Comparing Sedation Methods for Endoscopic Ultrasound
Author Information
Author(s): Urabe Makiko, Ikezawa Kenji, Seiki Yusuke, Watsuji Ko, Kawamoto Yasuharu, Hirao Takeru, Kai Yugo, Takada Ryoji, Yamai Takuo, Mukai Kaori, Nakabori Tasuku, Uehara Hiroyuki, Ohkawa Kazuyoshi
Primary Institution: Osaka International Cancer Institute
Hypothesis
This study aimed to examine the safety and complications of sedation with pentazocine or pethidine hydrochloride for outpatient diagnostic EUS.
Conclusion
The combination of midazolam and pethidine hydrochloride is a more favorable anesthetic than the combination of midazolam and pentazocine for diagnostic EUS in outpatients.
Supporting Evidence
- The median time spent in the recovery room after EUS was significantly shorter in the pethidine hydrochloride group than in the pentazocine group (69 vs. 77 min).
- The frequency of nausea or vomiting after EUS was significantly lower in the pethidine hydrochloride group than in the pentazocine group (0% vs. 6.2%).
- The frequency of readmission to the recovery room after discharge was significantly lower in the pethidine group than in the pentazocine group (0% vs. 3.7%).
Takeaway
This study found that using pethidine hydrochloride for sedation during an ultrasound of the digestive system is better than using pentazocine because it leads to less nausea and a quicker recovery.
Methodology
A retrospective review of 1302 consecutive cases undergoing outpatient diagnostic EUS, with propensity score matching to compare sedation methods.
Potential Biases
Potential bias due to the single-center design and lack of assessment of operator and patient satisfaction.
Limitations
This study is a retrospective single‐center observational study that does not include data on patient comorbidities or detailed patient backgrounds.
Participant Demographics
Median age of participants was 69 years, with a mix of male (61.7%) and female (38.3%) patients after matching.
Statistical Information
P-Value
p<0.001
Confidence Interval
95% CI, 6.066–51.542
Statistical Significance
p<0.001
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website