European Journal of Pediatrics

, Volume 174, Issue 11, pp 1475–1480 | Cite as

Propofol-alfentanyl versus midazolam-alfentanyl in inducing procedural amnesia of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in children—blind randomised trial

  • Edyta Sienkiewicz
  • Piotr Albrecht
  • Janusz Ziółkowski
  • Piotr DziechciarzEmail author
Original Article


In paediatric patients, esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is commonly performed with the use of sedation. The aim of the study was to compare the effectiveness of propofol and midazolam in providing procedural amnesia and controlling behaviour in children undergoing diagnostic EGD. Children (9–16 years), classified to the first or second class of the American Society of Anaesthesiologists’ physical status classification referred for EGD, were randomly assigned to receive propofol with alfentanyl or midazolam with alfentanyl for sedation during the procedure. Within 120 min after the procedure, patients were repeatedly investigated for memory of the procedure and for memory of pain intensity during EGD with the use of the visual analogue scale. Activity and cooperation of the patient during the procedure was assessed with the relative adequacy scale. Of the 51 children, 48 completed the study. Propofol was significantly better than midazolam in inducing amnesia of procedural pain (mean difference 11.53 mm; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.96 to 22.10), loss of memory of the procedure (relative risk 0.4; 95 % CI 0.21 to 0.59) and controlling behaviour (relative risk 2.12; 95 % CI 1.33 to 3.36).

Conclusion: In children sedated for EGD, propofol is significantly better than midazolam at providing procedural amnesia and controlling behaviour during the procedure.

What is known:

There is still the matter of debate what is the most safe and effective way to provide sedation for paediatric esophagogastroduodenoscopy in children.

What is new:

In children sedated for gastroduodensocopy propofol is significantly better than midazolam at providing amnesia, reported procedural pain and controlling behaviour during the procedure.


Pain Deep sedation General anaesthesia Endoscopy Children 



Confidence interval




Mean difference






Relative adequacy scale


Relative risk


Visual analogue scale



We would like to thank Beata Korus our paediatric endoscopy nurse for her cooperation in performing this trial.

Conflict of interest

This work was funded by the Medical University of Warsaw. The authors declare that no financial or other conflicts of interest exist in relation to the content of the article.

Authors’ contribution

ES and PD initially conceptualised this study. All authors contributed to the study protocol. ES, JZ and PD were responsible for data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, and preparation of the report. AP contributed to data analysis and data interpretation. ES and PD assumed the main responsibility for the writing of the first draft of this manuscript. All authors contributed to (and agreed upon) the final version.


  1. 1.
    Alados-Arboledas FJ, Millán-Bueno P, Expósito-Montes JF, de la Cruz-Moreno J, Pérez-Parras A, Arévalo-Garrido A (2011) Safety and efficacy of continuous infusion propofol for diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in spontaneous breathing. An Pediatr (Barc) 75:124–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    American Academy of Pediatrics, American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry, Coté CJ, Wilson S, Work Group on Sedation (2006) Guidelines for monitoring and management of pediatric patients during and after sedation for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures: an update. Pediatrics 18:2587–2602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bailey B, Gravel J, Daoust R (2012) Reliability of the visual analog scale in children with acute pain in the emergency department. Pain 153:839–842CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Blount R, Zempsky W, Jaaniste T, Evans S, Cohen L, Dvine K, Zeltzer L (2009) Management of pediatric pain and distress due to medical procedures. In: Roberts M, Steele R (eds) Handbook of pediatric psychology, 4th edn. Gilford Press, New York, pp 171–188Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chen PH, Wu TC, Chiu CY (2012) Pediatric gastrointestinal endoscopic sedation: a 2010 nationwide survey in Taiwan. Pediatr Neonatol 53:188–192CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dar AQ, Shah ZA (2010) Anesthesia and sedation in pediatric gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures: a review. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2:257–262PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Elitsur Y, Blankenship P, Lawrence Z (2000) Propofol sedation for endoscopic procedures in children. Endoscopy 32:788–791CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Howard R, Carter B, Curry J, Association of Paediatric Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland (2012) Good practice in postoperative and procedural pain management, 2nd edition. Paediatr Anaesth 22(suppl 1):1Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kain ZN, Hofstadter MB, Mayes LC, Krivutza DM, Alexander G, Wang SM, Reznick JS (2000) Midazolam: effects on amnesia and anxiety in children. Anesthesiology 93:676–684CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    McGrath PJ, Walco GA, Turk DC et al (2008) Core outcome domains and measures for pediatric acute and chronic/recurrent pain clinical trials. J Pain 9:771–783CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Oh JE, Lee HJ, Lee YH (2013) Propofol versus midazolam for sedation during esophagogastroduodenoscopy in children. Clin Endosc 46:368–372PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Powell CV, Kelly AM, Williams A (2001) Determining the minimum clinically significant difference in visual analog pain score for children. Ann Emerg Med 37:28–31CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rafeey M, Ghojazadeh M, Feizo Allah Zadeh H, Majidi H et al (2010) Use of oral midazolam in pediatric upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Pediatr Int 52:191–195CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Squires R, Morriss F, Schluterman S, Krivutza DM, Alexander G, Wang SM, Reznick JS (1995) Efficacy, safety, and cost of intravenous sedation versus general anesthesia in children undergoing endoscopic procedures. Gastrointest Endosc 41:99–104CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tsao JC, Lu Q, Kim SC, Zeltzer LK (2006) Relationships among anxious symptomatology, anxiety sensitivity and laboratory pain responsivity in children. Cogn Behav Ther 35:207–215PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    van Beek EJ, Leroy PL (2012) Safe and effective procedural sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy in children. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 54:171–185CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Van Houten JS, Crane SA, Janardan SK, Wells K (1998) A randomized, prospective, double blind comparison of midazolam (Versed) and emulsifield diazepam (Dizac) for opioid-based, conscious sedation in endoscopic procedures. Am J Gastroenterol 93:170–174CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Edyta Sienkiewicz
    • 1
  • Piotr Albrecht
    • 1
  • Janusz Ziółkowski
    • 2
  • Piotr Dziechciarz
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Paediatric Gastroenterology and NutritionThe Medical University of WarsawWarsawPoland
  2. 2.Department of Paediatric Anesthesiology and Intensive TherapyThe Medical University of WarsawWarsawPoland
  3. 3.Department of PaediatricsThe Medical University of WarsawWarsawPoland

Personalised recommendations