ArticleSurgical endoscopy2014
Sedation for interventional gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures: are we overlooking the “pain”?
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety and efficacy of combined use of propofol and etomidate for sedation during gastroscopy: Systematic review and meta-analysis.Medicine · 2019Pooled it
- Anesthetic strategy for obese patients during gastroscopy: deep sedation or conscious sedation? A prospective randomized controlled trial.Journal of anesthesia · 2021Trial
- Trial
- Beneficial effect of intravenous magnesium during endoscopic submucosal dissection for gastric neoplasm.Surgical endoscopy · 2015Trial
- Comparison of the efficacy and safety of sedation between dexmedetomidine-remifentanil and propofol-remifentanil during endoscopic submucosal dissection.World journal of gastroenterology · 2015Trial
- Conventional versus Analgesia-Oriented Combination Sedation on Recovery Profiles and Satisfaction after ERCP: A Randomized Trial.PloS one · 2015Trial
- Trial
- Effects of ciprofol on respiratory-related adverse incidence in patients with obesity during painless gastroscopy: a prospective, randomized clinical trial.Perioperative medicine (London, England) · 2025Article
- Intraoperative fentanyl in endoscopic procedures and their impact on PACU time and costs.Perioperative medicine (London, England) · 2025Article
- Outcomes of Propofol Sedation During Emergency Endoscopy Performed for Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2016Article
- Pro: propofol in endoscopy.Clinical endoscopy · 2014Article
- Endoscopic sedation: risk assessment and monitoring.Clinical endoscopy · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough interventional gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopic procedures are known to cause greater pain and discomfort than diagnostic procedures, the efficacy of adequate pain control or the difference in pain and amount of analgesic required according to type of intervention is not well known. This study was done to investigate the safety and efficacy of combining fentanyl with propofol for interventional GI endoscopic procedures and determine whether this method is superior to propofol monosedation.
methodsThe data of 810 patients that underwent interventional GI endoscopic procedures under sedation with either propofol alone (Group P, n = 499) or propofol/fentanyl (Group PF, n = 311) at a single tertiary-care hospital between May 2012 and December 2012 were retrospectively reviewed. Rates of respiratory and cardiovascular events, propofol and fentanyl requirements, and risk factors of respiratory events of the two groups were analyzed.
resultsThe incidence of respiratory events (P = 0.001), number of cases in which the procedure had to be interrupted for assisted mask bagging (P = 0.044), and propofol infusion rates were significantly lower in Group PF compared to Group P (P < 0.0001). The amount of fentanyl required for diagnostic procedures was significantly lower than that for interventional procedures (P < 0.001). Patients of Group PF showed a lower risk of developing respiratory events compared to Group P (OR 0.224, 95 % CI 0.069–0.724).
conclusionsCombining fentanyl with propofol seems to reduce the risk of respiratory events compared with propofol monosedation during GI endoscopic procedures by providing effective analgesia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.