Spreadsheet: 06a7d9c2-24e0-49f8-a14d-4932e6c24308
Sheet: Sheet1

Unnamed: 0 | Unnamed: 1 | Unnamed: 2 | Unnamed: 3 | Unnamed: 4 | Unnamed: 5 | Unnamed: 6 | Unnamed: 7 | Unnamed: 8 | Unnamed: 9 | Unnamed: 10 | Unnamed: 11 | Unnamed: 12 | Unnamed: 13 | Unnamed: 14 | Unnamed: 15 | Unnamed: 16 | Unnamed: 17 | Unnamed: 18 | Unnamed: 19 | Unnamed: 20 | Unnamed: 21 | Unnamed: 22 | Unnamed: 23
PROPOFOL BY NON-ANESTHESIOLOGISTS
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | ASA/
 |  |  | Title, | Let/ | Med | [NAME] |  |  | Health | Patient | Mod/ |  | [NAME] |  |  |  |  | Sedation | Analgesia | Physiologic | Complications/ | D/C &Other
 | Author | Date | Journal | Abs | Spc | Design | ST | N | Status | Age (yrs) | Deep | Procedure | Agent | Route | Dosage | Intvn #1 | Intvn #2 | Outcomes | Outcomes | Outcomes | Side Effects | Outcomes | Comments
Propofol administered by anesthesiologists vs non-anesthesiologists
1 | [NAME], [NAME], [NAME]. Holub J, Lieberman DA: Anesthesiologist or non-anesthesiologist-administered propofol and cardiopulmonary complications for endoscopy: which is safer? Gastrointest Endosc 2004; 59:AB93 | 2004 | Anesthesiologist or non-anesthesiologist-administered propofol and cardiopulmonary complications for endoscopy: which is safer? Gastrointest Endosc 2004; 59:AB93 | Abs | [NAME]/non-anesth | RS | C | 14572 | ASA 1-4 | * | M | Colonoscopy, EGD or ERCP | Propofol | IV | * | Propofol administered by anesthesiologist | Propofol administered by non-anesthesiologist | * | * | * | Cardiolpulmonary complications (adjusted relative risk = 0.538) | * | Propofol administered by anesthesiologists vs non-anesthesiologists and cardiopulmonary complications
Propofol single-agents - observational studies, case reports, or non-pertinent comparison groups
1 | [NAME], Bonilla Y, Bronstein M, Ruiz R, [NAME], [NAME], Leamus A, [NAME] sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy administered by nursing staff under gastroenterologist supervision. Gastrointest Endosc 2005; 61:AB108 | 2005 | Propofol sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy administered by nursing staff under gastroenterologist supervision. Gastrointest Endosc 2005; 61:AB108 | Abs | Gastroent | RS | D | 7000 | ASA 1-2 (70% of pts) | * | * | Endoscopy | Propofol | * | median = 10-20 mg/min | Propofol (administered by nurses under gastroenterologist supervision) | * | Time to recovery of normal neuromuscular status (median = 15 min) | * | PO2 desaturation < 85% (0.11% of pts; 8 cases), ventilatory complications (0.12% of pts) | Pain at injection site (28% of pts) | Procedural tolerance and sedation satisfaction (good/excellent; 98% of cases) | Propofol administered by nurses under Endoscopist supervision; one ventilatory failure requiring GA & intubation
2 | [NAME], [NAME], [NAME], Johnstone B, Jaeger J, [NAME] D: Cardiovascular complications after GI endoscopy: occurrence and risks in a large hospital system. Gastrointest Endosc 2004; 60:679-685 | 2004 | Cardiovascular complications after GI endoscopy: occurrence and risks in a large hospital system. Gastrointest Endosc 2004; 60:679-685 | * | Gastroent | RS | C | 165 | * | * | * | Colonoscopy, upper endoscopy, ERCP or TEE | Propofol or other (unspecified) drugs | IV | * | Propofol | Non-Propofol drugs | * | * | * | Cardiovascular complications (odds ratio of 4.6 with propofol use) | * | Propofol an independent risk factor for cardiovascular complications; 26 pts with complications and 139 controls
