Tu1719 Does Propofol Use Affect Colonoscopy Outcomes? Data From New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry

Anderson, Joseph C.; Weiss, Julia; Goodrich, Martha; Robertson, Douglas J.; Butterly, Lynn F.

doi:10.1016/j.gie.2012.03.1365

Cited by 1 publication

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Of the finalized studies, one was a RCT [8] and 10 were cohort studies [1,6,7,[9][10][11][12][13][14][15]. Risk of bias assessment is shown in Supplementary Table 2 and Supplementary Table 3 for RCT and cohort studies, respectively.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Six studies assessed PDR and no statistically significant difference was found between the two groups (RR: 1.01, 95 % CI 0.93-1.10, P = 0.83, I 2 = 91.2 %, PI 0.82-1.24) (▶ Fig. 3a) [6,7,9,[12][13]. Four studies used the fenanyl/midazolam combination for OBS and demonstrated no statistical difference as well (RR: 1.00, 95 % CI 0.90-1.11, P = 0.99, I 2 = 93.1 %, PI 0.81-1.24) (▶ Fig.…”

Section: Polyp Detection Ratementioning

confidence: 99%

“…CIR was assessed in five studies and significantly increased intubation rates were found in PS group compared to OBS group (RR: 1.02, 95 % CI 1.00-1.03, P = 0.047, I 2 = 92.9 %, PI 0.98-1.05) (▶ Fig. 5a) [6,7,11,13,15]. Four studies used fentanyl/ midazolam combination for OBS, and increased CIR was found in PS group (RR: 1.02, 95 % CI 1.00-1.04, P = 0.02, I 2 = 93.8 %, PI 0.99-1.05) (▶ Fig.…”

Section: Cirmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[1,5] A recent meta-analysis that compared PS with OBS did not reveal any statistically significant increase in patient satisfaction (RR = 0.94, 95 % CI 0.86-1.04), physician satisfaction (RR = 0.35, 95 % CI 0.02-6.95), and recovery time (mean difference =-6.77, 95 % CI-16.21-2.67) [5]. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies comparing use of OBS vs PS for colonoscopy have shown varying results in terms of differences in ADR, PDR, AADR, and CIR [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15]. To further clarify these outcomes, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of these studies to determine whether PS in comparison to OBS improves the aforementioned quality metrics.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

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

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract