Begin main content

Sedation and Anesthesia Options for Diagnostic Procedures: A Review of Clinical Effectiveness and Guidelines

Last updated: May 8, 2015
Project Number: RC0654-000
Product Line: Rapid Response
Research Type: Devices and Systems
Report Type: Summary with Critical Appraisal
Result type: Report

Question

  1. What is the clinical effectiveness of sedation and anesthesia options for patients undergoing diagnostic procedures who are required to remain still?
  2. What are the evidence-based guidelines associated with sedation and anesthesia options for patients undergoing diagnostic procedures who are required to remain still?

Key Message

Considerable heterogeneity in the studies identified. Propofol-based regimens may be effective in reducing both the recovery and procedure time compared to traditional sedatives in adults undergoing diagnostic endoscopy while the value of local anesthesia in adults undergoing CT/MR-arthrography remains unclear. Among pediatrics, the evidence suggests that sedation/anesthesiology can be safe and efficacious for a variety of diagnostic procedures. One clinical practice guideline, specific to pediatrics, stated that the pharmacological choice should take into account patients’ needs and preferences although, chloral hydrate or midazolam were recommended for patients undergoing painless imaging given its wider safety margin.