3 | [NAME], Schnieper P, Drewe J, Pflimlin E, Beglinger C: Safety of propofol for conscious sedation during endoscopic procedures in high-risk patients-a prospective, controlled study. Am J Gastroenterology 2003; 98:1751-1757 | 2003 | Safety of propofol for conscious sedation during endoscopic procedures in high-risk patients-a prospective, controlled study. Am J Gastroenterology 2003; 98:1751-1757 | * | Gastroent | NR | D | 1284 | ASA 1-4 | m = 64 | * | Gastroscopy, colonoscopy or combined gastroscopy/colonoscopy | Propofol | IV | 20 mg initial bolus propofol with 10-20 mg additional titration doses for ASA 1-2 patients and 10 mg additional titration doses for ASA 3-4 patients | Propofol | * | * | * | SaO2 < 90% (3.6% of ASA 3-4 patients vs 1.7% of ASA 1-2 patients), MAP decline >25% (26.7% of ASA 3-4 patients vs 33.1% of ASA 1-2 patients), HR decline >20% (8.8% of ASA 3-4 patients vs 10.9% of ASA 1-2 patients) | Emergency interventions/jaw thrust maneuver, mask ventilation, and/or positioning of nasopharyngeal tube (0.9% of ASA 3-4 patients vs 0.2% of ASA 1-2 patients) | * | Propofol for ASA 3-4 vs ASA 1-2, patients matched for age, gender, duration of procedure
4 | [NAME], Schnieper P, Drewe J, Pflimlin E, Beglinger C: Conscious sedation with propofol in elderly batients: a prospective evaluation. Aliment Pharrnacol Ther 2003; 17:1493-1501 | 2003 | Conscious sedation with propofol in elderly batients: a prospective evaluation. Aliment Pharrnacol Ther 2003; 17:1493-1501 | * | Gastroent | NR | D | 4473 | ASA 1-4 | <70, 70-85 and >85 | * | EGD, colonoscopy, ECRP, sigmoidoscopy or endosonography | Propofol | IV | 146.5 mg vs 101.5 mg vs 73.1 mg propofol (for the 3 specified age groups) | Propofol (administered to <70 vs 70-85 vs 85 year old patients) | * | * | * | SaO2 < 90% (2.0% of patients <70 vs 3.2% of patients 70-85 vs 4.7% of patients >85 years old), MAP decline >25% (32.8% of patients <70 vs 29.0% of patients 70-85 vs 30.2% of patients >85 years old), HR decline >20% (13.5% of patients <70 vs 14.8% of patients 70-85 vs 13.9% of patients >85 years old), HR < 50 bpm (3.4% of patients <70 vs 4.6% of patients 70-85 vs 5.7% of patients >5 years old) | Emergency interventions/jaw thrust maneuver, mask ventilation, and/or positioning of nasopharyngeal tube (0.3% of patients <70 vs 0.3% of patients 70-85 vs 0.3% of patients >85 years old) | * | Propofol administered by nurses for patients <70, 70-85 and >85 years old
5 | [NAME], Schnieper P, Drewe J, Pflimlin E, Beglinger C: Risk stratification and safe administration of propofol by registered nurses supervised by the gastroenterologist: a prospective observational study of more than 2000 cases. [NAME] 2003; 57:664-671 | 2003 | Risk stratification and safe administration of propofol by registered nurses supervised by the gastroenterologist: a prospective observational study of more than 2000 cases. [NAME] 2003; 57:664-671 | * | Gastroent | NR | D | 2574 | ASA 1-4 | * | * | Colonoscopy, ERCP (endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography), endoscopic ultrasonography | Propofol | IV | 20 mg (initial dose); 10-20 mg (increments) | Propofol (administered by nurses under gastroenterologist supervision) | * | * | * | SaO2 (< 90% = 1.7% of pts), BP (MAP decrease > 25% = 31.9% of pts; SBP below 90 mm Hg = 14.6%), bradycardia (3.7% of pts) | * | * | Propofol administered by nurses under gastroenterologist supervision
6 | Heuss LT. Schnieper P, Pflimlin E, Beglinger C: Nurse-administered sedation with propofol under observation of the endoscopist: a prospective observation study with more than 5000 patients. Gastrointest Endosc 2003; 57:AB105 | 2003 | Nurse-administered sedation with propofol under observation of the endoscopist: a prospective observation study with more than 5000 patients. Gastrointest Endosc 2003; 57:AB105 | Abs | Gastroent | NR | D | 10351 | * | * | * | Various GI | Propofol | * | * | Propofol | * | * | * | SaO2 (< 90% = 0.83%; < 85%  = 0.6% of pts); SaO2 (decrease from baseline = 60.4% of pts; mean change = -2%) | * | * | Propofol administered by nurses
7 | [NAME], [NAME], Walker JA: Nurse administered propofol sedation: safety record among individual nurses and physicians in 3 centers. Am J Gastroenterol 2004; 99:S300 | 2004 | Nurse administered propofol sedation: safety record among individual nurses and physicians in 3 centers. Am J Gastroenterol 2004; 99:S300 | Abs | Gastroent | RS | D | 28697 | * | * | * | Colonoscopy or EGD | Propofol or other (unspecified) drugs | IV | * | Propofol | * | * | * | * | Assisted ventilation required (0.14% of patients) | * | Propofol administered by nurses and supervising endoscopists; record review for events of assisted ventilation
8 | [NAME], [NAME], [NAME], Coates M, [NAME], Goodwine BW, Strahl E, [NAME], Sipe B, [NAME] E, Helper D: Safety of propofol administered by registered nurses with gastroenterologist supervision in 2000 endoscopic cases. Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97:1159-1163 | 2002 | Safety of propofol administered by registered nurses with gastroenterologist supervision in 2000 endoscopic cases. Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97:1159-1163 | * | Gastroent | NR | D | 2000 | * | * | * | Mixed endoscopy cases | Propofol or other (unspecified) drugs | IV | 20-40 mg initial bolus, followed by 10-20 mg to maintain adequate sedation | Propofol | * | * | * | O2 saturation of < 90%; 0.55% of patients; 11/2000), O2 saturation of < 85% (0.25% of patients; 5/2000) | Restlessness (0.1% of patients; 2/2000) | Succussful completion of procedure with propofol alone (99.9%; 2220/2222 procedures) | Propofol administered by nurses supervised by gastroenterologists, both trained in ACLS and propofol use
9 | Tohda G, [NAME], [NAME], [NAME], [NAME] T: Propofol sedation during endoscopic procedures: safety and effective administration by registered nurses, supervised by endoscopists. Gastrointest Endosc 2005; 61:AB123 | 2005 | Propofol sedation during endoscopic procedures: safety and effective administration by registered nurses, supervised by endoscopists. Gastrointest Endosc 2005; 61:AB123 | Abs | Gastroent | RS | D | 25200 | ASA 1-3 | * | M | Upper endoscopy, colonoscopy | Propofol or other (unspecified) drugs | IV | 0.8-1.0 mg/kg initial bolus with additional bolus doses administered if necessary (mean dosage for upper endoscopy = 1.25 mg/kg; mean dosage for colonoscopy = 1.54 mg/kg) | Propofol | * | * | * | SpO2 (< 90% = 6.5% of patients; < 85% = 0.52% of patients), BP < 90mm Hg (3.5% of colonoscopy patients and 0.7% of upper endoscopy patients), HR < 50 bpm (1.7% of patients) | Required oxygen via [NAME] (7.2% of patients) | * | Propofol sedation administration by registered nurses, supervised by endoscopists
10 | Walker JA, McIntyre RD, [NAME] PF, [NAME], Haulk AA, Adesman P, Tolleson S, Parent R, Donnelly R, Rex DK: Nurse-administered propofol sedation without anesthesia specialists in 9152 endoscopic cases in an ambulatory surgery center. Am J Gastroenterol 2003; 98:1744-1750 | 2003 | Nurse-administered propofol sedation without anesthesia specialists in 9152 endoscopic cases in an ambulatory surgery center. Am J Gastroenterol 2003; 98:1744-1750 | * | Gastroent | NR | D | 9152 | ASA 1-4 | 8-96 | * | Endoscopy | Propofol | IV | 30-50 mg (initial dose); 10-20 mg (additional doses) | Propofol (administered by nurses under gastroenterologist supervision) | * | * | * | Prolonged apnea, hypoxemia (0.03% of pts) | Laryngospasm (0.02% of pts) | Hospitalization (0.13%), pt satisfaction (m = 9.5 on scale of 1-10) | Propofol administered by nurses under Endoscopist supervision
11 | Yusoff I, [NAME], [NAME] administered propofol for upper-G1 EUS is safe and effective: a prospective study in 500 patients. Gasrrointest Endosc 2004; 60:356-360 | 2004 | Endoscopist administered propofol for upper-G1 EUS is safe and effective: a prospective study in 500 patients. Gasrrointest Endosc 2004; 60:356-360 | * | Gastroent | NR | D | 500 | ASA 1-2 | * | M | Endoscopy | Propofol | IV | 10 mg/ml (20-30 mg for weight < 60 kg; 40-45 for weight > 60 kg) | Propofol | * | * | * | O2 saturation < 90% (3% of pts); hypoxemia (0.8% of pts) | Recall of procedure (0.6%) | Pt rating of comfortable (100%) | Propofol administered by endoscopist
