A single dose of propofol can produce excellent sedation and comparable amnesia with midazolam in cystoscopic examination
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In this study we compared the sedative and amnesic effects of propofol with midazolam in cystoscopy examination.
METHODS: This prospective clinical trial was done on 44 adults, with American Society of Anesthesiology physical status I, II, III, who were candidate for cystoscopic examination. Patients were recruited according to convenience sampling method and randomized into two equal groups. In study group, propofol plus fentanyl and in control group midazolam plus fentanyl were given intravenously. Vital signs and SaO2, the number of patients movements, presence of eyelid movements and verbal contact all at the first and 10th minutes after beginning the procedure were recorded. Also, frequency distributions of patients recalls, VAS (visual analog scale) for pain and VAS for satisfaction scores were evaluated in recovery room.
RESULTS: Frequency distribution of patients movements, frequency distribution of verbal contact and eyelid movements at the first and 10th minutes were higher in midazolam group (P<0.05). There were a lower VAS pain score and higher VAS satisfaction score in propofol group (P = 0.009 and P = 0.041 respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Propofol was more effective than midazolam in inducing deep sedation and immobility in patients undergoing cystoscopy examination, without interfacing patients with additional danger.
KEYWORDS: Propofol, midazolam, cystoscopy.
METHODS: This prospective clinical trial was done on 44 adults, with American Society of Anesthesiology physical status I, II, III, who were candidate for cystoscopic examination. Patients were recruited according to convenience sampling method and randomized into two equal groups. In study group, propofol plus fentanyl and in control group midazolam plus fentanyl were given intravenously. Vital signs and SaO2, the number of patients movements, presence of eyelid movements and verbal contact all at the first and 10th minutes after beginning the procedure were recorded. Also, frequency distributions of patients recalls, VAS (visual analog scale) for pain and VAS for satisfaction scores were evaluated in recovery room.
RESULTS: Frequency distribution of patients movements, frequency distribution of verbal contact and eyelid movements at the first and 10th minutes were higher in midazolam group (P<0.05). There were a lower VAS pain score and higher VAS satisfaction score in propofol group (P = 0.009 and P = 0.041 respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Propofol was more effective than midazolam in inducing deep sedation and immobility in patients undergoing cystoscopy examination, without interfacing patients with additional danger.
KEYWORDS: Propofol, midazolam, cystoscopy.