-
Pharmacology 2023Propofol occasionally induces a green or pink-cloudy urine discoloration. A lesser-known effect is green discoloration of hair, milk, liver, or stool. We aimed to gain...
INTRODUCTION
Propofol occasionally induces a green or pink-cloudy urine discoloration. A lesser-known effect is green discoloration of hair, milk, liver, or stool. We aimed to gain insight into the features of these disturbances.
METHODS
The terms ("propofol" OR "fospropofol") AND ("green" OR "pink" OR "cloudy" OR "pink-cloudy") were searched in Excerpta Medica, MEDLINE/PubMed®, and Web of Sciences databases, with no language limit, from inception up to February 2023 (CRD4202236804). Articles reporting individually documented cases were retained, and data were extracted using a checklist.
RESULTS
Seventy-seven original reports documented 95 cases (including 13 subjects ≤18 years of age). Completeness of reporting was satisfactory in 33, good in 35, and excellent in 27 cases. Propofol-associated green urine discoloration was observed in 54 patients. In most instances (n = 21, 39%), propofol was given for ≥24 h. Sometimes, however, the urine discoloration developed after propofol for ≤3 h (n = 12, 22%). Propofol-associated urine discoloration was usually observed during the administration of this agent, but it was at times (n = 11) first recognized ≥3 h after propofol discontinuation. The duration of green urine discoloration was usually ≤24 h after stopping propofol. Propofol-associated green urine discoloration was never associated with worsening kidney function. A pink-cloudy urine discoloration was observed in 32 subjects with an acidic urine pH and increased uric acid excretion given propofol for ≤24 h. A stage I acute kidney injury was observed in 2 cases (6.3%) of propofol-associated pink-cloudy urine discoloration. Nine cases of non-urinary green discoloration were observed: hair (n = 4), breast milk (n = 1), liver (n = 1), stool (n = 1).
CONCLUSION
Propofol is sometimes associated with a green (benign) or pink-cloudy (occasionally associated with mild acute kidney injury) urine discoloration. Rarely, non-urinary green discoloration has been reported.
Topics: Female; Humans; Anesthetics, Intravenous; Liver; Acute Kidney Injury
PubMed: 37634493
DOI: 10.1159/000533327 -
International Journal of Surgery... Jan 2023Postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) is a common neurological system disorder in surgical patients. The choice of anesthetic can potentially reduce POCD. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) is a common neurological system disorder in surgical patients. The choice of anesthetic can potentially reduce POCD. The authors performed this network meta-analysis to compare different anesthetic drugs in reducing the incidence of POCD for elderly people undergoing noncardiac surgery. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science for randomized controlled trials comparing the different anesthetic drugs for noncardiac surgery in elderly from inception until July, 2022. The protocol was registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD#42020183014). A total of 34 trials involving 4314 patients undergoing noncardiac surgery in elderly were included. The incidence of POCD for each anesthetic drug was placebo (27.7%), dexmedetomidine (12.9%), ketamine (15.2%), propofol (16.8%), fentanyl (23.9%), midazolam (11.3%), sufentanil (6.3%), sevoflurane (24.0%), and desflurane (28.3%). Pairwise and network meta-analysis showed dexmedetomidine was significantly reducing the incidence of POCD when compared with placebo. Network meta-analysis also suggested dexmedetomidine was significantly reducing the incidence of POCD when compared with sevoflurane. Sufentanil and dexmedetomidine ranked the first and second in reducing the incidence of POCD with the surface under the cumulative ranking curve value of 87.4 and 81.5%. Sufentanil and dexmedetomidine had the greatest possibility to reduce the incidence of POCD for elderly people undergoing noncardiac surgery.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Sevoflurane; Anesthetics, Inhalation; Dexmedetomidine; Postoperative Cognitive Complications; Sufentanil; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 36799783
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000001 -
International Journal of Surgery... Nov 2023Propofol is the most widely used intravenous anesthetic in endoscopic surgery, but is associated with several adverse reactions. Public research has shown that... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Propofol is the most widely used intravenous anesthetic in endoscopic surgery, but is associated with several adverse reactions. Public research has shown that remimazolam, a safe general anesthetic, is increasingly being used as a substitute for propofol in clinical operations. Our meta-analysis aimed to analyze whether the adverse reaction rate of remimazolam in endoscopic surgery is acceptable and whether the surgical success rate is not lower than that of propofol.
AIM
This meta-analysis examined the adverse events and efficacy of remimazolam vs. propofol during endoscopic surgery.
METHOD
MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google Scholar were comprehensively searched. Seven studies comparing remimazolam and propofol were included in our meta-analysis. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and Cochrane manual were used to assess the quality of the results published in all included studies to ensure that our meta-analysis results are reliable and worthwhile.