Propofol combined with other agents - observational studies, case reports, non-pertinent comparison groups or no single-agent control groups
1 | [NAME], Dubovsky AN, Aisenberg J, [NAME]: Propofol for endoscopic sedation: a protocol for safe and effective administration by the gastroenterologist. Gastrointest Endosc 2003; 58: 325-732 | 2003 | Propofol for endoscopic sedation: a protocol for safe and effective administration by the gastroenterologist. Gastrointest Endosc 2003; 58: 325-732 | * | Gastroent | NR | D | 819 | ASA 1-4 | m = 59 | * | Endoscopy | Propofol+midazolam+meperidine | IV | Propofol (52 or 66 mg) | Propofol+midazolam+meperidine | * | * | * | O2 saturation (< 90% 9% of pts), BP (decrease > 20 mm Hg; 27% of pts) | * | * | Propofol+midazolam+meperidine; administered by gastroenterologist; some performed with anesthesiologist
2 | Kulling D, [NAME] R, [NAME] of nonanesthetist sedation with propofol for outpatient colonoscopy and esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Endoscopy 2003; 35:679-682 | 2003 | Safety of nonanesthetist sedation with propofol for outpatient colonoscopy and esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Endoscopy | * | Gastroent | NR | D | 300 | ASA 1-3 | m = 53 | M | Colonoscopy, EGD | Propofol+pethidine+butylscopolamine (for colonoscopy) or propofol alone (for EGD) | IV | 0.25 or 0.5 mg/kg initial dose+10 mg bolus propofol combined with 25 mg pethidine and 20 mg butylscopolamine (for  colonoscopy procedures) or 0.25 or 0.5 mg/kg initial dose+10 mg bolus propofol (for EGD procedures) | Propofol+pethidine+butylscopolamine (for colonoscopy) or propofol alone (for EGD) | * | * | * | O2 saturation (mean lowest = 95%), SpO2 < 90% (3.7% of partients in recovery, 11/300), RR (mean lowest = 12/min), BP (mean lowset = 66 [NAME]), BP below 50 mm Hg (7.3% of patients, 22/300), HR (mean lowest = 68/min), HR below 50/min (3.3% of patients, 10/300) | * | * | Propofol+pethidine+butylscopolamine (colonoscopy) or propofol alone (EGD); separate outcomes not reported
Propofol vs benzodiazepines
1 | [NAME], Grattidge P: Sedation for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: a comparative study of propofol and midazolam. Endoscopy 1995; 27:240-243 | 1995 | Sedation for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: a comparative study of propofol and midazolam. Endoscopy 1995; 27:240-243 | * | Gastroent | RA | Y | 90 | Healthy | m = 44 | * | Endoscopy | Propofol vs midazolam | IV | Propofol (0.6 mg/kg) vs midazolam (0.06 mg/kg_ | Propofol | [NAME] | Level of sedation (deeper, p <  0.001) | * | O2 saturation (< 90%; 92% vs 91% of pts, p = 0.27) | Nausea (13% vs 9%), discomfort (VAS; m = 2.4 vs 2.7) | * | Propofol vs midazolam+meperidine; administered by anesthesiologist or anesthesia nurse
2 | [NAME], [NAME], Dumot JA, Shermock KM, Morrow JB, [NAME], [NAME], Maurer WG: Gastroenterologist-administered propofol versus meperidine and midazolam for advanced upper endoscopy: a prospective, randomized trial. Gastroenterology 2002; 123:8-16 | 2002 | Gastroenterologist-administered propofol versus meperidine and midazolam for advanced upper endoscopy: a prospective, randomized trial. Gastroenterology 2002; 123:8-16 | Abs | Gastroent | RS | C | 537892 | ASA 1-4 | * | M | Colonoscopy, EGD or ERCP | Propofol vs standard sedation (unspecified) | IV | * | Propofol | Standard sedation (unspecified) | * | * | * | [NAME] complications (adjusted relative risk = 1.04) | * | Propofol vs unspecified standard sedation administered by non-anesthesiologists, cardiopulmonary complications
Propofol vs benzodiazepines+opioids
1 | Kongkam P, Pornphisarn B, Rerknimitr R. Non-anesthetist administered propofol for ERCP; efficacy, safety profile and side effect: a prospective randomized trial. [NAME]. 2004; 59:AB127 | 2004 | Non-anesthetist administered propofol for ERCP; efficacy, safety profile and side effect: a prospective randomized trial. [NAME]. 2004; 59:AB127 | Abs | Gastroent | RA | Y | 75 | * | m = 58 | * | ERCP (endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography) | Propofol vs midazolam+meperidine | IV (continuous) | Propofol (m = 224.0 mg); [NAME] (m = 8.5 mg); meperidine (m = 67.7 mg) | Propofol (administered by gastroenterology fellows) | Midazolam+meperidine | * | * | O2 saturation (< 90%; 14.6% vs 38% of pts), SBP (decrease > 25% of baseline (9.76% vs 20.6% of pts), HR (decrease > 25% of baseline (4.88% vs 5.9% of pts) | * | Recovery time (full recovery; at 15 min, propofol = 85.4%/midazolam = 44.1%; at 30 min, propofol = 97.6%/midazolam = 55.9%; at 60 min, propofol = 100%%/midazolam = 70.6%) | Propofol vs midazolam+meperidine; administered by gastroenterology fellows
2 | [NAME], Rex DK, [NAME], [NAME], [NAME], [NAME], [NAME] D: Propofol versus midazolam/meperidine for outpatient colonoscopy: administration by nurses supervised by endoscopists. Gastrointest Endosc 2002; 55:815-825 | 2002 | Propofol [NAME]/meperidine for outpatient colonoscopy: administration by nurses supervised by endoscopists. Gastrointest Endosc 2002; 55:815-825 | * | Gastroent | RA | Y | 80 | ASA 1-2 | m = 53 | * | Endoscopy | Propofol vs midazolam+meperidine | IV | Propofol (m = 218 mg); [NAME] (m = 4.7 mg); meperidine (m = 89.7 mg) | Propofol (administered by nurses under gastroenterologist supervision) | Midazolam+meperidine | Time to sedation (m = 2.1 vs 7.0 min, p < 0.0001), depth of sedation (greater, p < 0.0001) | Pain (at discharge, 10% vs 17.5% of pts; at 48 hrs, 0% vs 7%) | * | * | Recovery time (m = 14.4 vs 33.0 min), pt satisfaction at discharge (m = 9.3 vs 8.6) | Propofol vs midazolam+meperidine; administered by nurses under gastroenterologist supervision
3 | [NAME], [NAME], [NAME], [NAME], [NAME], Liangpunsakul S, Strahl E, [NAME], Rex DK: Propofol versus midazolam/fentanyl for outpatient colonoscopy: administration by nurses supervised by endoscopists. [NAME]; 1:425-432 | 2003 | Propofol [NAME]/fentanyl for outpatient colonoscopy: administration by nurses supervised by endoscopists. [NAME]; 1:425-432 | * | Gastroent | RA | Y | 100 | * | * | * | Colonoscopy | Propofol vs midazolam+fentanyl | IV | Propofol (m = 277 mg); [NAME] (m = 7.2 mg); [NAME] (m = 117 ug) | Propofol (administered by nurse under endoscopist supervision) | Midazolam+fentanyl | Time to sedation (m = 2.1 vs 6.1 min, p < 0.0001), depth of sedation (greater, p < 0.0001) | * | O2 desaturation (requiring mask ventilation; 0% vs 2% of pts), SBP < 90 mm Hg (8% vs 8%), HR < 50 bpm (2% vs 0%) | * | Time to discharge (36.5 vs 46.1 min, p = 0.01), pt satisfaction (VAS; 9.3 vs 9.4, p > 0.50) | Propofol vs midazolam+fentanyl; administered by registered nurse under endoscopist supervision
4 | [NAME], [NAME], Dumot JA, Shermock KM, Morrow JB, [NAME], [NAME], Maurer WG: Gastroenterologist-administered propofol versus meperidine and midazolam for advanced upper endoscopy: a prospective, randomized trial. Gastroenterology 2002; 123:8-16 | 2002 | Gastroenterologist-administered propofol versus meperidine and midazolam for advanced upper endoscopy: a prospective, randomized trial. Gastroenterology 2002; 123:8-16 | * | Gastroent | RA | Y | 75 | ASA 1-3 | m = 55 | * | ERCP (endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography), endoscopic ultrasonography | Propofol vs midazolam+meperidine | IV | Propofol (loading dost = 40 or 50 mg, followed by 10 mg boluses); [NAME] (loading dose < 2 mg, followed by 0.5-1.0 mg increments); meperidine (loading dost < 50 mg, followed by 12.5-24 mg increments) | Propofol (administered by gastroenterologist independent investigator) | Midazolam+meperidine | * | * | O2 saturation (< 90%; 36.8% vs 56.8% of pts; < 85%, 7.9% vs 16.2%), SBP (decrease > 25% of baseline (15.76% vs 18.4% of pts), HR (decrease > 25% of baseline (0% vs 0.8% of pts) | Discomfort (VAS; 6.3 vd 8.7), gagging (VAS; 7.0 vs 9.2), anxiety (VAS; 26.3 vs 20.0) | Recovery (normal activity next day; propofol = 93.8 vs 81.8, p = 0.19), satisfaction (VAS; 90.1 vs 84.9) | Propofol vs midazolam+meperidine; administered by gastroenterologist
