versus opioids, benzodiazepines, or a combination of both. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing PS to other sedation methods to assess the impact on colonoscopy outcomes. Methods? Multiple databases were searched and studies of interest were extracted. Primary outcome of the study was adenoma detection rate (ADR) and secondary outcomes included polyp detection rate (PDR), advanced adenoma detection rate (AADR), and cecal intubation rate (CIR). Results? A total of 11 studies met the inclusion criteria with a total of 177,016 patients (148,753 and 28,263 in the opioids/benzodiazepine group and PS group, respectively). Overall, ADR (RR: 1.07, 95?% CI 0.99-1.15), PDR (RR: 1.01, 95?% CI 0.93-1.10), and AADR (RR: 1.17, 95?% CI 0.92-1.48) did not improve with the use of PS. The CIR was slightly higher for propofol sedation group (RR 1.02, 95?% CI 1.00-1.03). Conclusion? Based on our analysis, PS and opioid/benzodiazepine sedation seem to have comparable ADR. Our results do not favor use of a particular sedation method and the choice of sedation should be individualized based on patient preference, risk factors and resource availability.

SUBMITTER: Aziz M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7247890 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Impact of propofol sedation versus opioid/benzodiazepine sedation on colonoscopy outcomes: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

Aziz Muhammad M Weissman Simcha S Fatima Rawish R Khan Zubair Z Mohan Babu P BP Mehta Tej I TI Lee-Smith Wade W Hassan Ammar A Sciarra Michael M Nawras Ali A Adler Douglas G DG

Endoscopy international open 20200525 6

<b>Background and study aims </b> Choice of sedation (propofol vs opioid/benzodiazepine) has been studied in the literature and has shown variable outcomes. The majority of recent studies have evaluated propofol sedation (PS) versus opioids, benzodiazepines, or a combination of both. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing PS to other sedation methods to assess the impact on colonoscopy outcomes. <b>Methods </b> Multiple databases were searched and studies of inte ...[more]

PMID: 32490152

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTo improve patient tolerability and satisfaction as well as minimize complications, procedural sedation has been widely used. Propofol is the most widely used agent for induction of anesthesia and sedation by anesthesiologists. With a different mechanism compared to propofol, remimazolam is a new short-acting GABA-A receptor agonist. It is an ester-based benzodiazepine. This meta-analysis aims to clarify the efficacy and safety of remimazolam versus propofol for procedure sedation.MethodsElectronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing efficacy or safety of remimazolam versus propofol. Meta-analysis were conducted using RStudio with "metafor" package with random-effects model.ResultsA total of twelve RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled results demonstrated that patients with remimazolam for procedural sedation had lower risk of bradycardia (OR 0.28, 95% CI [0.14-0.57]), hypotension (OR 0.26, 95% CI [0.22-0.32]), and respiratory depression (OR 0.22, 95% CI [0.14-0.36]). There was no difference in the risk of developing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (OR 0.65, 95% CI [0.15-2.79]) and dizziness (OR 0.93, 95% CI [0.53-1.61]) between the remimazolam and propofol groups. Using remimazolam for procedural sedation is significantly associated with less injection pain compared to propofol (OR 0.06, 95% CI [0.03-0.13]). Regarding the sedation efficacy, there was no difference in sedation success rate or time to loss of consciousness, recover and discharge between the remimazolam and the propofol groups.ConclusionsBased on our meta-analysis, patients receiving procedural sedation with remimazolam had lower risk of bradycardia, hypotension, respiratory depression and injection pain compared with propofol. On the other hand, there was no difference in sedation success rate, risk of PONV, dizziness, time to LOC, recovery and discharge between these two sedatives.Prospero registration numberCRD42022362950.