RESULTS
Compared to propofol, the use of remimazolam reduced postoperative injection pain [relative risk (RR)=0.06, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.03-0.12, P <0.00001], postoperative hypotension (RR=0.45, 95% CI: 0.28-0.73, P =0.001), and postoperative respiratory depression (RR=0.20, 95% CI: 0.08-0.47, P =0.0002); however, it also slightly reduced the success rate of the operation [risk difference (RD)=-0.02, 95% CI: -0.04 to -0.01, P =0.0007]. There were no significant differences in the occurrence of bradycardia symptoms after the operation (RD=-0.01, 95% CI: -0.03 to 0.01, P =0.35), recovery time after the operation [standardized mean difference (SMD)=0.68, 95% CI: -0.43 to 1.80, P =0.23] or discharge time (SMD=0.17, 95% CI: -0.58 to 0.23, P =0.41). We also performed a subgroup analysis of each corresponding outcome.
CONCLUSION
Our analysis showed that remimazolam may be a safer shock option than propofol for endoscopic surgery. However, further research is required to determine their utility.
Topics: Humans; Propofol; Anesthesia, Intravenous; Endoscopy; Pain, Postoperative
PubMed: 37534687
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000638 -
Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica Jun 2016The objective of this review is to evaluate the existing literature with regard to the influence of propofol and remifentanil total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) on... (Review)
Review
The objective of this review is to evaluate the existing literature with regard to the influence of propofol and remifentanil total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) on cerebral perfusion and oxygenation in healthy pigs. Anaesthesia has influence on cerebral haemodynamics and it is important not only in human but also in veterinary anaesthesia to preserve optimal regulation of cerebral haemodynamics. Propofol and remifentanil are widely used in neuroanaesthesia and are increasingly used in experimental animal studies. In translational models, the pig has advantages compared to small laboratory animals because of brain anatomy, metabolism, neurophysiological maturation, and cerebral haemodynamics. However, reported effects of propofol and remifentanil on cerebral perfusion and oxygenation in pigs have not been reviewed. An electronic search identified 99 articles in English. Title and abstract screening selected 29 articles for full-text evaluation of which 19 were excluded with reasons. Of the 10 peer-reviewed articles included for review, only three had propofol or remifentanil anaesthesia as the primary study objective and only two directly investigated the effect of anaesthesia on cerebral perfusion and oxygenation (CPO). The evidence evaluated in this systematic review is limited, not focused on propofol and remifentanil and possibly influenced by factors of potential importance for CPO assessment. In one study of healthy pigs, CPO measures were within normal ranges following propofol-remifentanil anaesthesia, and addition of a single remifentanil bolus did not affect regional cerebral oxygen saturation (rSO2). Even though the pool of evidence suggests that propofol and remifentanil alone or in combination have limited effects on CPO in healthy pigs, confirmative evidence is lacking.
Topics: Animals; Brain; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Oxygen; Periodicals as Topic; Piperidines; Propofol; Remifentanil; Swine
PubMed: 27334375
DOI: 10.1186/s13028-016-0223-6 -
Frontiers in Medicine 2021The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the efficacy and safety of remimazolam in clinical endoscopic procedure sedation. The authors...
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the efficacy and safety of remimazolam in clinical endoscopic procedure sedation. The authors searched the databases of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for studies published until January 2, 2021, that reported remimazolam sedation for endoscopic procedures. The sedative efficiency and the incidence of adverse events were assessed as outcomes. Cochrane Review Manager Software 5.3 was used to perform the statistical analyses. Seven relevant studies involving a total of 1,996 patients were identified. We conducted a meta-analysis of the different controls used in the studies, that is, the placebo, midazolam, and propofol. The results demonstrated that remimazolam had a strong sedative effect, and its sedative efficiency was significantly higher than that of placebo [OR = 0.01, 95% CI: (0.00, 0.10), = 30%, <0.00001]. The sedative efficiency of remimazolam was significantly higher than that of midazolam [OR = 0.12, 95% CI: (0.08, 0.21), = 0%, < 0.00001] but lesser than that of propofol [OR = 12.22, 95% CI: (1.58, 94.47), = 0%, = 0.02]. Regarding the adverse events, remimazolam is associated with a lower incidence of hypotension than placebo and midazolam. Similarly, remimazolam was associated with a lower incidence of hypotension and hypoxemia than propofol. Remimazolam is a safe and effective sedative for patients undergoing endoscopic procedures. The sedative efficiency of remimazolam was significantly higher than that of midazolam but slightly lower than that of propofol. However, the respiration and circulation inhibitory effects of remimazolam were weaker than those of midazolam and propofol.
