Effect of midazolam and butorphanol premedication on inhalant isoflurane anesthesia in mice

Isoflurane is a representative inhalant anesthesia used in laboratory animals. However, isoflurane mediates respiratory depression and adverse clinical reactions during induction. In the present study, we established a novel balanced anesthesia method in mice that combined isoflurane anesthesia with midazolam and butorphanol (MB). Thirty-four male C57BL/6J mice received either isoflurane alone or isoflurane with an intra-peritoneal MB premedication (3 mg/kg midazolam and 4 mg/kg butorphanol). The minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) in each group was evaluated. Induction time and adverse clinical reactions were recorded in each group. Core body temperature, heart rate, respiratory rate, and oxygen saturation (SPO₂) were assessed before and for 1 h after induction. Premedication with MB achieved a significant reduction in MAC compared with isoflurane monoanesthesia (isoflurane, 1.38 ± 0.15%; isoflurane with MB, 0.78 ± 0.10%; P<0.05). Induction time was significantly shortened with MB premedication, and adverse reactions such as excitement or incontinence were observed less frequently. Furthermore, isoflurane anesthesia with MB premedication caused increase of respiratory rates compared to isoflurane monoanesthesia. No significant decrease of SPO₂ was observed in MBI anesthesia, while a decrease in SPO₂ was apparent with isoflurane monoanesthesia (baseline, 98.3% ± 1.1; 10 min after induction, 91.8 ± 6.4%; P<0.05). In conclusion, premedication with MB was effective for the mitigation of respiratory depression induced by isoflurane in mice, with rapid induction and fewer adverse clinical reactions.     

An outcome study comparing intravenous sedation with midazolam/fentanyl (conscious sedation) versus propofol infusion (deep sedation) for aesthetic surgery

The purpose of this study was to determine the differences in measurable outcomes following aesthetic procedures performed under intravenous sedation with incremental doses of midazolam and fentanyl and those performed under propofol infusion. The authors' hypothesis was that the differences in these outcome parameters are not significant between these intravenous sedation protocols. All intraoperative and perioperative records of 84 consecutive patients having aesthetic surgery under a conscious sedation protocol using incremental doses of intravenous midazolam and fentanyl were retrospectively reviewed and compared with the records of a second group of 85 patients having aesthetic surgery under a deep sedation regimen based primarily on propofol infusion. All procedures were hospital based and performed by two surgeons. Twenty-eight different parameters were examined by chart review. In addition, a patient questionnaire was used to assess patient satisfaction and patient recall of operative and perioperative pain, anxiety, nausea, and vomiting. Multivariate statistical analysis was conducted. The two sedation groups were similar with regard to aesthetic procedures performed and patient demographics. The mean duration of operative time was statistically equivalent (152 minutes and 153 minutes). In both groups, there were minor adverse intraoperative events reported but no significant complications. Transient hypotension was more common in the propofol infusion group (12.9 percent versus 2.4 percent, p = 0.018), but no patient required intervention beyond reducing the sedative agent or increasing intravenous fluids. The amount of supplemental fentanyl given intraoperatively was significantly higher in the group whose primary agent for sedation was propofol infusion than the group who received midazolam/fentanyl (209 mug and 143 mug, respectively). The overall questionnaire response rate was 80 percent for both groups. The midazolam/fentanyl sedation group had more recall of "unpleasant intraoperative events" (17 percent versus 3 percent, p = 0.007). However, both groups had low recall of intraoperative pain, anxiety, and nausea. The propofol infusion group experienced significantly more nausea in the recovery room (p = 0.002), nausea at the time of discharge (p = 0.009), and nausea the evening after the operation (p = 0.013). Greater than 90 percent of the patients in both groups would have the same anesthetic in the future rather than undergo general anesthesia. Patient safety, outcomes, and satisfaction are similar in plastic surgery procedures performed under sedation protocols using either incremental doses of midazolam and fentanyl or propofol infusion. All operative and postoperative outcomes for pain, anxiety, and vomiting were similar in the two groups except for immediate postoperative nausea, which was higher in the propofol infusion group. The overall satisfaction of patients undergoing plastic surgery procedures under these intravenous sedation protocols appears very high.     

