BACKGROUND There are limited data regarding the efficacy and safety of remifentanil sedation for diagnostic bronchoscopy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of remifentanil by comparing it with those of conventional drugs, midazolam and propofol. METHODS A retrospective study of 186 patients who underwent diagnostic bronchoscopy at Chonbuk National University Hospital was performed. Patients were classified into the remifentanil group and midazolam/propofol group according to the drugs used during bronchoscopy. RESULTS Of the 186 patients, 111 patients received remifentanil and 75 received midazolam/propofol during the bronchoscopy. The proportion of patients who required bronchoscopy for endobronchial inspection alone was significantly higher in the midazolam/propofol group than in the remifentanil group (93.3% vs. 73.0%; p <  0.001). In contrast, the proportion of patients who required more invasive procedures, such as bronchoscopic biopsy, bronchoalveolar lavage, or transbronchial lung biopsy, was significantly higher in the remifentanil group than in the midazolam/propofol group (27.0% vs. 6.7%; p <  0.001). The recovery time was significantly shorter in the remifentanil group than in the midazolam/propofol group (mean 6.4 min vs. 11.6 min, p <  0.001). There were no significant differences between the groups with regard to safety events including desaturation, hypotension, and arrhythmia. CONCLUSIONS Despite the higher proportion of patients who underwent more invasive procedures in the remifentanil group than in the midazolam/propofol group, there was no significant difference in safety events between the groups. Those in the remifentanil group also demonstrated a faster recovery time than those in the midazolam/propofol group.

中文翻译：

---

柔性纤维支气管镜检查期间的镇静作用：比较瑞芬太尼与咪达唑仑/丙泊酚的临床有效性和安全性。

背景技术关于瑞芬太尼镇静用于诊断性支气管镜检查的功效和安全性的数据有限。这项研究的目的是通过与常规药物咪达唑仑和丙泊酚进行比较，评估瑞芬太尼的临床疗效和安全性。方法回顾性分析了春北国立大学医院186例接受了诊断性支气管镜检查的患者。根据支气管镜检查期间使用的药物，将患者分为瑞芬太尼组和咪达唑仑/丙泊酚组。结果在186例患者中，支气管镜检查中有111例患者接受了瑞芬太尼，75例患者接受了咪达唑仑/异丙酚。咪达唑仑/丙泊酚组仅需进行支气管镜检查以进行支气管内检查的患者比例显着高于瑞芬太尼组（93。3％和73.0％；p <0.001）。相比之下，瑞芬太尼组中需要更多侵入性手术（例如，支气管镜活检，支气管肺泡灌洗或经支气管肺活检）的患者比例显着高于咪达唑仑/丙泊酚组（27.0％vs. 6.7％； p < 0.001）。瑞芬太尼组的恢复时间明显短于咪达唑仑/丙泊酚组（平均6.4分钟对11.6分钟，p <0.001）。两组之间在安全性事件（包括去饱和，低血压和心律不齐）方面无显着差异。结论尽管瑞芬太尼组接受侵入性手术的患者比例比咪达唑仑/丙泊酚组高，但两组之间的安全事件无显着差异。