資料載入中.....
|
請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件:
https://ir.cnu.edu.tw/handle/310902800/34441
|
| 標題: | The Use of Propofol versus Dexmedetomidine for Patients Receiving Drug-Induced Sleep Endoscopy: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials |
| 作者: | Chen, Yi-Ting
Sun, Cheuk-Kwan
Wu, Kuan-Yu
Chang, Ying-Jen
Chiang, Min-Hsien
Chen, I-Wen
Liao, Shu-Wei
Hung, Kuo-Chuan |
| 貢獻者: | Chia Yi Chang Gung Mem Hosp, Dept Anesthesiol
E Da Hosp, Dept Emergency Med
I Shou Univ, Coll Med
Natl Cheng Kung Univ Hosp, Dept Urol
Natl Cheng Kung Univ, Coll Med
Chi Mei Med Ctr, Dept Anesthesiol
Chang Jung Christian Univ, Coll Hlth Sci
Chang Gung Univ, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Mem Hosp, Dept Anesthesiol, Coll Med
Chia Nan Univ Pharm & Sci, Dept Hlth & Nutr |
| 關鍵字: | dexmedetomidine
propofol
drug-induced sleep endoscopy
hypoxemia |
| 日期: | 2021 |
| 上傳時間: | 2023-11-11 11:53:01 (UTC+8) |
| 出版者: | MDPI |
| 摘要: | The sedation outcomes associated with dexmedetomidine compared with those of propofol during drug-induced sleep endoscopy (DISE) remains unclear. Electronic databases (i.e., the Cochrane controlled trials register, Embase, Medline, and Scopus) were searched from inception to 25 December 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the sedation outcomes with dexmedetomidine or propofol in adult patients diagnosed with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) receiving DISE. The primary outcome was the difference in minimum oxygen saturation (mSaO2). Five RCTs (270 participants) published between 2015 and 2020 were included for analysis. Compared with dexmedetomidine, propofol was associated with lower levels of mSaO2 (mean difference (MD) = -7.24, 95% confidence interval (CI) -12.04 to -2.44; 230 participants) and satisfaction among endoscopic performers (standardized MD = -2.43, 95% CI -3.61 to -1.26; 128 participants) as well as a higher risk of hypoxemia (relative ratios = 1.82, 95% CI 1.2 to 2.76; 82 participants). However, propofol provided a shorter time to fall asleep and a lower risk of failed sedation compared with dexmedetomidine. No significant difference was found in other outcomes. Compared with propofol, dexmedetomidine exhibited fewer adverse effects on respiratory function and provided a higher level of satisfaction among endoscopic performers but was associated with an elevated risk of failed sedation. |
| 關聯: | J CLIN MED, v.10, n.8, pp.1585 |
| 顯示於類別: | [保健營養系(所) ] 期刊論文
|
文件中的檔案:
| 檔案 |
描述 |
大小 | 格式 | 瀏覽次數 |
|---|
| index.html | | 0Kb | HTML | 101 | 檢視/開啟 | | jcm10081585.pdf | | 3231Kb | Adobe PDF | 52 | 檢視/開啟 |
|
在CNU IR中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.
|
