IntroductionGastrointestinal endoscopy is an invasive and diagnostic procedure that causes the patients considerable pain, discomfort, and anxiety. Therefore, various types of sedation and analgesia techniques have been used during the procedure.AimTo compare the effects and side-effects of sedation with propofol versus midazolam plus pethidine in patients undergoing endoscopy.Material and methodsThis is a randomised controlled double-blind clinical trial study conducted on 272 patients undergoing diagnostic and treatment endoscopy and colonoscopy in Imam Khomeini Hospital in Ahvaz between 2017 and 2018. The patients were randomly assigned to two groups. Patients in the first group (n = 136) received propofol with midazolam and ketamine, and the second group (n = 136) received pethidine and midazolam. Study outcome measures included the recovery time, patient satisfaction, quality of sedation, and adverse events.ResultsThe occurrence of complications was higher in the propofol group (25% vs. 0%; p = 0.0001). No serious adverse events were observed in the study groups. Overall patient satisfaction and quality of sedation assessment scores in the propofol group were significantly better than those seen in the pethidine-midazolam group (p = 0.012 and p = 0.001, respectively). Recovery time was statistically shorter in the propofol-midazolam group (6.05 ±1.62 min) compared to the pethidine-midazolam group (6.72 ±2.21 min) (p = 0.006).ConclusionsPropofol-midazolam can provide better sedation, patient satisfaction, and recovery than pethidine-midazolam during endoscopy. Therefore, it can be recommended in patients scheduled for diagnostic and treatment endoscopy.

Background: The main aim of the present study is to investigate the independent association objectively measured level of physical activity (PA) and serum concentration of liver aminotransferases (alanine aminotransferase [ALT] and aspartate aminotransferase [AST]) among seemingly healthy individuals. Materials and Methods: The current secondary study was conducted in the framework of Khuzestan Comprehensive Health Study, a large population-based multicentric cross-sectional study, conducted between 2016 and 2019 on 18,966 individuals living in Khuzestan province, southwestern Iran. International PA Questionnaire was used for evaluating PA levels, and participants were divided into three groups: low, moderate, and high PA, and ALT and AST were compared between these groups. Results: The mean ± standard deviation age of participants was 38.65 ± 11.40 years. The majority of participants were female (71%). The mean concentration of ALT in total sample was 18.22 ± 13.06 (male: 23.65 ± 16.26 and female: 15.57 ± 10.06), while the mean concentration of ALT in total sample was 19.61 ± 8.40 (male: 22.44 ± 10.03 and female: 18.23 ± 7.08). A statistically significant inverse correlation was found between AST (r = −0.08, P = 0.02) and ALT (r = −0.038, P < 0.001) with total PA score. The mean concentration of ALT was 19.96 ± 13.63 in people with low PA, 17.62 ± 12.31 with moderate PA, and 18.12 ± 13.47 with high PA (P < 0.001). The mean concentration of AST in total sample was 20.37 ± 8.85 in people with low PA, 19.21 ± 8.83 with moderate PA, and 19.75 ± 8.85 with high PA (P < 0.001). The difference between people in different levels of PA in terms of mean concentration of AST was remained significant (P = 0.003); however, the difference for ALT was not remained significant after adjusting potential confounders. Conclusion: The current study based on large sample showed that PA had a statistically negative association with the concentration of liver aminotransferases in the seemingly healthy individuals; however, the observed associations were weak. People in the lowest levels of PA had the highest levels of ALT and AST.