Conscious or unconscious

The impact of sedation choice on colon adenoma detection

Mark Metwally, Nicholas Agresti, William B. Hale, Victor Ciofoaia, Ryan O'Connor, Jonathan Fine, Seth A. Gross, Michael B. Wallace, Yun Wang

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

21 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

AIM: To determine if anesthesiologist-monitored use of propofol results in improved detection of adenomas when compared with routine conscious sedation. METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted at two separate hospital-based endoscopy units where approximately 12 000 endoscopic procedures are performed annually, with one endoscopy unit exclusively using anesthesiologist-monitored propofol. Three thousand two hundred and fifty-two patients underwent initial screening or surveillance colonoscopies. Our primary end point was the adenoma detection rate, defined as the number of patients in whom at least one adenoma was found, associated with the type of sedation. RESULTS: Three thousand two hundred and fifty-two outpatient colonoscopies were performed by five selected endoscopists. At least one adenoma was detected in 27.6% of patients (95% CI = 26.0-29.1) with no difference in the detection rate between the anesthesiologist -propofol and group and the gastroenterologist-midazolam/fentanyl group (28.1% vs 27.1%, P = 0.53). CONCLUSION: The type of sedation used during co-lonoscopy does not affect the number of patients in whom adenomatous polyps are detected.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)3912-3915
Number of pages4
JournalWorld Journal of Gastroenterology
Volume17
Issue number34
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 14 2011

Fingerprint

Adenoma
Colon
Propofol
Colonoscopy
Endoscopy
Conscious Sedation
Adenomatous Polyps
Midazolam
Fentanyl
Outpatients
Retrospective Studies
Anesthesiologists

Keywords

  • Adenoma
  • Colonoscopy
  • References
  • Sedation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

Metwally, M., Agresti, N., Hale, W. B., Ciofoaia, V., O'Connor, R., Fine, J., ... Wang, Y. (2011). Conscious or unconscious: The impact of sedation choice on colon adenoma detection. World Journal of Gastroenterology, 17(34), 3912-3915. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v17.i34.3912

Conscious or unconscious : The impact of sedation choice on colon adenoma detection. / Metwally, Mark; Agresti, Nicholas; Hale, William B.; Ciofoaia, Victor; O'Connor, Ryan; Fine, Jonathan; Gross, Seth A.; Wallace, Michael B.; Wang, Yun.

In: World Journal of Gastroenterology, Vol. 17, No. 34, 14.09.2011, p. 3912-3915.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Metwally, M, Agresti, N, Hale, WB, Ciofoaia, V, O'Connor, R, Fine, J, Gross, SA, Wallace, MB & Wang, Y 2011, 'Conscious or unconscious: The impact of sedation choice on colon adenoma detection', World Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 17, no. 34, pp. 3912-3915. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v17.i34.3912
Metwally M, Agresti N, Hale WB, Ciofoaia V, O'Connor R, Fine J et al. Conscious or unconscious: The impact of sedation choice on colon adenoma detection. World Journal of Gastroenterology. 2011 Sep 14;17(34):3912-3915. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v17.i34.3912
Metwally, Mark ; Agresti, Nicholas ; Hale, William B. ; Ciofoaia, Victor ; O'Connor, Ryan ; Fine, Jonathan ; Gross, Seth A. ; Wallace, Michael B. ; Wang, Yun. / Conscious or unconscious : The impact of sedation choice on colon adenoma detection. In: World Journal of Gastroenterology. 2011 ; Vol. 17, No. 34. pp. 3912-3915.
@article{3f7aa048e6bf470c949916e92894d7ba,
title = "Conscious or unconscious: The impact of sedation choice on colon adenoma detection",
abstract = "AIM: To determine if anesthesiologist-monitored use of propofol results in improved detection of adenomas when compared with routine conscious sedation. METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted at two separate hospital-based endoscopy units where approximately 12 000 endoscopic procedures are performed annually, with one endoscopy unit exclusively using anesthesiologist-monitored propofol. Three thousand two hundred and fifty-two patients underwent initial screening or surveillance colonoscopies. Our primary end point was the adenoma detection rate, defined as the number of patients in whom at least one adenoma was found, associated with the type of sedation. RESULTS: Three thousand two hundred and fifty-two outpatient colonoscopies were performed by five selected endoscopists. At least one adenoma was detected in 27.6{\%} of patients (95{\%} CI = 26.0-29.1) with no difference in the detection rate between the anesthesiologist -propofol and group and the gastroenterologist-midazolam/fentanyl group (28.1{\%} vs 27.1{\%}, P = 0.53). CONCLUSION: The type of sedation used during co-lonoscopy does not affect the number of patients in whom adenomatous polyps are detected.",
keywords = "Adenoma, Colonoscopy, References, Sedation",
author = "Mark Metwally and Nicholas Agresti and Hale, {William B.} and Victor Ciofoaia and Ryan O'Connor and Jonathan Fine and Gross, {Seth A.} and Wallace, {Michael B.} and Yun Wang",
year = "2011",
month = "9",
day = "14",
doi = "10.3748/wjg.v17.i34.3912",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "17",
pages = "3912--3915",
journal = "World Journal of Gastroenterology",
issn = "1007-9327",
publisher = "WJG Press",
number = "34",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Conscious or unconscious

