# Propofol versus Dexmedetomidine for Sedation of Cancer Patients Undergoing Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography: Randomized Single-Blinded Controlled Study

**Authors:** Ahmed Mohamed Soliman, Yehya Mohamed Hamad, Abeer AbdElmonem Almaghraby, Ahmed Abdalla Mohamed, Shady Rady Abdallah

PMC · DOI: 10.5812/aapm-148512 · Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine · 2024-09-09

## TL;DR

This study compares propofol and dexmedetomidine for sedation during ERCP in cancer patients, finding that dexmedetomidine is safer and more effective.

## Contribution

The study provides new evidence that dexmedetomidine is a better sedative option for cancer patients undergoing ERCP compared to propofol.

## Key findings

- Dexmedetomidine reduced hypoxemic events and postoperative nausea compared to propofol.
- Dexmedetomidine provided better intraoperative and postoperative pain control.
- Endoscopist satisfaction was higher with dexmedetomidine.

## Abstract

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a primary diagnostic and therapeutic option for pancreaticobiliary pathologies.

This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine versus propofol during ERCP in cancer patients.

This randomized controlled single-blinded trial was conducted with 202 cancer patients aged 21 to 60 years, of both sexes, with a body mass index of 18.5 to 30 kg/m2, and classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class II - III, who were undergoing ERCP. The patients were randomly assigned to two equal groups. The Propofol Group (n = 101) received a loading dose of propofol (1 - 2 mg/kg over 30 seconds) followed by an infusion (0.05 - 0.1 mg/kg/hour). The Dexmedetomidine Group (n = 101) received a loading dose of dexmedetomidine (1 μg/kg over 10 minutes) followed by an infusion (0.2 - 0.7 μg/kg/hour). The maintenance dose was adjusted during the procedure based on vital signs, Bispectral Index (BIS), and oxygen saturation.

The Dexmedetomidine group showed a significantly lower incidence of intra-procedural hypoxemic events (14.9% vs. 26.7%, P = 0.037) and a comparable incidence of hypotension (17.8% vs. 13.9%, P = 0.441). Dexmedetomidine also demonstrated significantly lower intraoperative pain scores according to the Facial Pain Score (P < 0.05), significantly lower postoperative Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores (P < 0.05), and a lower frequency of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) compared to the Propofol group. Additionally, there was a significantly higher frequency of endoscopist satisfaction in the Dexmedetomidine group compared to the Propofol group (P < 0.05).

Dexmedetomidine can be used as a safe and effective alternative to propofol for deep sedation of cancer patients undergoing ERCP. It is associated with a lower incidence of hypoxemic events, effective intraoperative sedation, quicker recovery, and superior analgesic effects both intraoperatively and postoperatively compared to propofol.

## Linked entities

- **Chemicals:** propofol (PubChem CID 4943), dexmedetomidine (PubChem CID 5311068)
- **Diseases:** cancer (MONDO:0004992)

## Full-text entities

- **Diseases:** Pain (MESH:D010146), PONV (MESH:D020250), hypotension (MESH:D007022), Cancer (MESH:D009369)
- **Chemicals:** Propofol (MESH:D015742), Dexmedetomidine (MESH:D020927), oxygen (MESH:D010100)
- **Species:** Homo sapiens (human, species) [taxon 9606]

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC11895786/full.md

## Figures

5 figures with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC11895786/full.md

## References

33 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC11895786/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC11895786