小剂量右美托咪定用于局麻下玻璃体切割术的镇静效果观察

目的：探讨右美托咪定用于局麻下玻璃体切割术的镇静效果。方法：选择拟在局麻监测下行玻璃体切割术患者50 例为研究对象,年龄20-72岁,ASA 分级Ⅱ级~Ⅲ级,随机分为右美托咪定组（D组）和咪达唑仑组（M 组）,每组25 例。D组患者于术前10min 静脉泵注右美托咪定0.5 滋g/kg,后以0.2-0.4 μg/kg.h 的速度持续输注,M组术前10 min 缓慢静脉注射咪达唑仑0.02 mg/kg,术中按需静注0.5 mg/ 次。维持VAS 评分≤ 4 分,Ramsay评分2-4 分。记录和比较两组患者术中血压、心率、呼吸的变化、辅助用药及患者对镇静效果的满意度。结果：给药后,M组T5时点MAP较T0显著下降（P〈0.05）,D组T10及以后各时点MAP 较T0显著下降（P〈0.05）;D 组T5及以后各时点BP 较T0显著下降（P〈0.05）,但组间及M 组组内BP 比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）;M 组T30时点HR 较T0 显著下降（P〈0.01）,而在T5时,组间比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0.01）,即D 组下降更为显著。给药后各时点,D 组VAS 评分均显著低于M组（P〈0.05）,30 min 时达最低。两组Ramsay镇静评分给药后5 min 均达2 级以上,与给药前比较均显著升高（P〈0.05）,D组给药后30 min 及以后各时点Ramsay镇静评分均显著高于M组（P〈0.01）。给药后各时点,两组组内和组间SPO2和RR 比较均无统计学差异（P〉0.05）。D 组患者满意度较M组更高（P〈0.05）。结论：小剂量右美托咪定用于玻璃体切割术可使患者血流动力学平稳,镇静效果良好,疼痛感觉减轻,舒适度提高。     

口服咪达唑仑对儿童术前分离焦虑的效果分析

目的:明确与父母分离焦虑在不同年龄段小儿的发生率,并探讨术前口服咪达唑仑对减轻患儿术前焦虑的效果。方法:募集442例年龄12岁的非心脏手术患儿,分为咪达唑仑组和对照组,每组再按照年龄分为五个年龄段。咪达唑仑组患儿术前30分钟给予0.5 mg/kg咪达唑仑口服;对照组则未予任何制剂。观察并比较不同年龄段患儿入手术室与家长分离时的情况。结果:药物组分离焦虑发生率显著低于对照组。在各年龄组中,8个月到3岁的婴幼儿是发生分离焦虑比例最高的年龄段。对照组分离焦虑的发生率为16.94%,研究组为8%,较对照组有显著下降(P0.05)。此外,研究组小于8个月和3-5岁组患儿发生分离焦虑的比例也均较未用药组有显著下降(P0.05)。结论:分离焦虑与患儿年龄相关,低龄患儿在手术前有明显的分离焦虑,术前30分钟口服咪达唑仑0.5 mg/kg能显著改善分离时的焦虑,但不能完全消除。     

Comparative effect of intraoperative propacetamol versus placebo on morphine consumption after elective reduction mammoplasty under remifentanil-based anesthesia: a randomized control trial [ISRCTN71723173]

