RESUMO
The evidence on the attitude of 60 cancer out-patients to fibrocolonoscopy carried out under general anesthesia was evaluated versus different procedures of intravenous injection. Most patients were scared prior to examination; 83.3% felt sleepy during the procedure while 85% of those anesthetized wouldn't mind receiving narcosis for repeat examination. Propofol (diprivan) alone showed an advantage over midazolam (dormicum) in being more tolerable and cutting stay at hospital by a third. Ketamin proved undesirable due to psychomimetic effects and delayed regaining of consciousness.
Assuntos
Anestesia Geral , Colonoscopia , Neoplasias Gastrointestinais , Adulto , Idoso , Anestesia Geral/métodos , Anestésicos Combinados/administração & dosagem , Anestésicos Combinados/farmacologia , Anestésicos Dissociativos/efeitos adversos , Anestésicos Intravenosos/farmacologia , Colonoscopia/psicologia , Estado de Consciência/efeitos dos fármacos , Interpretação Estatística de Dados , Medo , Tecnologia de Fibra Óptica , Humanos , Ketamina/administração & dosagem , Ketamina/efeitos adversos , Tempo de Internação , Midazolam/administração & dosagem , Midazolam/farmacologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pacientes Ambulatoriais , Satisfação do Paciente , Pacientes/psicologia , Propofol/farmacologia , Inquéritos e QuestionáriosRESUMO
Various methods of total anesthesia for colonoscopy in cancer patients, carried out in a outpatient setting, are compared. Diprivane and dormicum were used as monoanesthesia and in combinations with ketamine and fentanyl. Diprivane anesthesia was the optimal as regards the velocity of recovery of psychophysiological functions. Ketamine was acknowledged inefficient because of long awakening and psychotic effects.
