• Zhizhen Wang, Zhi Hu, and Tianyang Dai.
• Department of Thoracic Surgery, The Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, Luzhou City, Sichuan, P.R. China.
• Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Sep 1; 97 (36): e12229.

BackgroundPropofol and midazolam are widely used for the sedation of bronchoscopy. This systematic review and meta-analysis is conducted to compare the efficacy of propofol and midazolam for bronchoscopy.MethodsThe databases including PubMed, EMbase, Web of science, EBSCO, and Cochrane library databases are systematically searched for collecting the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) regarding the efficacy of propofol and midazolam for bronchoscopy.ResultsThis meta-analysis has included 4 RCTs. Compared with midazolam intervention in patients undergoing bronchoscopy, propofol intervention is associated with remarkably reduced recovery time [standard mean difference (SMD) = -0.74; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = -1.04 to -0.45; P < .00001], but demonstrates no significant impact on operation time (SMD = -0.01; 95% CI = -0.16 to 0.13; P = .87), induction time (SMD = -0.58; 95% CI = -1.19 to 0.03; P = .06), lowest oxyhemoglobin saturation (SpO2, SMD = 0.24; 95% CI = -0.09 to 0.58; P = .15), SpO2 <90% [risk ratio (RR) = 1.02; 95% CI = 0.82-1.25; P = .88), and major arrhythmias (RR = 0.56; 95% CI = 0.26-1.19; P = .13).ConclusionPropofol sedation is able to reduce recovery time and shows similar safety compared with midazolam sedation during bronchoscopy.

15 keywords...

hide…