PubMed: 34381792
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2021.655042 -
Medicine Sep 2018Propofol and midazolam are widely used for the sedation of bronchoscopy. This systematic review and meta-analysis is conducted to compare the efficacy of propofol and... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Propofol and midazolam are widely used for the sedation of bronchoscopy. This systematic review and meta-analysis is conducted to compare the efficacy of propofol and midazolam for bronchoscopy.
METHODS
The databases including PubMed, EMbase, Web of science, EBSCO, and Cochrane library databases are systematically searched for collecting the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) regarding the efficacy of propofol and midazolam for bronchoscopy.
RESULTS
This meta-analysis has included 4 RCTs. Compared with midazolam intervention in patients undergoing bronchoscopy, propofol intervention is associated with remarkably reduced recovery time [standard mean difference (SMD) = -0.74; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = -1.04 to -0.45; P < .00001], but demonstrates no significant impact on operation time (SMD = -0.01; 95% CI = -0.16 to 0.13; P = .87), induction time (SMD = -0.58; 95% CI = -1.19 to 0.03; P = .06), lowest oxyhemoglobin saturation (SpO2, SMD = 0.24; 95% CI = -0.09 to 0.58; P = .15), SpO2 <90% [risk ratio (RR) = 1.02; 95% CI = 0.82-1.25; P = .88), and major arrhythmias (RR = 0.56; 95% CI = 0.26-1.19; P = .13).
CONCLUSION
Propofol sedation is able to reduce recovery time and shows similar safety compared with midazolam sedation during bronchoscopy.
Topics: Anesthetics, Intravenous; Bronchoscopy; Humans; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Midazolam; Pain, Procedural; Propofol; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 30200147
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000012229 -
Minerva Anestesiologica 2023This review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessed the side effects and efficacy of esketamine combined with propofol in procedural sedation... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
This review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessed the side effects and efficacy of esketamine combined with propofol in procedural sedation and analgesia.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
The PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant studies occurring between their inceptions and September 2022. The primary outcome was the incidence of sedation-related adverse events. Secondary outcomes included recovery time, total consumption of propofol and body movement.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Data from a total of seven RCTs enrolling 808 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Pooling of data showed that compared with other drug regimens, the esketamine and propofol combination was associated with a reduction in the risk of hypotension (relative risk [RR]: 0.37, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.25 to 0.56) and bradycardia (RR: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.15 to 0.80) as well as an increase in the risk of agitation (RR: 6.29, 95% CI: 1.15 to 34.32). The results also indicated a decrease in propofol consumption (standardized mean difference: -1.45, 95% CI: -2.39 to -0.50) with the use of the esketamine and propofol combination. No significant difference was observed between the two groups in respiratory depression, nausea/vomiting, recovery time or body movement.
CONCLUSIONS
Esketamine combined with propofol has an advantage in reducing the incidence of hypotension and bradycardia during procedural sedation and analgesia, but it may increase the risk of agitation in the recovery phase. More studies of high quality are needed before the widespread adoption of the combination of esketamine and propofol.
Topics: Humans; Propofol; Bradycardia; Pain; Analgesia; Hypotension
PubMed: 36988407
DOI: 10.23736/S0375-9393.23.17100-8 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2023Ciprofol (HSK3486) is a novel intravenous anesthetic agent that bears structural similarity to propofol and displays favorable pharmacodynamic characteristics such as...
Ciprofol (HSK3486) is a novel intravenous anesthetic agent that bears structural similarity to propofol and displays favorable pharmacodynamic characteristics such as rapid onset and offset. The meta-analysis aimed at comparing the efficacy and safety of ciprofol versus propofol in clinical practice. Medline, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library were searched from inception to April 2023. The primary outcome was success rate of sedation/anesthetic induction and differences in sedation/induction time. The secondary outcomes included risks of hemodynamic instability, respiratory complications, and pain on injection, as well as recovery profiles, satisfaction score, and top-up dose requirement. Twelve RCTs (sedation: = 6, anesthetic induction, = 6, all conducted in China) involving 1,793 patients (age: 34-58 years) published from 2021 to 2023 were analyzed. Pooled results revealed no differences in success rate [risk ratio (RR) = 1, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.99 to 1.01, I = 0%, 1,106 patients, = 1] and time required for successful anesthetic induction/sedation [mean difference (MD) = 7.95 s, 95% CI: -1.09 to 16.99, I = 97%, 1,594 patients, = 0.08]. The risks of top-up dose requirement (RR = 0.94, = 0.48), cardiopulmonary complications [i.e., bradycardia (RR = 0.94, = 0.67), tachycardia (RR = 0.83, = 0.68), hypertension (RR = 1.28, = 0.2), hypoxemia/pulmonary depression (RR = 0.78, = 0.24)], and postoperative nausea/vomiting (RR = 0.85, = 0.72), as well as discharge time (MD = 1.39 min, = 0.14) and satisfaction score (standardized MD = 0.23, = 0.16) did not differ significantly between the two groups. However, the ciprofol group had lower risks of hypotension (RR = 0.85, = 0.02) and pain on injection (RR = 0.17, < 0.00001) than the propofol group. The time to full alertness was statistically shorter in the propofol group (i.e., 0.66 min), but without clinical significance. Our results demonstrated similar efficacy between ciprofol and propofol for sedation and anesthetic induction, while ciprofol was associated with lower risks of hypotension and pain on injection. Future studies are warranted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ciprofol in pediatric or the elderly populations. (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/), identifier (CRD42023421278).
