Advanced Search

Home > Journals > Minerva Anestesiologica > Past Issues > Minerva Anestesiologica 2009 December;75(12) > Minerva Anestesiologica 2009 December;75(12):677-83



A Journal on Anesthesiology, Resuscitation, Analgesia and Intensive Care

Official Journal of the Italian Society of Anesthesiology, Analgesia, Resuscitation and Intensive Care
Indexed/Abstracted in: Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 2,036

Frequency: Monthly

ISSN 0375-9393

Online ISSN 1827-1596


Minerva Anestesiologica 2009 December;75(12):677-83


Propofol sedation in a colorectal cancer screening outpatient cohort

Chelazzi C. 1, Consales G. 1, Boninsegni P. 1, Bonanomi G. A. 2, Castiglione G. 2, De Gaudio A. R. 1

1 University of Florence, Department of Critical Care Medicine, Section of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Florence, Italy; 2 Operative Unit of Secondary Prevention and Screening, ISPO, Florence, Italy

AIM: Colorectal cancer screening colonoscopies require sedation for both anxiety and pain. Propofol is used worldwide and allows for rapid and profound sedation with quick recovery after cessation of infusion. However, there is still a debate about whether it should be administered by anesthetists, gastroenterologists, or trained nurses. The aim of the study was to assess the number and proportion of patients who might benefit from the quality and safety of sedation under propofol during colonoscopies in a cohort of colorectal cancer screening outpatients.
METHODS: Patients’ genders, ages, numbers of operative procedures, and prior experience with colonoscopies were recorded, and differences were tested between sedated and unsedated patients. The need for mask ventilation and the rate of anesthetically, medically, or surgically related complications were compared between sedated and unsedated patients. The number of complete colonoscopies, length of the procedures, and time to reach the ileocecal valve were compared between sedated and unsedated patients.
RESULTS: Of 135 colonoscopies, 101 were performed under sedation. All sedated patients underwent complete endoscopic examinations, while 8.9% of unsedated patients had their examination stopped due to excessive discomfort or pain. Colonoscopies tended to be shorter in sedated than unsedated patients. No anesthesia-related complications occurred. In 3/135 patients, a short period (<3 min) of mask ventilation was necessary. One surgical complication occurred among the sedated patients. One unsedated patient suffered a medical complication (dyspnea and ST-T elevation).
CONCLUSIONS: Propofol sedation can be safely applied to colorectal cancer screening outpatients. Sedation was managed by a dedicated anesthetic staff and no patient suffered anesthesia-related complications.

language: English


top of page