Project description:Background: Ciprofol (HSK3486) is a novel intravenous anesthetic agent that bears structural similarity to propofol and displays favorable pharmacodynamic characteristics such as rapid onset and offset. The meta-analysis aimed at comparing the efficacy and safety of ciprofol versus propofol in clinical practice. Methods: Medline, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library were searched from inception to April 2023. The primary outcome was success rate of sedation/anesthetic induction and differences in sedation/induction time. The secondary outcomes included risks of hemodynamic instability, respiratory complications, and pain on injection, as well as recovery profiles, satisfaction score, and top-up dose requirement. Results: Twelve RCTs (sedation: n = 6, anesthetic induction, n = 6, all conducted in China) involving 1,793 patients (age: 34-58 years) published from 2021 to 2023 were analyzed. Pooled results revealed no differences in success rate [risk ratio (RR) = 1, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.99 to 1.01, I2 = 0%, 1,106 patients, p = 1] and time required for successful anesthetic induction/sedation [mean difference (MD) = 7.95 s, 95% CI: -1.09 to 16.99, I2 = 97%, 1,594 patients, p = 0.08]. The risks of top-up dose requirement (RR = 0.94, p = 0.48), cardiopulmonary complications [i.e., bradycardia (RR = 0.94, p = 0.67), tachycardia (RR = 0.83, p = 0.68), hypertension (RR = 1.28, p = 0.2), hypoxemia/pulmonary depression (RR = 0.78, p = 0.24)], and postoperative nausea/vomiting (RR = 0.85, p = 0.72), as well as discharge time (MD = 1.39 min, p = 0.14) and satisfaction score (standardized MD = 0.23, p = 0.16) did not differ significantly between the two groups. However, the ciprofol group had lower risks of hypotension (RR = 0.85, p = 0.02) and pain on injection (RR = 0.17, p < 0.00001) than the propofol group. The time to full alertness was statistically shorter in the propofol group (i.e., 0.66 min), but without clinical significance. Conclusion: Our results demonstrated similar efficacy between ciprofol and propofol for sedation and anesthetic induction, while ciprofol was associated with lower risks of hypotension and pain on injection. Future studies are warranted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ciprofol in pediatric or the elderly populations. Systematic Review Registration: (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/), identifier (CRD42023421278).

Project description:ObjectiveUnderstanding the effects of benzodiazepines (BZDs) on maternal/fetal health remains incomplete despite their frequent use. This article quantifies the effects of antenatal BZD exposure on delivery outcomes.MethodsData sourcesMedline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched till June 30, 2018.Study selectionEnglish-language cohort studies comparing antenatal BZD exposure to an unexposed group on any delivery outcome were eligible. In all, 23,909 records were screened, 56 studies were assessed, and 14 studies were included.Data extractionTwo reviewers independently assessed quality and extracted data. Estimates were pooled using random effects meta-analysis. Sub-analyses examined several potential moderators including timing of exposure.ResultsThere were 9 outcomes with sufficient data for meta-analysis. Antenatal BZD exposure was significantly associated with increased risk of 6 outcomes initially: spontaneous abortion (pooled odds ratio = 1.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.43 to 2.42), preterm birth (1.96; 95% CI, 1.25 to 3.08), low birth weight (2.24; 95% CI, 1.41 to 3.88), low Apgar score (2.19; 95% CI, 1.94 to 2.47), Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) admission (2.61; 95% CI, 1.64 to 4.14), and induced abortion (2.04; 95% CI, 1.23 to 3.40). There was significant heterogeneity between studies for most outcomes without consistent moderators. Birth weight (mean difference [MD]: -151.35 g; 95% CI, -329.73 to 27.03), gestational age (-0.49 weeks; 95% CI, -1.18 to 0.19), and small for gestational age (SGA; 1.42; 95% CI, 1.00 to 2.01) did not show significant associations although after adjusting for publication bias, gestational age, and SGA became significant, totaling 8 significant outcomes.ConclusionsAntenatal BZD exposure appears to be statistically associated with increased risk of several adverse perinatal outcomes. Although confounds cannot be ruled out, NICU admission does appear clinically relevant and consistent with the antidepressant literature.

Dataset Information

Impact of propofol sedation versus opioid/benzodiazepine sedation on colonoscopy outcomes: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

Publications

Impact of propofol sedation versus opioid/benzodiazepine sedation on colonoscopy outcomes: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets