Sedatives used in pediatric imaging: Comparison of IV pentobarbital with IV pentobarbital with midazolam added

被引:36
|
作者
Mason, KP
Zurakowski, D
Karian, VE
Connor, L
Fontaine, PJ
Burrows, PE
机构
[1] Childrens Hosp, Dept Anesthesia, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[2] Childrens Hosp, Dept Radiol, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[3] Childrens Hosp, Dept Biostat, Boston, MA 02115 USA
关键词
D O I
10.2214/ajr.177.2.1770427
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVE. This study was designed to evaluate safety, efficacy, and success of adding IV midazolam to an established IV pentobarbital protocol for pediatric sedation for radiologic imaging. Outcomes included sedation and discharge times as well as adverse events. SUBJECTS AND METHODS, This prospective study compared two different sedation protocols developed by the radiology sedation committee and approved by the hospital sedation committee at our institution. Patients in the pentobarbital group received IV pentobarbital alone, and patients in the pentobarbital-midazolam group received a combination of IV pentobarbital and midazolam. A total of 1070 infants and children were enrolled, and sedation data were entered into a computer database and reviewed at bimonthly radiology sedation committee meetings for safety, efficacy, efficiency, failed sedations, and adverse outcomes. RESULTS. Mean age distribution, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification, fasting status, weight, and types of examinations were similarly distributed between the two study groups. Analysis of variance indicated longer times were required to sedate and to discharge patients who had received pentobarbital-midazolam (p < 0.001 for both times), even after adjusting for differences in the patients' ages and weights. The pentobarbital-midazolam group required more time to be successfully sedated and more time to discharge from the recovery room. The rates of adverse events and failed sedations were similar for both groups. CONCLUSION. Midazolam does not have a beneficial effect on pentobarbital sedation and has no effect on the rate of adverse events. The prolonged time needed both to sedate and to discharge (timed from the initial dose of sedation) pediatric patients who have received midazolam should discourage physicians from combining it with pentobarbital for pediatric sedation.
引用
收藏
页码:427 / 430
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Development and characterization of novel fast-dissolving pentobarbital suppositories for pediatric procedural sedation and comparison with lipophilic formulations
    Freisz, Aurelien
    Dhifallah, Imen
    Le Basle, Yoann
    Jouannet, Mireille
    Chennell, Philip
    Garrait, Ghislain
    Beyssac, Eric
    Bouattour, Yassine
    Sautou, Valerie
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICS AND BIOPHARMACEUTICS, 2024, 204
  • [32] Propofol vs pentobarbital for sedation of children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging: results from the Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium
    Mallory, Michael D.
    Baxter, Amy L.
    Kost, Susanne I.
    PEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA, 2009, 19 (06) : 601 - 611
  • [33] Comparison of oral pentobarbital sodium (nembutal) and oral chloral hydrate for sedation of infants during radiologic imaging: Preliminary results
    Rooks, VJ
    Chung, T
    Connor, L
    Zurakowski, D
    Hoffer, FA
    Mason, KP
    Burrows, PE
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2003, 180 (04) : 1125 - 1128
  • [34] COMPARISON OF THE RECOVERY CHARACTERISTICS OF MIDAZOLAM, ALONE OR ANTAGONIZED WITH FLUMAZENIL, AND THIOPENTAL IN ASA III-IV PATIENTS
    TAMAYO, E
    GOMEZ, JI
    DELRIO, MC
    ALVAREZ, FJ
    ACTA ANAESTHESIOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, 1995, 39 (02) : 186 - 190
  • [35] IV acetaminophen causes significant decrease in blood pressure when used to treat pediatric fever but not when used to treat pediatric pain
    Hoffman, R. J.
    Amine, Leena
    Merwood, Nicholas
    CLINICAL TOXICOLOGY, 2018, 56 (10) : 1008 - 1008
  • [36] Comparison of Intranasal Ketamine and Midazolam in Peripheral IV Access in Children Presenting to the Emergency Department, a Randomized Clinical Trial
    Jafarnejad, Shabahang
    Mehrabi, Iman
    Rezai, Mahdi
    Ebrahimi, Hamidreza Khoshnezhad
    PAKISTAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL & HEALTH SCIENCES, 2020, 14 (03): : 1412 - 1417
  • [37] A double-blind, randomized comparison of IV lorazepam versus midazolam for sedation of ICU patients via a pharmacologic model
    Barr, J
    Zomorodi, K
    Bertaccini, EJ
    Shafer, SL
    Geller, E
    ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2001, 95 (02) : 286 - 298
  • [38] Comparison of the generation II with IV heterogeneous Ziegler-Natta catalysts used in propylene polymerizations
    Czaja, K
    Krol, B
    POLIMERY, 1998, 43 (05) : 287 - 292
  • [39] Comparison of Mechanical Versus Hand Administration of IV Contrast Agents for Pediatric Pulmonary CT Angiography
    Zapala, Matthew A.
    Zurakowski, David
    Lee, Edward Y.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2017, 208 (03) : 632 - 636
  • [40] A double-blind, randomized comparison of IV lorazepam vs. midazolam for sedation of ICU patients via a pharmacologic model
    Barr, J
    Zomorodi, K
    Bertaccini, E
    Shafer, S
    Geller, E
    ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2000, 93 (3A) : U158 - U158