BACKGROUND: Postoperative administration of paracetamol or its prodrug propacetamol has been shown to decrease pain with a morphine sparing effect. However, the effect of propacetamol administered intra-operatively on post-operative pain and early postoperative morphine consumption has not been clearly evaluated. In order to evaluate the effectiveness of analgesic protocols in the management of post-operative pain, a standardized anesthesia protocol without long-acting opioids is crucial. Thus, for ethical reasons, the surgical procedure under general anesthesia with remifentanil as the only intraoperative analgesic must be associated with a moderate predictable postoperative pain. METHODS: We were interested in determining the postoperative effect of propacetamol administered intraoperatively after intraoperative remifentanil. Thirty-six adult women undergoing mammoplasty with remifentanil-based anesthesia were randomly assigned to receive propacetamol 2 g or placebo one hour before the end of surgery. After remifentanil interruption and tracheal extubation in recovery room, pain was assessed and intravenous titrated morphine was given. The primary end-point was the cumulative dose of morphine administered in the recovery room. The secondary end-points were the pain score after tracheal extubation and one hour after, the delay for obtaining a Simplified Numerical Pain Scale (SNPS) less than 4, and the incidence of morphine side effects in the recovery room.For intergroup comparisons, categorical variables were compared using the chi-squared test and continuous variables were compared using the Student t test or Mann-Whitney U test, as appropriate. A p value less than 0.05 was considered as significant. RESULTS: In recovery room, morphine consumption was lower in the propacetamol group than in the placebo group (p = 0.01). Pain scores were similar in both groups after tracheal extubation and lower in the propacetamol group (p = 0.003) one hour after tracheal extubation. The time to reach a SNPS < 4 was significantly shorter in the propacetamol group (p = 0.02). The incidence of morphine related side effects did not differ between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative propacetamol administration with remifentanil based-anesthesia improved significantly early postoperative pain by sparing morphine and shortening the delay to achieve pain relief.     

Comparison of midazolam and diazepam for sedation during plastic surgery

A randomized double-blind study was designed to compare midazolam, a rapid-acting water-soluble benzodiazepine, with diazepam for sedation when administered as an adjuvant to ketamine during local anesthesia. In the preliminary dose-ranging study, midazolam (0.05 to 0.15 mg/kg IV) was found to produce a spectrum of central nervous system activity (e.g., sedation, amnesia) that was similar to diazepam (0.1 to 0.3 mg/kg IV). However, the slope of midazolam's dose-response curve for sedation appeared to be steeper (i.e., a narrower therapeutic dosage range). In a comparative evaluation of their relative sedative-amnestic properties and recovery characteristics, the median effective doses of the two benzodiazepines were compared. Midazolam (0.1 mg/kg IV) was found to produce more profound sedation and amnesia than diazepam (0.2 mg/kg IV). Midazolam was associated with significantly less pain on injection and a lower incidence of postoperative venoirritation. Overall patient acceptance was higher with midazolam compared to diazepam. Finally, recovery characteristics were similar for the two benzodiazepines in our outpatient setting.     

Effects of transcranial laser irradiation in near infrared range on antinociceptive reactions in mice after administration of diazepam, clopheline and morphine]

The experiments were carried out on white mice whose brain was irradiated transcranially with laser light in infrared range. Exposure to irradiation was 20 min. In one group of animals only laser light was used, in others laser was combined with morphine (3mg/kg), clonidine (0.5 mg/kg), and diazepam (1 mg/kg) injected intraperitoneally. The nociceptive reactions were studied with the help of "tail-flick" and "hot-plate" tests. It was found that laser light did not modify significantly the results of both tests. Moreover, it didn't influence the antinociceptive properties of morphine, clonidine and diazepam in the "hot-plate" test. In the "tail-flick" test laser light did not affect the action of clonidine, but provided naloxone-independent antinociceptive reaction with diazepam and increased the antinociceptive effect of morphine. Laser irradiation of the brain did not cause any significant morphological changes. These results suggest the possibility of modulating antinociceptive actions of morphine and diazepam by laser irradiation of the brain.     

