动态支气管镜下镇静治疗呼气性中央气道塌陷:哪种方案最理想?

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Respiratory medicine Pub Date : 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.rmed.2024.107904
Rodrigo Funes-Ferrada , Alejandra Yu Lee-Mateus , Bryan F. Vaca-Cartagena , Sofia Valdes-Camacho , Alanna Barrios-Ruiz , Ana Garza-Salas , Kelly S. Robertson , Sebastian Fernandez-Bussy , Ryan M. Chadha , Martin D. Abel , Courtney L. Scott , David Abia-Trujillo
{"title":"动态支气管镜下镇静治疗呼气性中央气道塌陷:哪种方案最理想?","authors":"Rodrigo Funes-Ferrada ,&nbsp;Alejandra Yu Lee-Mateus ,&nbsp;Bryan F. Vaca-Cartagena ,&nbsp;Sofia Valdes-Camacho ,&nbsp;Alanna Barrios-Ruiz ,&nbsp;Ana Garza-Salas ,&nbsp;Kelly S. Robertson ,&nbsp;Sebastian Fernandez-Bussy ,&nbsp;Ryan M. Chadha ,&nbsp;Martin D. Abel ,&nbsp;Courtney L. Scott ,&nbsp;David Abia-Trujillo","doi":"10.1016/j.rmed.2024.107904","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To compare sedation protocols for dynamic bronchoscopy (DB) in the evaluation of expiratory central airway collapse (ECAC).</div></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><div>This observational study included adult patients (≥18 years) referred to Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, from March 2023 to July 2024, for suspected ECAC. Patients were grouped based on sedation protocols: propofol (Protocol 1), remimazolam (Protocol 2), and remimazolam/fentanyl (Protocol 3). The primary outcome was the quality of assessment during DB, rated on a 4-point Likert scale (1 = poor, 4 = excellent). Secondary outcomes included anesthesia duration and post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) length of stay. Statistical analyses included Fisher's exact test, ordinal logistic regression, and Kruskal-Wallis tests.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Seventy-three patients met the inclusion criteria. Overall, DB quality of assessment was significantly associated with sedation protocol (<em>P=0.01</em> Ordinal regression results suggest that protocol 3 (remimazolam/fentanyl) may be comparable to protocol 1 (propofol) (OR0.40, 95%CI 0.12–1.33, <em>P</em> = 0.13), with both showing a tendency for better performance than protocol 2 (remimazolam) (OR0.14, 95%CI 0.04–0.46 <em>P=0.002</em> vs protocol 3; OR0.35, 95%CI 0.09–0.29 <em>P=0.115 v</em>s protocol 1<em>)</em>. No significant differences were found in PACU length of stay among the three protocols (<em>P</em> = 0.13). No post-procedural complications were reported.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Protocol 3 (remimazolam/fentanyl) demonstrated significantly higher odds of achieving a better quality of assessment compared to Protocol 2 (remimazolam) and showed comparable performance to Protocol 1 (propofol). These findings suggest that remimazolam/fentanyl is an effective sedation option for DB, providing improved assessment quality without increasing PACU stay. Larger prospective studies are necessary to confirm these results.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":21057,"journal":{"name":"Respiratory medicine","volume":"236 ","pages":"Article 107904"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sedation during dynamic bronchoscopy for expiratory central airway collapse: Which is the ideal protocol?\",\"authors\":\"Rodrigo Funes-Ferrada ,&nbsp;Alejandra Yu Lee-Mateus ,&nbsp;Bryan F. Vaca-Cartagena ,&nbsp;Sofia Valdes-Camacho ,&nbsp;Alanna Barrios-Ruiz ,&nbsp;Ana Garza-Salas ,&nbsp;Kelly S. Robertson ,&nbsp;Sebastian Fernandez-Bussy ,&nbsp;Ryan M. Chadha ,&nbsp;Martin D. Abel ,&nbsp;Courtney L. Scott ,&nbsp;David Abia-Trujillo\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.rmed.2024.107904\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To compare sedation protocols for dynamic bronchoscopy (DB) in the evaluation of expiratory central airway collapse (ECAC).</div></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><div>This observational study included adult patients (≥18 years) referred to Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, from March 2023 to July 2024, for suspected ECAC. Patients were grouped based on sedation protocols: propofol (Protocol 1), remimazolam (Protocol 2), and remimazolam/fentanyl (Protocol 3). The primary outcome was the quality of assessment during DB, rated on a 4-point Likert scale (1 = poor, 4 = excellent). Secondary outcomes included anesthesia duration and post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) length of stay. Statistical analyses included Fisher's exact test, ordinal logistic regression, and Kruskal-Wallis tests.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Seventy-three patients met the inclusion criteria. Overall, DB quality of assessment was significantly associated with sedation protocol (<em>P=0.01</em> Ordinal regression results suggest that protocol 3 (remimazolam/fentanyl) may be comparable to protocol 1 (propofol) (OR0.40, 95%CI 0.12–1.33, <em>P</em> = 0.13), with both showing a tendency for better performance than protocol 2 (remimazolam) (OR0.14, 95%CI 0.04–0.46 <em>P=0.002</em> vs protocol 3; OR0.35, 95%CI 0.09–0.29 <em>P=0.115 v</em>s protocol 1<em>)</em>. No significant differences were found in PACU length of stay among the three protocols (<em>P</em> = 0.13). No post-procedural complications were reported.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Protocol 3 (remimazolam/fentanyl) demonstrated significantly higher odds of achieving a better quality of assessment compared to Protocol 2 (remimazolam) and showed comparable performance to Protocol 1 (propofol). These findings suggest that remimazolam/fentanyl is an effective sedation option for DB, providing improved assessment quality without increasing PACU stay. Larger prospective studies are necessary to confirm these results.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21057,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Respiratory medicine\",\"volume\":\"236 \",\"pages\":\"Article 107904\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Respiratory medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0954611124003792\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Respiratory medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0954611124003792","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较动态支气管镜(DB)镇静方案在评估呼气性中央气道塌陷(ECAC)中的应用价值。材料和方法:本观察性研究纳入了2023年3月至2024年7月在佛罗里达州杰克逊维尔梅奥诊所就诊的疑似ECAC的成年患者(≥18岁)。根据镇静方案对患者进行分组:异丙酚(方案1)、雷马唑仑(方案2)和雷马唑仑/芬太尼(方案3)。主要结局是DB期间的评估质量,采用4分李克特量表(1 =差,4 =优)。次要结局包括麻醉持续时间和麻醉后护理单位(PACU)住院时间。统计分析包括Fisher精确检验、有序逻辑回归和Kruskal-Wallis检验。结果:73例患者符合纳入标准。总体而言,DB评估质量与镇静方案显著相关(P=0.01),有序回归结果表明方案3(雷马唑仑/芬太尼)可能与方案1(异丙酚)相当(OR0.40, 95%CI 0.12-1.33, P= 0.13),两者都表现出比方案2(雷马唑仑)更好的表现趋势(OR0.14, 95%CI 0.04-0.46 P=0.002 vs方案3;(OR0.35, 95%CI 0.09- 0.29, P=0.115)。三种治疗方案的PACU住院时间无显著差异(P= 0.13)。无术后并发症报道。结论:与方案2(雷马唑仑/芬太尼)相比,方案3(雷马唑仑/芬太尼)获得更好评估质量的几率明显更高,与方案1(异丙酚)表现出相当的性能。这些研究结果表明,雷马唑仑/芬太尼是一种有效的DB镇静选择,在不增加PACU停留时间的情况下提供更好的评估质量。需要更大规模的前瞻性研究来证实这些结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Sedation during dynamic bronchoscopy for expiratory central airway collapse: Which is the ideal protocol?

