Assessment of the effects of @entity3652 - XXXX combination versus @entity1875 -remifentanil combination for sedation during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

@entity1 @entity390 @entity26 @entity3652 @entity1875 @entity158 @entity3575 @entity386
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) as a diagnostic and treatment procedure is used in most biliary tract and pancreatic. Either sedation or general anesthesia could be considered for this procedure. Combining a sedative with an opioid agent can provide effective moderate sedation. This study compared the impact of @entity3652 - @entity3575 (KF) versus propofol-remifentanil (PR) on sedation scale in @entity1 undergoing ERCP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: As a double-blinded randomized clinical trial, 80 @entity1 selected by convenient sampling, allocated randomly into two groups. KF group received @entity3652 0.5 mg/kg body weight intravenously over 60 s and then @entity3575 1 mcg/kg body weight intravenously. PR group received @entity1875 l mg/kg body weight intravenously over 60 s and then remifentanil 0.05 mcg/kg body weight/min intravenously. Intravenous (IV) infusion of @entity1875 was maintained by 50 mcg/kg body weight/min throughout ERCP. Ramsay Sedation Score, vital signs, @entity26 saturation (SpO2), recovery score (modified Aldrete score) and visual analog scales of @entity158 intensity, and endoscopist's satisfaction were considered as measured outcomes. All analysis were analyzed by SPSS Statistics version 22 and using t-test, Chi-square and repeated measured ANOVA and Mann-Whitney tests for data analysis. RESULTS: Respiratory rate and SpO2 level during the time intervals were lower in PR group (P < 0.001). Sedation score at intervals was not significantly different (P = 0.07). The frequency of @entity386 in PR group was significantly higher than the KF group (P = 0.003). The percentage of need to supplemental @entity26 in PR group was 35.1% that was also significantly higher than 8.8% in the KF group (P = 0.008), but the dosage frequency was significantly higher in KF group (P < 0.001). The KF and PR groups average length of stay in the recovery room were 50.71 standard deviation (SD = 9.99) and 42.57 (SD = 11.99) minutes, respectively, indicating a significant difference (P = 0.003). The mean severity of @entity390 in KF and PR groups was, respectively, 2.74 confidence interval (CI = 1.68-3.81) and 0.43 (CI = 0.11-0.75), that was significantly higher in KF group (P < 0.001). The average score of surgeon satisfaction in both KF and PR groups were 7.69 (CI = 7.16-8.21) and 8.65 (CI = 8.25-9.05), respectively, which was higher in KF group (P = 0.004), but the average level of @entity1 satisfaction in KF group was 8.86 (CI = 8.53-9.19) and in PR group was 8.95 (CI - 8.54-9.35) that were not significantly different (P = 0.074). CONCLUSION: There is no statistically significant difference between KF and PR combinations in sedation score, but PR combination provides better @entity158 control, with less @entity390 and shorter recovery time while causing more respiratory side effects, that is, @entity386 and need to @entity26 .
