Effect of Sedation/Analgesia During Colonoscope on Abdominal Pain After Examination.

Q3 Medicine

Asian journal of anesthesiology Pub Date : 2024-09-24 Epub Date: 2025-07-24 DOI:10.6859/aja.202409_62(3).0002

Fong-Sheng Lin, Chih-Peng Lin, Ya-Jung Cheng, Wei-Zen Sun

{"title":"Effect of Sedation/Analgesia During Colonoscope on Abdominal Pain After Examination.","authors":"Fong-Sheng Lin, Chih-Peng Lin, Ya-Jung Cheng, Wei-Zen Sun","doi":"10.6859/aja.202409_62(3).0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Sedation/analgesia (S/A) is widely used to relieve patients' anxiety and discomfort during colonoscopy. Their effects on abdominal pain after colonoscopy have never been fully investigated.Methods: The prospective study consecutively recruited 494 healthy patients having a screen colonoscopy examination as part of their health checkup. They were divided into two groups based on individuals' decision to receive sedation and analgesia or not. In the S/A group, 374 patients received midazolam and alfentanil during colonoscopy with standard monitoring, while in the non-sedation/analgesia (NSA) group, 120 patients received no analgesics. Severity and duration of abdominal pain (ordinal scale: 1 = none, 4 = severe) were assessed at the end of stay in the postanesthetic care unit (the S/A group) or examination room (the NSA group) and before discharge. Side effects S/A during (hypotension, hypoxemia) and after (nausea, vomiting, dizziness) colonoscopy were also recorded. All patients were closely monitored during the whole course of the health check-up package.Results: The mean doses of midazolam and alfentanil were 4.06 mg and 813.12 μg, respectively. Patients in the NSA group had two-fold risks of moderate to severe abdominal pain compared to those in the S/ A group (16.67% vs. 9.36%, odds ratio = 1.937, 95% confidence interval: 1.010-3.625). The NSA group also had a higher incidence of abdominal pain 120 minutes after examination (33.33% vs. 16.04%, P < 0.001). Duration of abdominal pain in those patients who did have abdominal pain was longer in the S/ A group than in the NSA group (153.3 ± 49.9 vs. 118.7 ± 47.5 minutes, P < 0.001). The incidence of hypotension and hypoxemia in the group S/A was 5.6% and 2.9%, respectively. More patients in the S/ A group felt dizzy or sleepy than those in the NSA group (14.7% vs. 3.3%, P < 0.001). The incidence of nausea and vomiting was similar between the two groups.Conclusion: Optimal S/A with midazolam and alfentanil decreases the severity and duration of postcolonoscopic abdominal pain.","PeriodicalId":8482,"journal":{"name":"Asian journal of anesthesiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian journal of anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6859/aja.202409_62(3).0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Sedation/analgesia (S/A) is widely used to relieve patients' anxiety and discomfort during colonoscopy. Their effects on abdominal pain after colonoscopy have never been fully investigated.

Methods: The prospective study consecutively recruited 494 healthy patients having a screen colonoscopy examination as part of their health checkup. They were divided into two groups based on individuals' decision to receive sedation and analgesia or not. In the S/A group, 374 patients received midazolam and alfentanil during colonoscopy with standard monitoring, while in the non-sedation/analgesia (NSA) group, 120 patients received no analgesics. Severity and duration of abdominal pain (ordinal scale: 1 = none, 4 = severe) were assessed at the end of stay in the postanesthetic care unit (the S/A group) or examination room (the NSA group) and before discharge. Side effects S/A during (hypotension, hypoxemia) and after (nausea, vomiting, dizziness) colonoscopy were also recorded. All patients were closely monitored during the whole course of the health check-up package.

Results: The mean doses of midazolam and alfentanil were 4.06 mg and 813.12 μg, respectively. Patients in the NSA group had two-fold risks of moderate to severe abdominal pain compared to those in the S/ A group (16.67% vs. 9.36%, odds ratio = 1.937, 95% confidence interval: 1.010-3.625). The NSA group also had a higher incidence of abdominal pain 120 minutes after examination (33.33% vs. 16.04%, P < 0.001). Duration of abdominal pain in those patients who did have abdominal pain was longer in the S/ A group than in the NSA group (153.3 ± 49.9 vs. 118.7 ± 47.5 minutes, P < 0.001). The incidence of hypotension and hypoxemia in the group S/A was 5.6% and 2.9%, respectively. More patients in the S/ A group felt dizzy or sleepy than those in the NSA group (14.7% vs. 3.3%, P < 0.001). The incidence of nausea and vomiting was similar between the two groups.

Conclusion: Optimal S/A with midazolam and alfentanil decreases the severity and duration of postcolonoscopic abdominal pain.

查看原文本刊更多论文

结肠镜下镇静镇痛对检查后腹痛的影响。

背景：镇静/镇痛（S/A）被广泛用于缓解结肠镜检查患者的焦虑和不适。它们对结肠镜检查后腹痛的影响从未被充分研究过。方法：前瞻性研究连续招募494例健康患者，将结肠镜筛查作为健康检查的一部分。根据患者是否接受镇静镇痛的决定，将患者分为两组。在S/A组，374例患者在结肠镜检查期间接受咪达唑仑和阿芬太尼的标准监测，而在非镇静/镇痛（NSA）组，120例患者未接受镇痛。在麻醉后护理单元（S/A组）或检查室（NSA组）和出院前评估腹痛的严重程度和持续时间（顺序量表：1 =无，4 =严重）。同时记录结肠镜检查期间（低血压、低氧血症）和结肠镜检查后（恶心、呕吐、头晕）的副作用S/A。在一揽子健康检查的整个过程中，对所有病人都进行了密切监测。结果：咪达唑仑和阿芬太尼的平均剂量分别为4.06 mg和813.12 μg。与S/ A组相比，NSA组患者发生中至重度腹痛的风险为2倍（16.67% vs. 9.36%，优势比= 1.937,95%可信区间：1.010-3.625）。NSA组在检查后120分钟腹痛发生率也较高（33.33% vs. 16.04%, P < 0.001）。S/ A组患者腹痛持续时间比NSA组更长（153.3±49.9分钟vs 118.7±47.5分钟，P < 0.001）。S/A组低血压和低氧血症发生率分别为5.6%和2.9%。S/ A组患者感到头晕或困倦的患者多于NSA组（14.7% vs. 3.3%, P < 0.001）。两组患者的恶心和呕吐发生率相似。结论：咪达唑仑联合阿芬太尼的最佳S/A可降低结肠镜后腹痛的严重程度和持续时间。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Asian journal of anesthesiology Medicine-Medicine (all)

CiteScore

1.00

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Asian Journal of Anesthesiology (AJA), launched in 1962, is the official and peer-reviewed publication of the Taiwan Society of Anaesthesiologists. It is published quarterly (March/June/September/December) by Airiti and indexed in EMBASE, Medline, Scopus, ScienceDirect, SIIC Data Bases. AJA accepts submissions from around the world. AJA is the premier open access journal in the field of anaesthesia and its related disciplines of critical care and pain in Asia. The number of Chinese anaesthesiologists has reached more than 60,000 and is still growing. The journal aims to disseminate anaesthesiology research and services for the Chinese community and is now the main anaesthesiology journal for Chinese societies located in Taiwan, Mainland China, Hong Kong and Singapore. AJAcaters to clinicians of all relevant specialties and biomedical scientists working in the areas of anesthesia, critical care medicine and pain management, as well as other related fields (pharmacology, pathology molecular biology, etc). AJA''s editorial team is composed of local and regional experts in the field as well as many leading international experts. Article types accepted include review articles, research papers, short communication, correspondence and images.