Effects of clonidine preemptive analgesia on acute postoperative pain in abdominal surgery

Preemptive analgesia refers to blockade of afferent nerve fibers before a painful stimulus, which prevents or reduces subsequent pain even beyond the effect of the block. The aim of the study was to compare the effect of clonidine used before and at the end of operation on pain control in abdominal surgery. A total of 77 patients admitted for colorectal surgery were randomly classified into three groups: epidural clonidine before operation, epidural clonidine at the end of operation, and control group. After the operation on patient demand, analgesia with boluses of epidural morphine was instituted. The parameters of postoperative pain level using VAS score (visual analog scale), sedation and analgesics consumption were determined as outcome measures at 1, 2, 6, and 24 h of the operation. Clonidine administered before operation provided lowest pain scores at 6 and 24 h (p < 0.05). Clonidine administered at the end of operation had low pain scores at 1 and 2 h, with a significant pain breakthrough thereafter (6.93 +/- 1.66 at 6 h and 4.04 +/- 2.39 at 24 h) compared with the group administered clonidine before operation (3.60 +/- 2.94 and 3.71 +/- 1.82). Clonidine administered before operation provided less sedation (p < 0.05) and a significantly lower use of analgesics (p < 0.05). Blockade of nociceptive stimulus using the centrally acting alpha2-adrenergic agonist clonidine before the onset of pain stimulus resulted in reduced pain levels, sedation and analgesic requirement.     

Dorsal noradrenergic bundle lesions fail to alter opiate withdrawal or suppression of opiate withdrawal by clonidine

Previous work has shown that clonidine effectively supresses many of the signs of opiate withdrawal. The present study was designed to test the hypothesis that the supression of opiate withdrawal by clonidine is mediated by forebrain noradrenergic projections of the locus coeruleus. Two groups of 24 rats each were subjected to either a 6-hydroxydopamine lesion of the dorsal noradrenergic bundle (Lesion group) or a sham, vehicle injection (Sham group). All rats were made dependent on morphine by subcutaneous implantation of one 75 mg silastic morphine pellet for three days followed by 3 more days with two additional 75 mg pellets. Following removal of the morphine pellet, withdrawal was precipitated in all rats by subcutaneous injection of 4 mg/kg of naloxone. Pretreatment 10 min. before withdrawal with clonidine (0.1 or 0.2 mg/kg) produced a significant attenuation of withdrawal signs as compared to saline injected rats; this effect was equally significant in both sham and lesion groups. Lesions of the locus coeruleus had no effect on withdrawal, nor did they affect the ameliorating action of clonidine. These results substantiate the observation that clonidine can effectively attenuate signs of opiate withdrawal in the rat, but fail to support the hypothesis that these effects are mediated by the forebrain projections of the locus coeruleus.     

Nociceptive Transmission to Rat Primary Somatosensory Cortex – Comparison of Sedative and Analgesic Effects

CO₂-laser C-fibre evoked cortical potentials (LCEPs) is a potentially useful animal model for studies of pain mechanisms. A potential confounding factor when assessing analgesic effects of systemically administered drugs using LCEP is sedation. This study aims to clarify: 1) the relation between level of anaesthesia and magnitude of LCEP, 2) the effects of a sedative and an analgesic on LCEP and dominant EEG frequency 3) the effects of a sedative and analgesic on LCEP when dominant EEG frequency is kept stable. LCEP and EEG were recorded in isoflurane/nitrous-oxide anaesthetized rats. Increasing isoflurane level gradually reduced LCEPs and lowered dominant EEG frequencies. Systemic midazolam (10 μmol/kg) profoundly reduced LCEP (19% of control) and lowered dominant EEG frequency. Similarly, morphine 1 and 3 mg/kg reduced LCEP (39%, 12% of control, respectively) and decreased EEG frequency. When keeping the dominant EEG frequency stable, midazolam caused no significant change of LCEP. Under these premises, morphine at 3 mg/kg, but not 1 mg/kg, caused a significant LCEP reduction (26% of control). In conclusion, the present data indicate that the sedative effects should be accounted for when assessing the analgesic effects of drug. Furthermore, it is suggested that LCEP, given that changes in EEG induced by sedation are compensated for, can provide information about the analgesic properties of systemically administrated drugs.     

