2005The Korean Journal of Internal MedicineOpen access

The effect of propofol for conscious sedation during colonoscopy-A Prospective, Randomized Study

Hoon Cho, Yeong-Muk Kim, Ji-Hyeon Oh, Su-Jin Jeon, Jae-Hyeon Moon, Min-Hee Kim, Keum-Mi Park, Joon‐Sang Lee

Open full text 3 citations

Abstract

Background:The objectives of this study were to assess propofol as sedative agents for colonoscopy in the safety and efficacy, compared with midazolam plus meperidine. Methods:120 patients undergoing colonoscopy in a prospective study were randomly assigned to one of three medication regimens. Patients in group A (n=42) received i.v. 25 mg of meperidine and 2.5 mg of midazolam. Patients in group B (n=41) received i.v. a median dose of 96.59 mg of propofol (range 40-180) and patients in group C (n=37) received i.v. 25 mg of meperidine and a median dose of 77.03 mg of propofol (range 40-150), administered by a nurse with endoscopist supervision. Endpoints were patient satisfaction, procedure and recovery times and complications. Results:The mean time to sedation was much faster in 2 groups using propofol (group A: 152105.9 sec, group B: 52.946.5 sec, group C: 5663.7sec; p

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Background:The objectives of this study were to assess propofol as sedative agents for colonoscopy in the safety and efficacy, compared with midazolam plus meperidine. Methods:120 patients undergoing colonoscopy in a prospective study were randomly assigned to one of three medication regimens. Patients in group A (n=42) received i.v. 25 mg of meperidine and 2.5 mg of midazolam. Patients in group B (n=41) received i.v. a median dose of 96.59 mg of propofol (range 40-180) and patients in group C (n=37) received i.v. 25 mg of meperidine and a median dose of 77.03 mg of propofol (range 40-150), administered by a nurse with endoscopist supervision. Endpoints were patient satisfaction, procedure and recovery times and complications. Results:The mean time to sedation was much faster in 2 groups using propofol (group A: 152105.9 sec, group B: 52.946.5 sec, group C: 5663.7sec; p

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 3 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Background:The objectives of this study were to assess propofol as sedative agents for colonoscopy in the safety and efficacy, compared with midazolam plus meperidine. Methods:120 patients undergoing colonoscopy in a prospective study were randomly assigned to one of three medication regimens. Patients in group A (n=42) received i.v. 25 mg of meperidine and 2.5 mg of midazolam. Patients in group B (n=41) received i.v. a median dose of 96.59 mg of propofol (range 40-180) and patients in group C (n=37) received i.v. 25 mg of meperidine and a median dose of 77.03 mg of propofol (range 40-150), administered by a nurse with endoscopist supervision. Endpoints were patient satisfaction, procedure and recovery times and complications. Results:The mean time to sedation was much faster in 2 groups using propofol (group A: 152105.9 sec, group B: 52.946.5 sec, group C: 5663.7sec; p

Key concepts: Medicine, Propofol, Midazolam, Colonoscopy, Sedation, Anesthesia, Sedative, Prospective cohort study

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The effect of propofol for conscious sedation during colonoscopy-A Prospective, Randomized Study — Research Paper | ScholarLens