T2 - The impact of sedation choice on colon adenoma detection

AU - Metwally, Mark

AU - Agresti, Nicholas

AU - Hale, William B.

AU - Ciofoaia, Victor

AU - O'Connor, Ryan

AU - Fine, Jonathan

AU - Gross, Seth A.

AU - Wallace, Michael B.

AU - Wang, Yun

PY - 2011/9/14

Y1 - 2011/9/14

N2 - AIM: To determine if anesthesiologist-monitored use of propofol results in improved detection of adenomas when compared with routine conscious sedation. METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted at two separate hospital-based endoscopy units where approximately 12 000 endoscopic procedures are performed annually, with one endoscopy unit exclusively using anesthesiologist-monitored propofol. Three thousand two hundred and fifty-two patients underwent initial screening or surveillance colonoscopies. Our primary end point was the adenoma detection rate, defined as the number of patients in whom at least one adenoma was found, associated with the type of sedation. RESULTS: Three thousand two hundred and fifty-two outpatient colonoscopies were performed by five selected endoscopists. At least one adenoma was detected in 27.6% of patients (95% CI = 26.0-29.1) with no difference in the detection rate between the anesthesiologist -propofol and group and the gastroenterologist-midazolam/fentanyl group (28.1% vs 27.1%, P = 0.53). CONCLUSION: The type of sedation used during co-lonoscopy does not affect the number of patients in whom adenomatous polyps are detected.

AB - AIM: To determine if anesthesiologist-monitored use of propofol results in improved detection of adenomas when compared with routine conscious sedation. METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted at two separate hospital-based endoscopy units where approximately 12 000 endoscopic procedures are performed annually, with one endoscopy unit exclusively using anesthesiologist-monitored propofol. Three thousand two hundred and fifty-two patients underwent initial screening or surveillance colonoscopies. Our primary end point was the adenoma detection rate, defined as the number of patients in whom at least one adenoma was found, associated with the type of sedation. RESULTS: Three thousand two hundred and fifty-two outpatient colonoscopies were performed by five selected endoscopists. At least one adenoma was detected in 27.6% of patients (95% CI = 26.0-29.1) with no difference in the detection rate between the anesthesiologist -propofol and group and the gastroenterologist-midazolam/fentanyl group (28.1% vs 27.1%, P = 0.53). CONCLUSION: The type of sedation used during co-lonoscopy does not affect the number of patients in whom adenomatous polyps are detected.

KW - Adenoma

KW - Colonoscopy

KW - References

KW - Sedation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80054799496&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80054799496&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3748/wjg.v17.i34.3912

DO - 10.3748/wjg.v17.i34.3912

M3 - Article

VL - 17

SP - 3912

EP - 3915

JO - World Journal of Gastroenterology

JF - World Journal of Gastroenterology

SN - 1007-9327

IS - 34

ER -