Assessment of Sedation Quality and Maternal-Fetal Safety Using Remifentanil versus Midazolam in Monitored Anesthesia Care during Diagnostic Hysteroscopy

在诊断性宫腔镜检查期间的监测麻醉护理中,使用瑞芬太尼与咪达唑仑评估镇静质量和母胎安全性

阅读:1

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Monitored anesthesia care (MAC) is increasingly utilized in diagnostic hysteroscopy to ensure patient comfort while maintaining safety. Among various agents, remifentanil and midazolam are commonly employed, but comparative data on their sedation quality and maternal-fetal safety profiles during hysteroscopy in reproductive-age women remain limited. METHODS: This prospective, randomized, controlled trial included 120 women undergoing diagnostic hysteroscopy. Participants were randomized into two groups: Group R (remifentanil infusion at 0.05-0.1 µg/kg/min) and Group M (midazolam bolus 0.05 mg/kg followed by 0.02 mg/kg as needed). Primary outcomes were sedation quality (Ramsay Sedation Score [RSS], patient and surgeon satisfaction), and secondary outcomes included hemodynamic stability, recovery time, and fetal safety indicators (serum β-hCG and uterine perfusion on Doppler ultrasonography pre- and post-procedure). RESULTS: Group R had significantly better sedation depth (RSS: 3.8 ± 0.6 vs. 2.9 ± 0.5, P < 0.001), shorter recovery time (11.2 ± 2.1 min vs. 24.7 ± 3.6 min, P < 0.001), and higher patient satisfaction (94.1% vs. 78.3%, P = 0.018). Hemodynamic parameters remained stable in both groups. No significant difference was found in fetal safety markers (serum β-hCG: P = 0.41; uterine perfusion index: P = 0.57). CONCLUSION: Remifentanil provides superior sedation quality and faster recovery without compromising maternal-fetal safety compared to midazolam during MAC for diagnostic hysteroscopy. It is a viable alternative for short gynecological procedures in reproductive-age women.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。