Propofol+opioids vs benzodiazepines+opioids
1 | [NAME], Nair S, Norkus EP, Hertan HI, Pitchumoni CS: Propofol versus midazolam and meperidine for conscious sedation in GI endoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2000; 95:1476-1479 | 2000 | Propofol [NAME] and meperidine for conscious sedation in GI endoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2000; 95:1476-1479 | * | Gastroent | NR | Y | 274 | ASA 1-4 | m = 59 | M | Colonoscopy or EGD | Propofol+fentanyl vs midazolam+meperidine | IV | 20-120 mg propofol+0.25-1.5 mg fentanyl vs 2-6 mg midazolam+25-75 mg meperidine | Propofol+fentanyl | Midazolam+meperidine | Deeper level of sedation (1.84 times more likely with propofol vs  midazolam, p = 0.027; controlling for age, sex, duration of treatment, type of procedure, and ASA status) | * | O2 saturation <90% (7.3% vs 2.4% of patients), BP decline > 20 mmHg (24% vs 15.3% of patients) | * | * | Propofol+fentanyl vs midazolam+meperidine for conscious sedation administered by nurse anesthetist
Rejected articles
1 | [NAME] Brill JV, [NAME], [NAME]. Sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy: new practices, new economics. Am J [NAME]; 100:996-1000 | 2005 | Review, descriptive paper, letter or editorial, no original data
2 | [NAME], [NAME]: Colonoscopy - is sedation necessary and is there any role for intravenous propofol? Endoscopy 2000; 32:264-267 | 2000 | Review, descriptive paper, letter or editorial, no original data
3 | [NAME], Rex DK: Review article: registered nurse-administered propofol sedation for endoscopy. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2004; 19:147-155 | 2004 | Review, descriptive paper, letter or editorial, no original data
4 | [NAME], Hightower CD, Wood DA, [NAME], Aisenberg J: Moderate level sedation during endoscopy: a prospective study using low-dose propofol, meperidine/fentanyl, and midazolam. Gastrointest Endosc 2004; 59:795-803 | 2004 | Deep sedation observed in 2% of cases of low-dose propofol, meperidine/[NAME] or midazolam for endoscopy; separate outcomes for each drug not reported
5 | Graber RG: Propofol in the endoscopy suite: an anesthesiologist’s perspective. Gastrointest Endosc 1999; 49:803-806 | 1999 | Review, descriptive paper, letter or editorial, no original data
6 | Guise PA: Asystole following propofol and fentanyi in an anxious patient. Anaesth Intens Care 1991; 19:116-118 | 1991 | Report of asystole following propofol+fentanyi induction in an anxious patient
7 | [NAME], Gevirtz C: Debate: propofol may be safely administered by trained nonanesthesiologists. Am J Gastroenterol. 2004; 99:1207- 1211 | 2004 | Review, descriptive paper, letter or editorial, no original data
8 | Meltzer B: RNs pushing propofol. Outpatient Surg 2003; 4:24-37 | 2003 | Review, descriptive paper, letter or editorial, no original data
9 | [NAME], Vargo JJ, Khandwala F, [NAME] G: Procedure-specific risk of cardiopulmonary complications is same for propofol and traditional sedation: a meta analysis. Gastroenterology. 2005; 128:A-287 | 2005 | Review, descriptive paper, letter or editorial, no original data
10 | [NAME], Vargo JJ, Khandwala F, [NAME] G: Propofol’s safety profile is equivalent to standard sedation with narcotics/benzodiazepines - a meta analysis. Gastroenterology 2005; 128:A-288 | 2005 | Review, descriptive paper, letter or editorial, no original data