PubMed: 37818194
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1225288 -
Endoscopy International Open Sep 2023Upper gastrointestinal (UGI) endoscopy lacks established quality indicators. We conducted an umbrella systematic review of potential quality indicators for the... (Review)
Review
Upper gastrointestinal (UGI) endoscopy lacks established quality indicators. We conducted an umbrella systematic review of potential quality indicators for the detection of UGI cancer and dysplasia. Bibliographic databases were searched up to December 2021 for systematic reviews and primary studies. Studies reporting diagnostic accuracy, detection rates or the association of endoscopy or endoscopist-related factors with UGI cancer or dysplasia detection were included. AMSTAR2 and JBI checklists were used to assess systematic review and primary study quality. Clinical heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis and findings are summarized narratively. Eight systematic reviews and nine primary studies were included. Image enhancement, especially narrow band imaging, had high diagnostic accuracy for dysplasia and early gastric cancer (pooled sensitivity 0.87 (95% CI 0.84-0.89) and specificity 0.97 (0.97-0.98)). Higher detection rates with longer endoscopy examination times were reported in three studies, but no difference was observed in one study. Endoscopist biopsy rate was associated with increased gastric cancer detection (odds ratio 2.5; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.1-2.9). Early esophageal cancer (0.17% vs 0.14%, =0.04) and gastric cancer (0.16% vs 0.12%, =0.02) detection rates were higher with propofol sedation compared to no sedation. Endoscopies performed by trained endoscopists on dedicated Barrett's surveillance lists had higher detection rates (8% vs 3%, <0.001). The neoplasia detection rate during diagnostic endoscopies for Barrett's esophagus was 7% (95% CI 4%-10%). Image enhancement use, longer examination times, biopsy rate and propofol sedation are potential quality indicators for UGI endoscopy. Neoplasia detection rate and dedicated endoscopy lists are additional potential quality indicators for Barrett's esophagus.
PubMed: 37719799
DOI: 10.1055/a-2117-8621 -
Academic Emergency Medicine : Official... Sep 2015Propofol is an agent commonly used for procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) in the emergency department (ED), but it can cause respiratory depression and hypotension.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
Propofol is an agent commonly used for procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) in the emergency department (ED), but it can cause respiratory depression and hypotension. The combination of ketamine-propofol (K-P) is an alternative that theoretically provides a reduction in adverse events compared to propofol. The primary objective of this review was to determine if K-P has a lower frequency of adverse respiratory events in patients undergoing PSA in the ED than propofol alone. Secondary objectives were to compare the proportion of overall adverse events, sedation time, procedure time, and recovery time between K-P and propofol.
METHODS
Electronic searches of Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and CINAHL were conducted and reference lists were hand-searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in English comparing the use of K-P to propofol alone for PSA in the ED were included.
RESULTS
Six RCTs were included with a combined total of 932 patients (K-P = 520, propofol = 412). Five RCTs reported the proportion of adverse respiratory events; the pooled estimate revealed fewer adverse respiratory events with K-P compared to propofol (29.0% vs. 35.4%; risk ratio [RR] = 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.68 to 0.99). There was no significant difference with respect to the proportion of overall adverse events (38.8% vs. 42.5%; RR = 0.88; 95% CI = 0.75 to 1.04). Procedure time was similar when the groups were compared.
CONCLUSIONS
The premise of combining ketamine with propofol is based on the many synergies that theoretically exist between these two agents. In this study, K-P had a lower frequency of adverse respiratory events in patients undergoing PSA in the ED compared to propofol alone.
Topics: Conscious Sedation; Drug Therapy, Combination; Emergency Service, Hospital; Humans; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Ketamine; Pain; Pain Management; Propofol; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 26292077
DOI: 10.1111/acem.12737