General anesthesia for newborn pigs.

A safe technique for the induction and maintenance of general anesthesia in newborn pigs was accomplished. After premedication with atropine sulphate, anesthesia was induced by giving a mixture of oxygen, nitrous oxide and 2.5% halothane introduced by face mask. An endotracheal tube was inserted, and anesthesia was maintained using 0.5--1% halothane. Recovery was prompt, and there were no postoperative complications related to anesthesia.     

骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折经皮椎体后凸成形术中应用不同麻醉方式对疼痛阈值的影响

摘要 目的：探究骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折经皮椎体后凸成形术中应用不同麻醉方式对疼痛阈值的影响。方法：选择120例接受经皮椎体后凸成形术治疗的骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折患者,并将其随机分为全身麻醉组（n=40）、局部麻醉组（n=40）和硬膜外麻醉组（n=40）。对比分析三组麻醉效果、不同时间点疼痛阈值（VAS值）、疼痛总分（PRI）与疼痛强度（PPI）、温度疼痛阈值和电疼痛阈值以及采取自控镇痛、止痛药的情况。结果：全身麻醉组患者麻醉优良率为95.00 %,局部麻醉组患者麻醉优良率为87.50 %,硬膜外麻醉组患者麻醉优良率为92.50 %。三组患者麻醉效果比较,全身麻醉组显著优于局部麻醉组和硬膜外麻醉组（P<0.05）。随着麻醉时间的延长,硬膜外麻醉组患者在麻醉后的VAS值、PRI和PPI值、温度疼痛阈值和电疼痛阈值均显著低于全身麻醉组和局部麻醉组患者（P<0.05）。全身麻醉组采取其他方式进行止痛的概率为1.67 %,局部麻醉组为30.00 %,硬膜外麻醉组为2.50 %,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。结论：硬膜外麻醉方式对骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折经皮椎体后凸成形术的麻醉效果和镇痛效果较全身麻醉和局部麻醉效果好,值得临床推广使用。     

Hemodynamic effects of perioperative stressor events during rhinoplasty

The hemodynamic effects of perioperative stressors, including preoperative patient anxiety, intraoperative local anesthetic/adrenaline infiltrations, and some painful interventions, have not been fully elucidated in plastic surgery procedures. The present study was designed to determine the hemodynamic effects of perioperative stressor events in American Society of Anesthesiologists class I patients undergoing rhinoplasty procedures under general anesthesia. The study included 50 healthy patients, 18 to 51 years of age (mean age, 27 +/- 7 years), who underwent a rhinoplasty procedure in the authors' department. All patients were connected to a digital ambulatory Holter recorder for 24 hours starting on the day before the operation and continuing throughout the procedure. All of the patients received 10 ml of 2% lidocaine with 1:80,000 adrenaline 15 minutes after intubation. Observations consisted of heart rate, noninvasive blood pressure, and power spectral heart rate variability analyses, the latter of which is indicative of the sympathovagal balance of the patients. The majority of patients developed a persistent, moderate sinus tachycardia before the induction of anesthesia. After the infiltration of lidocaine/adrenaline, a mild to moderate and short-lasting tachycardia was detected. A similar increase in pulse rate was also noticed during lateral osteotomies. No significant blood pressure changes attributable to perioperative stressors (with the exclusion of general anesthesia induction, intubation, and extubation) were observed. Sympathetic activity was found to be responsible from marked tachycardia before the induction, which was attributable to preoperative anxiety. The authors' study has demonstrated that there are three hemodynamically unstable periods causing tachycardia for rhinoplasty patients that directly concern the plastic surgeon: immediate preoperative anxiety, local anesthetic/adrenaline injection, and lateral osteotomies. The authors conclude that these patients would benefit from routine use of premedications and that a lidocaine/adrenaline combination is a safe adjunct to general anesthesia in young rhinoplasty patients. In addition, a deeper anesthesia during local infiltration and osteotomies would be appropriate.     

