A COMPARISON OF TWO DIFFERENT SEDATION TECHNIQUES IN GERIATRIC PATIENTS FOR ENDOSCOPIC UROLOGICAL SURGERY

dc.contributor.authorCelik, Jale Bengi
dc.contributor.authorTopal, Ahmet
dc.contributor.authorErdem, Tuba Berra
dc.contributor.authorKara, Inci
dc.date.accessioned2020-03-26T18:23:28Z
dc.date.available2020-03-26T18:23:28Z
dc.date.issued2012
dc.departmentSelçuk Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness and safety of intravenous propofol-fentanyl and ketamine-midazolam combinations for procedural sedation and analgesia in elderly patients undergoing urological endoscopic surgery. Materials and Method: This prospective study enrolled 80 patients aged 60-80 years ASA I-III requiring endoscopic urological procedures. Patients received intravenous bolus doses of either fentanyl 1 mu g.kg-1 and propofol 1-2 mg.kg-1 in group P or ketamine 1-1.5 mg.kg-1 and midazolam 0.1 mg.kg-1 in group K titrated according to Ramsay sedation scale in the range of 3-4. Results: There were no differences in vital signs, operating times and demographic variables. Time to Aldrete score >= 8 was similar in two groups. Time to PADSS >= 9 was significantly longer in group K than group P (p<0.05). The frequency of vertigo, nausea, vomiting, visual disturbances, laryngeal spasm and hallucinations were higher in group K (p<0.05). But pain of injection and respiratory depression were more frequent in group P (p<0.05). Excessive salivation, tachycardia, bradycardia, hypotension, hypertension were similar in both groups. Conclusion: Hemodynamic changes and degrees of sedation showed that propofol-fentanyl and ketamine-midazolam combinations can safely be used in geriatric patients undergoing endoscopic urological procedures. However, in the propofol-fentanyl group the incidence of side effects were lower and the recovery period was shorter than the ketamine-midazolam group.en_US
dc.identifier.endpage60en_US
dc.identifier.issn1304-2947en_US
dc.identifier.issue1en_US
dc.identifier.startpage55en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12395/27660
dc.identifier.volume15en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000303335200011en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ4en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.language.isotren_US
dc.publisherGUNES KITABEVI LTD STIen_US
dc.relation.ispartofTURKISH JOURNAL OF GERIATRICS-TURK GERIATRI DERGISIen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.selcuk20240510_oaigen_US
dc.subjectPropofolen_US
dc.subjectKetamineen_US
dc.subjectConscious Sedationen_US
dc.subjectGeriatricsen_US
dc.titleA COMPARISON OF TWO DIFFERENT SEDATION TECHNIQUES IN GERIATRIC PATIENTS FOR ENDOSCOPIC UROLOGICAL SURGERYen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar