White PF

Language: English
References: 26
Page: 33-36
PDF size: 54.23 Kb.

Text Extraction

INTRODUCTION

Sedation techniques have become increasingly popular for a wide variety of both diagnostic and therapeutic procedures performed on an ambulatory basis. The commonly used sedative-hypnotics produce a dose-dependent spectrum of central nervous system (CNS) depression which represents a continuum from minimal («light») to deep sedation. The three commonly used terms to describe the various levels of sedation are:

I. Minimal Sedation («Premedication») is a drug-induced state during which patients respond normally to verbal commands. Although cognitive function and coordination may be mildly impaired, ventilatory and cardiovascular functions are unaffected.

REFERENCES

1. Bhananker SM, Posner KL, Cheney FW, et al. Injury and liability associated with monitored anesthesia care: a closed claims analysis. Anesthesiology 2006;104:228-34.

2. Patel S, Vargo JJ, Khandwala F, et al. Deep sedation occurs frequently during elective endoscopy with meperidine and midazolam. Am J Gastroenterol 2005;100:2689-95.

3. Rex DK, Heuss LT, Walker JA, Qi R. Trained registered nurses/endoscopy teams can administer propofol safely for endoscopy. Gastroenterology 2005;129:1384-91.

4. Vargo JJ, Zuccaro G, Dumot JA, et al. Gastroenterologist-administered propofol versus meperidine and midazolam for advanced upper endoscopy: a prospective, randomized trial. Gastroenterology 2002;123:8-16.

5. American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Sedation and Analgesia by Non-Anesthesiologists: Practice guidelines for sedation and analgesia by non-anesthesiologists. Anesthesiology 2002;96:1004-17.

6. Sá Rêgo MM, Watcha MF, White PF. The changing role of monitored anesthesia care in the ambulatory setting. Anesth Analg 1997;85:1020-1036.

7. Meyers CJ, Eisig SB, Kraut RA. Comparison of propofol and methohexital for deep sedation. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1994;52:448-452.

8. Sá Rêgo MM, Inagaki Y, White PF. Cost-effectiveness of methohexital versus propofol for sedation during monitored anesthesia care. Anesth Analg 1999;88:723-728.

9. White PF, Vasconez LO, Mathes, et al. Comparison of midazolam and diazepam for sedation during plastic surgery. J Plast Reconstr Surg 1988;81:703-712.

10. van Vlymen JM, Sá Rêgo MM, White PF. Benzodiazepine premedication: can it improve outcome in patients undergoing breast biopsy procedures: Anesthesiology 1999;90:740-7.

11. White PF, Negus JB. Sedative infusions during local and regional anesthesia: a comparison of midazolam and propofol. J Clin Anesth 1991;3:32-39.

12. Taylor E, Ghouri AF, White PF. Midazolam in combination with propofol for sedation during local anesthesia. J Clin Anesth 1992;4:213-216.

13. Shao X, Li H, White PF, et al. Bisulfite-containing propofol: is it a cost-effective alternative to DiprivanTM for induction of anesthesia? Anesth Analg 2000;91:871-5.

14. Song D, Hamza MA, White PF, et al. Comparison of a lower-lipid propofol emulsion with the standard emulsion for sedation during monitored anesthesia care. Anesthesiology 2004;100:1972-5.

15. Egan TD, Kern SE, Johnson KB, et al. Propofol in a modified cyclodextrin formulation: first in man pharmacodynamics. Anesth Analg 2006;102:S297.

16. Gibiansky E, Struys MM, et al. AQUAVAN injection, a water-soluble prodrug of propofol, as a bolus injection: A phase I dose-escalation comparison with DIPRIVAN (part 1): Pharmacokinetics. Anesthesiology 2005;103:718-29.

17. Struys MM, Vanluchene AL, Gibiansky L, et al. AQUAVAN injection, a water-soluble prodrug of propofol, as a bolus injection: a phase I dose-escalation comparison with DIPRIVAN (part 2): Pharmacodynamics and safety. Anesthesiology 2005;103:730-43.

18. White PF. Use of ketamine for sedation and analgesia during injection of local anesthetics. Ann Plast Surg 1985;15:53-56.

19. Badrinath S, Avramov MN, Shadrick M, et al. The use of a ketamine-propofol combination during monitored anesthesia care. Anesth Analg 2000;90:858-62.

20. Frey K, Sukhani R, Pawlowski J, et al. Propofol versus propofol-ketamine for retrobulbar nerve block: comparison of sedation quality, intraocular pressure changes, and recovery profiles. Anesth Analg 1999;89:317-21.

21. Greilich PE, Virella CD, Rich JM, et al. Remifentanyl versus meperidine for monitored anesthesia care: a comparison study in older patients undergoing ambulatory colonoscopy. Anesth Analg 2001;92:80-4.

22. Smith I, Avramov MN, White PF. A comparison of propofol and remifentanyl during monitored anesthesia care. J Clin Anesth 1997;9:148-154.

23. Avramov MN, Smith I, White PF. Interactions between midazolam and remifentanyl during monitored anesthesia care. Anesthesiology 1996;85:1283-1289.

24. Arain SR, Ebert TJ. The efficacy, side effects, and recovery characteristics of dexmedetomidine versus propofol when used for intraoperative sedation. Anesth Analg 2002;95:461-6.

25. Jalowiecki P, Rudner R, Gonciarz M, et al. Sole use of dexmedetomidine has limited utility for conscious sedation during outpatient colonoscopy. Anesthesiology 2005;103:269-73.

26. Tang J, Wang B, White PF, et al. Comparison of the sedation and recovery profiles of Ro 48-6791, anew benzodiazepine, and midazolam in combination with meperidine for outpatient endoscopic procedures. Anesth Analg 1999;89:893-8.