Speed of recovery and side-effect profile of sevoflurane sedation compared with midazolam

被引:39
作者
Ibrahim, AE
Ghoneim, MM
Kharasch, ED
Epstein, RH
Groudine, SB
Ebert, TJ
Binstock, WB
Philip, BK
机构
[1] Univ Washington, Dept Anesthesia, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
[2] Univ Iowa, Coll Med, Dept Anesthesia, Iowa City, IA 52242 USA
[3] Thomas Jefferson Univ, Jefferson Med Coll, Dept Anesthesiol, Philadelphia, PA 19107 USA
[4] Albany Med Coll, Dept Anesthesiol, Albany, NY 12208 USA
[5] Med Coll Wisconsin, Dept Anesthesiol, Milwaukee, WI 53226 USA
[6] Univ Chicago, Dept Anesthesia & Crit Care, Chicago, IL 60637 USA
[7] Harvard Univ, Brigham & Womens Hosp, Sch Med, Dept Anesthesia, Boston, MA 02115 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1097/00000542-200101000-00018
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
Background: Sedation for surgical procedures performed with regional or local anesthesia has usually been achieved with intravenous medications, whereas the use of volatile anesthetics has been limited. The use of sevoflurane for sedation has been suggested because of its characteristics of nonpungency, rapid induction, and quick elimination. The purpose of this investigation was to assess the quality, recovery, and side effects of sevoflurane sedation compared with midazolam. Methods: One hundred seventy-three patients undergoing surgery with local or regional anesthesia were enrolled in a multicenter, open-label, randomized investigation comparing sedation with sevoflurane versus midazolam. Sedation level was titrated to an Observer's Assessment of Alertness-Sedation score of 3 (responds slowly to voice). Recovery was assessed objectively by Observer's Assessment of Alertness-Sedation, Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST), and memory scores, and subjectively by visual analog scales. Results: Significantly more patients in the sevoflurane group had to be converted to general anesthesia because of excessive movement (18 sevoflurane and 2 midazolam; P = 0.043). Of remaining patients, 141 were assessable for efficacy and recovery data (93 sevoflurane and 48 midazolam). Sevoflurane and midazolam produced dose-related sedation. Sevoflurane patients had higher DSST and memory scores during recovery. Seventy-six percent (sevoflurane) compared with 35% (midazolam) returned to baseline DSST at 30 min postoperatively (P < 0.05). More frequent excitement-disinhibition was observed with sevoflurane (15 [16%] vs. midazolam; P = 0.008). Conclusions: Sevoflurane for sedation produces faster recovery of cognitive function as measured by DSST and memory scores compared with midazolam. However, sevoflurane for sedation is complicated by a high incidence of intraoperative excitement.
引用
收藏
页码:87 / 94
页数:8
相关论文
共 25 条
[1]  
ABBOUD TK, 1989, ANESTH ANALG, V68, P388
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1944, TEACHERS WORD BOOK 3
[3]   EFFECT OF NEBULIZED LIGNOCAINE ON AIRWAY IRRITATION AND HEMODYNAMIC-CHANGES DURING INDUCTION OF ANESTHESIA WITH DESFLURANE [J].
BUNTING, HE ;
KELLY, MC ;
MILLIGAN, KR .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 1995, 75 (05) :631-633
[4]  
CHERNIK DA, 1990, J CLIN PSYCHOPHARM, V10, P244
[5]   MEASURES OF FREE-RECALL OF 900 ENGLISH NOUNS - CORRELATIONS WITH IMAGERY, CONCRETENESS, MEANINGFULNESS, AND FREQUENCY [J].
CHRISTIAN, J ;
BICKLEY, W ;
TARKA, M ;
CLAYTON, K .
MEMORY & COGNITION, 1978, 6 (04) :379-390
[6]   Changes in electroencephalogram and autonomic cardiovascular activity during induction of anesthesia with sevoflurane compared with halothane in children [J].
Constant, I ;
Dubois, MC ;
Piat, V ;
Moutard, ML ;
McCue, M ;
Murat, I .
ANESTHESIOLOGY, 1999, 91 (06) :1604-1615
[7]   Recovery from sevoflurane anesthesia - A comparison to isoflurane and propofol anesthesia [J].
Ebert, TJ ;
Robinson, BJ ;
Uhrich, TD ;
Mackenthun, A ;
Pichotta, PJ .
ANESTHESIOLOGY, 1998, 89 (06) :1524-1531
[8]   Onset time, recovery duration, and drug cost with four different methods of inducing general anesthesia [J].
Fleischmann, E ;
Akça, O ;
Wallner, T ;
Arkiliç, CF ;
Kurz, A ;
Hickle, RS ;
Zimpfer, M ;
Sessler, DI .
ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 1999, 88 (04) :930-935
[9]   THE INTERACTIONS OF MIDAZOLAM AND FLUMAZENIL ON HUMAN-MEMORY AND COGNITION [J].
GHONEIM, MM ;
BLOCK, RI ;
PING, STS ;
ELZAHABY, HM ;
HINRICHS, JV .
ANESTHESIOLOGY, 1993, 79 (06) :1183-1192
[10]   NAUSEA - THE MOST IMPORTANT FACTOR DETERMINING LENGTH OF STAY AFTER AMBULATORY ANESTHESIA - A COMPARATIVE-STUDY OF ISOFLURANE AND OR PROPOFOL TECHNIQUES [J].
GREEN, G ;
JONSSON, L .
ACTA ANAESTHESIOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, 1993, 37 (08) :742-746