The combined use of propofol and fentanyl for outpatient intravenous conscious sedation

被引:13
作者
Abeles, G
Sequeira, M
Swensen, RD
Bisaccia, E
Scarborough, DA
机构
[1] Wright State Univ, Dayton, OH 45435 USA
[2] Kettering Anesthesia Associates, Dayton, OH 45435 USA
[3] Columbia Univ, Coll Phys & Surg, New York, NY 10032 USA
[4] Ohio State Univ Hosp, Div Dermatol, Columbus, OH 43210 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1046/j.1524-4725.1999.98225.x
中图分类号
R75 [皮肤病学与性病学];
学科分类号
100206 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND. Intravenous conscious sedation is currently being widely utilized for outpatient surgery including dermatologic surgery. Even though this type of anesthesia is typically administered by a trained licensed anesthetist, it is important for dermatologists who either intend to or are currently utilizing this type of anesthesia to be familiar with some of the methods and agents that are commonly employed. OBJECTIVE. Propofol and fentanyl are two anesthetic agents that are in prevalent use for skin and soft tissue surgery of brief or limited duration. With the goal of familiarizing dermatologic surgeons with this form of anesthesia, a study was conducted to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the combination of propofol and fentanyl when used for conscious sedation in an outpatient dermatology center. METHODS. Twenty patients, ages 25-65 years, who required conscious sedation were enrolled. Each patient received a standard dosage of fentanyl and propofol, as determined on a kilogram basis. Sedation time, total procedure time, recovery time, and total propofol dose, along with side effects, were determined. RESULTS. The mean onset to sedation was 52.5 seconds, the mean procedure time was 40 minutes 37 seconds, and the mean interval to recovery was 3 minutes 43 seconds, with a mean total dose of propofol of 5.83 mg/kg. Minimal side effects occurred. CONCLUSION. Propofol when used in conjunction with fentanyl appears to be a safe, quick, and effective method of providing conscious sedation.
引用
收藏
页码:559 / 561
页数:3
相关论文
共 11 条
[1]   Comparative study of propofol versus midazolam in the sedation of critically ill patients: Results of a prospective, randomized, multicenter trial [J].
Chamorro, C ;
deLatorre, FJ ;
Montero, A ;
SanchezIzquierdo, JA ;
Jareno, A ;
Moreno, JA ;
Gonzalez, E ;
Barrios, M ;
Carpintero, JL ;
MartinSantos, F ;
Otero, B ;
Ginestal, R .
CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, 1996, 24 (06) :932-939
[2]  
Cheng Y J, 1997, Acta Anaesthesiol Sin, V35, P79
[3]   Patient-controlled propofol sedation for elderly patients: Safety and patient attitude toward control [J].
Herrick, IA ;
Gelb, AW ;
Nichols, B ;
Kirkby, J .
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA-JOURNAL CANADIEN D ANESTHESIE, 1996, 43 (10) :1014-1018
[4]  
KOST M, 1998, MANUAL CONSCIOUS SED
[5]   Propofol for sedation in the intensive care unit: essentials for the clinician [J].
Marinella, MA .
RESPIRATORY MEDICINE, 1997, 91 (09) :505-510
[6]  
SCARMON FL, 1985, ANN OTO RHINOL LARYN, V94, P21
[7]  
STEVENS M, 1994, ANESTHESIA, P1469
[8]   The use of propofol for sedation in the emergency department [J].
Swanson, ER ;
Seaberg, DC ;
Mathias, S .
ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 1996, 3 (03) :234-238
[9]   Propofol versus midazolam for sedation during percutaneous transluminal angioplasty [J].
Wagner, HJ ;
Nowacki, J ;
Klose, KJ .
JOURNAL OF VASCULAR AND INTERVENTIONAL RADIOLOGY, 1996, 7 (05) :673-680
[10]  
White P F, 1991, J Clin Anesth, V3, P32, DOI 10.1016/0952-8180(91)90203-Y