Analysis of preincisional and postincisional treatment with alpha2-adrenoreceptor agonist clonidine regarding analgesic consumption and hemodynamic stability in surgical patients

Preemptive analgesia aims to prevent the sensitization of central nervous system, hence the development of pathologic pain after tissular injury. The aim of the study was to assess the effect of preincisional clonidine treatment on analgesic consumption and hemodynamic stability compared to clonidine administered at the end of the operation and control group. Ninety-one patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery were randomly assigned to four groups: peroral clonidine before operation, epidural clonidine before operation, epidural clonidine at the end of operation, and epidural saline before operation as a control group. After the operation, patient-controlled analgesia with epidural morphine was instituted. Analgesic consumption, blood pressure and heart rate were obtained at 1, 2, 6 and 24 h postoperatively, and the cumulative consumption of analgesics was assessed at the end of the study period. Significant differences (p < 0.05) in postoperative systolic blood pressure, with highest hemodynamic stability was observed at 1 h and 6 h in the group of patients administered epidural clonidine before operation. In this group of patients we found significant reduction in analgesic consumption during the study period (p < 0.05), compared to other groups. The cumulative consumption of analgesics assessed at the end of the study period was significantly reduced (p < 0.05) in the group of patients administered epidural clonidine before operation (8.40 +/- 3.74, respectively) as compared with the peroral clonidine before operation (16.79 +/- 5.75, respectively), epidural clonidine at the end of the operation (11.11 +/- 4.24, respectively) and control group of patients (18.00 +/- 6.45, respectively). Preincisional administration of epidural clonidine was associated with a significantly lower analgesic use, lower cumulative analgesic consumption and greater hemodynamic stability, in comparison with other groups.     

Low-dose propofol infusion for sedation during local anesthesia

The safety and efficacy of lose-dose propofol for sedation were investigated on 90 consenting patients who had undergone surgical procedures with local anesthesia. After being premedicated with intravenous midazolam 0.05 mg.kg(-1), all patients were randomly divided into two groups and received intravenously either a loading dose of propofol 0.8 mg.kg(-1) followed by a continuous infusion of propofol 30 microg.kg(-1)min(-1) (propofol group) or an equivalent volume of saline (placebo group) during operation. Study groups were compared with respect to the level of sedation, hemodynamic variables, oxygen saturation, and the incidence of intraoperative side effects. In addition, the discharge time and the satisfaction of both patients and surgeons with this sedative technique were assessed. Propofol reduced patients' discomfort and lowered their arterial pressure and heart rate during the infiltration of local anesthetics. It also promoted an adequate level of sedation without clinically significant oxygen desaturation in the intraoperative period. Surgeons and patients in the propofol group showed a higher level of satisfaction than those in the placebo group. There was no significant difference between the two groups with regard to the incidence of adverse effects and the discharge time. In conclusion, it was found that the use of low-dose propofol infusion was a safe and effective sedative technique for local anesthesia.     

Stimulus properties of clonidine in chronically morphine treated rats trained to a morphine-saline discrimination

In an operant behavior procedure of lever pressing on an FR 10 schedule of food reinforcement, morphine dependent and nondependent rats were trained to respond on a lever on one side of the food tray after a morphine (10 mg/kg i.p.) injection and to respond on a lever on the alternate side after a saline injection. Following discrimination training, in both dependent and nondependent rats saline was generalized to various doses of clonidine (10, 30 and 50 micrograms/kg i.p.). A response inhibition of about 65% was obtained with the highest dose. It was concluded that, even if clonidine can suppress signs of narcotic withdrawal, the internal state induced by morphine in an abstinent rat does differ from the one induced by clonidine in the same animal.     

