ABSTRACT
Background/Aims@#The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of sedation with propofol as an alternative to benzodiazepine drugs in outpatient endoscopy. @*Methods@#In this prospective study, examinees who underwent outpatient endoscopy under propofol sedation and submitted a nextday questionnaire with providing informed consent were evaluated. Periprocedural acute responses, late adverse events within 24 hours, and examinee satisfaction were evaluated. @*Results@#Among the 4,122 patients who received propofol in the 17,978 outpatient-based endoscopic examinations performed between November 2016 and March 2018, 2,305 eligible examinees (esophagogastroduodenoscopy for 1,340, endoscopic ultrasonography for 945, and total colonoscopy for 20) were enrolled, and their responses to a questionnaire were analyzed. The mean propofol dose was 69.6±24.4 mg (range, 20–200 mg). Diazepam, midazolam, and/or pentazocine in combination with propofol was administered to 146 examinees. Mild oxygen desaturation was observed in 59 examinees (2.6%); and mild bradycardia, in 2 (0.09%). Other severe reactions or late events did not occur. After eliminating 181 invalid responses, 97.7% (2,065/2,124) of the patients desired propofol sedation in future examinations. @*Conclusions@#Propofol sedation was found to be safe—without severe adverse events or accidents—for outpatient endoscopy on the basis of the patients’ next-day self-evaluation. Given the high satisfaction level, propofol sedation might be an ideal tool for painless endoscopic screening.
ABSTRACT
Background/Aims@#The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of sedation with propofol as an alternative to benzodiazepine drugs in outpatient endoscopy. @*Methods@#In this prospective study, examinees who underwent outpatient endoscopy under propofol sedation and submitted a nextday questionnaire with providing informed consent were evaluated. Periprocedural acute responses, late adverse events within 24 hours, and examinee satisfaction were evaluated. @*Results@#Among the 4,122 patients who received propofol in the 17,978 outpatient-based endoscopic examinations performed between November 2016 and March 2018, 2,305 eligible examinees (esophagogastroduodenoscopy for 1,340, endoscopic ultrasonography for 945, and total colonoscopy for 20) were enrolled, and their responses to a questionnaire were analyzed. The mean propofol dose was 69.6±24.4 mg (range, 20–200 mg). Diazepam, midazolam, and/or pentazocine in combination with propofol was administered to 146 examinees. Mild oxygen desaturation was observed in 59 examinees (2.6%); and mild bradycardia, in 2 (0.09%). Other severe reactions or late events did not occur. After eliminating 181 invalid responses, 97.7% (2,065/2,124) of the patients desired propofol sedation in future examinations. @*Conclusions@#Propofol sedation was found to be safe—without severe adverse events or accidents—for outpatient endoscopy on the basis of the patients’ next-day self-evaluation. Given the high satisfaction level, propofol sedation might be an ideal tool for painless endoscopic screening.
ABSTRACT
We reviewed 338 cases of colorectal cancer treated in our clinic since 1973. On these patients, 62% were aged 60 years or older.<BR>By location, the malignant tumor was found most frequenty in the rectum, followed by the sigmoid colon.<BR>Resection was perforoed in 94.3%, of the patients with curative resection accounted for 68.3%. In the curative resection group the cumulative 5-year and 10-year survival rates were 77% and 65, 9%, respectively.<BR>Early colorectal cancer was detected in only 26 patients. Mass screening for colorectal cancer using occult blood tests of feces had just recently started in our communities. Thus, further efforts to detect early colorectal cancer are needed.
ABSTRACT
Between September 1972 and December 1987, 808 gastric cancer patients were treated at our hospital. The male/female ratio was 1.7. Gastric resection was performed on 88% of the patients, while curative resection was performed on 59.2%. The operative mortarity rate was 1.8%.<BR>In patients undergoing surgery, the cumulative 5-year survival rates according to stage were 96.4% for stage 1, 68.6% for stage 2, 48.7% for stage 3 and 4.5% for stage 4.<BR>With the spread of a mass screening, many cases of early gastric cancer have been detected recently. However, the incidence of advance cancer increased with age. This suggests the necessity of encouraging the aged to participate in the mass screening. Though gastrectomy is safety procedure of encouraging the aged to participate in the mass screening. Though gastrectomy is safety procedure in old patients over 75 years of age, its indications should be evaluated taking into consideration the quality of the patient's life.