Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 8, 2026

Guidelines for Elective Pediatric Fiberoptic Intubation
Published on: January 17, 2011
Propofol versus Midazolam for Sedation during Esophagogastroduodenoscopy in Children
Ji Eun Oh1, Hae Jeong Lee, Young Hwan Lee
1Department of Internal Medicine, Samsung Changwon Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Changwon, Korea.
Insights
Propofol offers faster recovery for pediatric patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy compared to midazolam. Both sedatives are safe for children, with propofol showing quicker recovery times.
Area of Science:
- Pediatric Gastroenterology
- Anesthesiology
- Pharmacology
Background:
- Sedation is crucial for pediatric esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD).
- Propofol and midazolam are common sedative agents.
- Evaluating their comparative efficacy and safety in children is important.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the efficacy and safety of propofol versus midazolam for sedation during pediatric EGD.
- To assess recovery time, procedure length, and need for supportive measures.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective review of 62 pediatric patients undergoing ambulatory EGD.
- Comparison of 34 patients receiving propofol with 28 patients receiving midazolam.
- Analysis of procedure length, recovery time, and vital signs.
Main Results:
- No significant difference in procedure length between propofol and midazolam groups.
- Significantly faster recovery time with propofol (30 min) vs. midazolam (59 min).
- Propofol group showed more stable heart rates and less pain during administration, despite some localized pain.
Conclusions:
- Propofol provides faster recovery and comparable safety to midazolam for pediatric EGD.
- Propofol is an effective alternative for sedation in children undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.
Background/Aims:
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of propofol and midazolam for sedation during esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in children.
Methods:
We retrospectively reviewed the hospital records of 62 children who underwent ambulatory diagnostic EGD during 1-year period. Data were collected from 34 consecutive patients receiving propofol alone. Twenty-eight consecutive patients who received sedation with midazolam served as a comparison group. Outcome variables were length of procedure, time to recovery and need for additional supportive measures.
Results:
There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in age, weight, sex, and the length of endoscopic procedure. The recovery time from sedation was markedly shorter in propofol group (30±16.41 minutes) compared with midazolam group (58.89±17.32 minutes; p<0.0001). During and after the procedure the mean heart rate was increased in midazolam group (133.04±19.92 and 97.82±16.7) compared with propofol group (110.26±20.14 and 83.26±12.33; p<0.0001). There was no localized pain during sedative administration in midazolam group, though six patients had localized pain during administration of propofol (p<0.028). There was no serious major complication associated with any of the 62 procedures.
Conclusions:
Intravenous administered propofol provides faster recovery time and similarly safe sedation compared with midazolam in pediatric patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.
Related Concept Videos
Parenteral Anesthetics: Overview
Inhalational Anesthetics: Overview
Stages of General Anesthesia
General Anesthesia: Overview
General anesthesia induces unconsciousness in the whole body, while the others target specific areas or sensations. It is administered to minimize adverse effects, maintain...
Endoscopic Procedures I: Esophagogastroduodenoscopy
During an EGD, the endoscope can be used to:
Drug Dosing: Infants and Children