Different anesthesiological techniques are currently used for intragastric balloon positioning and removal. The aim of this study is to compare different anesthesiological approaches for balloon positioning and removal in a large multicentric patient population. Retrospective multicenter study was conducted. From May 2000 to April 2008, 3,824 patients underwent BIB(A (R)) placement [1,022 male/2,802 female; mean age 39.5 +/- A 14.7 years, range 12-71 years; mean body mass index (BMI) 44.8 +/- A 9.7 kg/m(2), range 28.0-79.1 kg/m(2); excess weight (EW) 59.1 +/- A 29.8 kg, range 16-210 kg; %EW 89.3 +/- A 31.7, range 21.4-262]. Patients were allocated to three groups according to anesthesiological technique used: conscious sedation (group A), deep sedation (group B), and general anesthesia (group C). Intragastric balloon was placed after diagnostic endoscopy and removed after 6 months. Both positioning and removal were done under different protocols. Conscious sedation was obtained with topical lidocaine spray, adding diazepam (0.05-0.1 mg/kg iv) or midazolam (0.03-0.05 mg/kg iv). Deep sedation was obtained with propofol alone or adding other drugs such as midazolam, meperidine/fentanyl or meperidine/fentanyl + midazolam. General anesthesia was obtained with midazolam premedication (0.01-0.02 mg/kg iv) followed by induction with propofol (1-1.5 mg/kg iv) + Norcuron (80 mcg/kg iv) + fentanyl (0.5-1 mcg/kg iv), and maintenance with propofol (50-150 mu g/kg/min) or sevorane. Oxygen saturation, hemodynamic stability, major anesthesiological complications and related mortality, patient satisfaction, time to return to autonomous walking, duration of procedure, and hospital stay were considered. Sedation-related mortality was absent. A significant number of patients with bronchoinhalation during balloon removal was observed with general anesthesia (P < 0.001). BIB positioning and removal should be performed under conscious sedation for patient safety and comfort, and technical success.
Intragastric balloon positioning and removal: sedation or general anesthesia?
Roberta Maselli;
2011-01-01
Abstract
Different anesthesiological techniques are currently used for intragastric balloon positioning and removal. The aim of this study is to compare different anesthesiological approaches for balloon positioning and removal in a large multicentric patient population. Retrospective multicenter study was conducted. From May 2000 to April 2008, 3,824 patients underwent BIB(A (R)) placement [1,022 male/2,802 female; mean age 39.5 +/- A 14.7 years, range 12-71 years; mean body mass index (BMI) 44.8 +/- A 9.7 kg/m(2), range 28.0-79.1 kg/m(2); excess weight (EW) 59.1 +/- A 29.8 kg, range 16-210 kg; %EW 89.3 +/- A 31.7, range 21.4-262]. Patients were allocated to three groups according to anesthesiological technique used: conscious sedation (group A), deep sedation (group B), and general anesthesia (group C). Intragastric balloon was placed after diagnostic endoscopy and removed after 6 months. Both positioning and removal were done under different protocols. Conscious sedation was obtained with topical lidocaine spray, adding diazepam (0.05-0.1 mg/kg iv) or midazolam (0.03-0.05 mg/kg iv). Deep sedation was obtained with propofol alone or adding other drugs such as midazolam, meperidine/fentanyl or meperidine/fentanyl + midazolam. General anesthesia was obtained with midazolam premedication (0.01-0.02 mg/kg iv) followed by induction with propofol (1-1.5 mg/kg iv) + Norcuron (80 mcg/kg iv) + fentanyl (0.5-1 mcg/kg iv), and maintenance with propofol (50-150 mu g/kg/min) or sevorane. Oxygen saturation, hemodynamic stability, major anesthesiological complications and related mortality, patient satisfaction, time to return to autonomous walking, duration of procedure, and hospital stay were considered. Sedation-related mortality was absent. A significant number of patients with bronchoinhalation during balloon removal was observed with general anesthesia (P < 0.001). BIB positioning and removal should be performed under conscious sedation for patient safety and comfort, and technical success.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
fulltext(1).pdf
accesso aperto
Tipologia:
Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza:
Creative commons
Dimensione
190.86 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
190.86 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.