The Use of Propofol versus Dexmedetomidine for Patients Receiving Drug-Induced Sleep Endoscopy: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

doi:10.3390/jcm10081585

Chia Nan University of Pharmacy & Science Institutional Repository > 藥理學院 > 保健營養系(所) > 期刊論文 > Item 310902800/34441

jsp.display-item.identifier=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
显示于类别:	[保健營養系(所) ] 期刊論文

文件中的档案:

档案	描述	大小	格式	浏览次数
index.html		0Kb	HTML	285	检视/开启
jcm10081585.pdf		3231Kb	Adobe PDF	127	检视/开启

在CNU IR中所有的数据项都受到原著作权保护.

TAIR相关文章

数据加载中.....