Review Article
Perspectives on the Role of Fospropofol in the Monitored Anesthesia Care Setting
Table 1
Key clinical trials evaluating the use of fospropofol as an agent in MAC sedation.
| | Study | | Procedure | Pretreatment | Dose (mg/kg) of fospropofol | Other agents? | Conclusions |
| | Cohen 2008 [69] | 127 | Colonoscopy | 50 μg fentanyl | 2, 5, 6.5, or 8.0 | Midazolam as reference (0.02 mg/kg) | Significant dose-dependent increases in sedation |
| | Cohen et al. 2010 [70] | 314 | Colonoscopy | 50 μg fentanyl | 2.0 or 6.5 | Midazolam (0.02 mg/kg) | Significantly greater sedation success, greater memory retention, and higher physician satisfaction at 6.5 than 2.0 mg/kg of fospropofol |
| | Silvestri et al. 2009 [71] | 252 | Flexible bronchoscopy | 50 μg fentanyl | 2 or 6.5 | No | Significantly higher sedation success at 6.5 mg/kg (88.7% versus 27.5%, ) |
| | Rex et al. 2007, Safety and Efficacy [72] | 314 | Colonoscopy | 50 μg fentanyl | 2.0 or 6.5 | Midazolam (0.02 mg/kg) | Significantly higher sedation success at 6.5 mg/kg (87% versus 26%, ) with significantly greater depth of sedation |
| | Rex et al. 2007, Clear-headed recovery [73] | 314 | Colonoscopy | 50 μg fentanyl | 2.0 or 6.5 | Midazolam (0.02 mg/kg) | Fospropofol patients (both doses) had significantly higher mean percentage of retention postprocedure than midazolam () |
|
|
