A Trial Comparing Propofol to Midazolam Plus Meperidine Sedation for Outpatient Colonoscopy

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

92 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2006-02-28

Study Completion Date

2006-06-30

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

-to determine if propofol sedation leads to shorter recovery times compared to traditional sedation using midazolam plus meperidine

Related Clinical Trials

Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.

Compare Propofol to Fentanyl and Midazolam for Colonoscopy

NCT01488045

Colon Cancer Rectal Cancer Colonic Diverticulosis

COMPLETED NA

Sedation Techniques for Outpatient Colonoscopy

NCT04686058

Colonoscopy

COMPLETED PHASE3

Satisfaction With Nurse Administered Propofol Sedation vs. Midazolam With Fentanyl Sedation for Endoscopy

NCT01934088

Inflammatory Bowel Disease Endoscopy Sedation

COMPLETED PHASE4

Non-anesthesiologist Administered Propofol Sedation for Colonoscopy - a Randomized Clinical Trial

NCT02067065

Digestive System Diseases Colonoscopy Sedation

COMPLETED NA

Remifentanil Only vs. Midazolam and Meperidine During Elective Colonoscopy

NCT01693185

Diagnostic Colonoscopy Screening

COMPLETED PHASE4

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Colonoscopy is an important diagnostic and therapeutic procedure. It is an invasive procedure, not well tolerated by most patients if performed without sedation. There is considerable variability in the practice of sedation for endoscopic procedures worldwide. There are some centers which perform a significant proportion of gastroscopies and colonoscopies without sedation. On the other hand, general anesthesia is given to more than 90% of patients undergoing colonoscopy in France. Most centers do use conscious sedation, usually in the form of benzodiazepines and/or narcotics, with propofol sedation reserved for difficult cases. Benzodiazepines and narcotics are effective and safe. However, the onset of sedation can be delayed, and in some patients conscious sedation is inadequate, resulting in a poor experience with the procedure. Moreover, there are significant post-sedation side effects, such as nausea, vomiting, and prolonged recovery period. This can substantially increase procedure costs due to the need for prolonged monitoring after endoscopy.

Propofol, a general anesthetic agent, has been routinely used in various procedures and surgeries. It has a fast onset of action (within 30-60 seconds), a short half life (1.8-4.1 minutes) but a narrow therapeutic window. The current package insert of propofol states that only persons trained in the administration of general anesthesia should administer propofol and these physicians should not be involved in the procedure so that patients can be continuously and properly monitored due to the risk of respiratory depression. No deaths associated with propofol sedation have been reported since it was first introduced in gastrointestinal endoscopy in the mid 1980. However, need for mechanical ventilation as a result of propofol sedation has been reported. In a number of small trials propofol was shown to have a superior recovery profile following various endoscopic procedures including gastroscopy, colonoscopy and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Indeed, propofol sedation is now used routinely in elective adult procedures in some centers. However, the lower cost of recovery is offset by the need for an anesthesiologist. Therefore, the use of propofol sedation is limited to selected endoscopic procedures or patients.

Although a number of small randomized trials have explored the efficacy of propofol sedation, the evidence is not definitive. Thus we conducted this study to determine if propofol sedation leads to shorter recovery times in elective outpatient colonoscopy compared to usual care.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Sedation

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

DIAGNOSTIC

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Outcome Assessors

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

1 propofol

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

propofol (sedation for outpatient colonoscopy)

Intervention Type DRUG

2 midazolam plus meperidine

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

midazolam plus meperidine (sedation for outpatient colonoscopy)

Intervention Type DRUG

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

propofol (sedation for outpatient colonoscopy)

Intervention Type DRUG

midazolam plus meperidine (sedation for outpatient colonoscopy)

Intervention Type DRUG

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* outpatient colonoscopy

Exclusion Criteria

* allergy to propofol , midazolam, meperidine, eggs or soybean
* history of colonic resection
* inability to understand spoken/written English
* dementia
* pregnancy
* unwillingness to participate in the study

Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

75 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No