Objective

To compare sedation protocols for dynamic bronchoscopy (DB) in the evaluation of expiratory central airway collapse (ECAC).

Materials and methods

This observational study included adult patients (≥18 years) referred to Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, from March 2023 to July 2024, for suspected ECAC. Patients were grouped based on sedation protocols: propofol (Protocol 1), remimazolam (Protocol 2), and remimazolam/fentanyl (Protocol 3). The primary outcome was the quality of assessment during DB, rated on a 4-point Likert scale (1 = poor, 4 = excellent). Secondary outcomes included anesthesia duration and post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) length of stay. Statistical analyses included Fisher's exact test, ordinal logistic regression, and Kruskal-Wallis tests.

Results

Seventy-three patients met the inclusion criteria. Overall, DB quality of assessment was significantly associated with sedation protocol (P=0.01 Ordinal regression results suggest that protocol 3 (remimazolam/fentanyl) may be comparable to protocol 1 (propofol) (OR0.40, 95%CI 0.12–1.33, P = 0.13), with both showing a tendency for better performance than protocol 2 (remimazolam) (OR0.14, 95%CI 0.04–0.46 P=0.002 vs protocol 3; OR0.35, 95%CI 0.09–0.29 P=0.115 vs protocol 1). No significant differences were found in PACU length of stay among the three protocols (P = 0.13). No post-procedural complications were reported.

Conclusion

Protocol 3 (remimazolam/fentanyl) demonstrated significantly higher odds of achieving a better quality of assessment compared to Protocol 2 (remimazolam) and showed comparable performance to Protocol 1 (propofol). These findings suggest that remimazolam/fentanyl is an effective sedation option for DB, providing improved assessment quality without increasing PACU stay. Larger prospective studies are necessary to confirm these results.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Respiratory medicine
Respiratory medicine 医学-呼吸系统
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
199
审稿时长
38 days
期刊介绍: Respiratory Medicine is an internationally-renowned journal devoted to the rapid publication of clinically-relevant respiratory medicine research. It combines cutting-edge original research with state-of-the-art reviews dealing with all aspects of respiratory diseases and therapeutic interventions. Topics include adult and paediatric medicine, epidemiology, immunology and cell biology, physiology, occupational disorders, and the role of allergens and pollutants. Respiratory Medicine is increasingly the journal of choice for publication of phased trial work, commenting on effectiveness, dosage and methods of action.
期刊最新文献
Home noninvasive ventilation in pediatric patients: Does one size fit all? Diagnostic and prognostic implications of a deep suprasternal notch in idiopathic pleuroparenchymal fibroelastosis Local and systemic adverse effects of inhaled corticosteroids - Does ciclesonide differ from other inhaled corticosteroids? Investigating the risk factors for the coexistence of insomnia and its exacerbation in AECOPD Exploring the Effects of Pulmonary Rehabilitation and its Determinants in Lung Transplant Candidates with Cystic Fibrosis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1