Safety and efficacy of office-based surgery with monitored anesthesia care/sedation in 4778 consecutive plastic surgery procedures

Office-based surgery has several potential benefits over hospital-based surgery, including cost containment, ease of scheduling, and convenience to both patients and surgeons. Scrutiny of office-based surgery by regulators and state-licensing agencies has increased and must be addressed by improved documentation of safety and efficacy. To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the authors' office-based plastic surgery, a review was undertaken of 3615 consecutive patients undergoing 4778 outpatient plastic surgery procedures under monitored anesthesia care/sedation in a single office. The charts of 3615 consecutive patients who had undergone office-based surgery with monitored anesthesia care/sedation between May of 1995 and May of 2000 were reviewed. In all cases, the anesthesia protocol used included sedation with midazolam, propofol, and a narcotic administered by a board-certified registered nurse anesthetist with local anesthesia provided by the surgeon. Charts were reviewed for patient profile, types of procedures, multiple procedures, duration of anesthesia, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, and complications related to anesthesia. Outcomes measured included death, airway compromise, dyspnea, hypotension, venous thrombosis, pulmonary emboli, protracted nausea and vomiting lasting more than 24 hours, and unplanned hospital admissions. Statistical analyses were performed using the Microsoft Excel program and the SAS package. Results were as follows: 92.3 percent of the patients were female and 7.7 percent were male, with a mean age of 42.7 years (range, 3 to 83 years). Patients underwent aesthetic (95.6 percent) and reconstructive (4.4 percent) plastic surgery procedures. Same-session multiple procedures occurred in 24.8 percent of patients. The vast majority of patients were healthy: 84.3 percent of patients were American Society of Anesthesiologists class I, 15.6 percent were class II, and 0.1 percent were class III. The operations required a mean of 111 minutes. There were no deaths, ventilator requirements, deep venous thromboses, or pulmonary emboli. Complications were as follows: 0.05 percent (n = 2) of patients had dyspnea that resolved, 0.2 percent (n = 6) of patients had protracted nausea and vomiting, and 0.05 percent (n = 2) of patients had unplanned hospital admissions (<24 hours). One patient had an emergent intubation. No prolonged adverse effects were noted. There was a 30-day follow-up minimum. Outpatient surgery is an important aspect of plastic surgery. It was shown that office-based surgery with intravenous sedation, performed by board-certified plastic surgeons and nurse anesthetists, is safe. Appropriate accreditation, safe anesthesia protocols, and proper patient selection constitute the basis for safe and efficacious office-based outpatient plastic surgery.     

咪达唑仑用于上肢创伤病人麻醉前给药的遗忘作用与脑电变化

目的:评价咪达唑仑用于上肢创伤病人行高位硬膜外阻滞的遗忘作用和相应的脑电变化。方法:选择40例单纯上肢创伤病人行高位硬膜外阻滞随机双盲分为四组:咪达唑仑0.15mg/kg和0.10mg/kg,安定0.20mg/kg,生理盐水2ml,麻醉前30分钟肌注,观察用药前后脑电改变,镇静分级对麻醉操作的遗忘率和程度以及术后心理状况。结果:用咪达唑仑后,镇静程度与遗忘效果有显著变化。0.10mg/kg咪达唑仑的遗忘率为70%,其中90%为不全遗忘;0.15mg/kg咪达唑仑可达到100%完全遗忘;咪达唑仑的脑电功率谱变化为δ和β相对功率明显增加,而θ和α相对功率明显下降。结论:肌注咪达唑仑完全可以消除病人对高位硬膜外麻醉穿刺操作过程的不良回忆,并与剂量相关。     

A comparison of the inhibitory effects of clonidine and guanfacine on the behavioral and autonomic components of morphine withdrawal in rats

Intravenous administration of naloxone (0.5 mg/kg) to morphine dependent rats elicited classical autonomic and behavioral symptoms of narcotic abstinence including hypertension, tachycardia, withdrawal body shakes, escape attempts, diarrhea, etc. Pretreatment of dependent rats with either clonidine (3–90 μg/kg) or guanfacine (3–900 μg/kg) produced a dose-dependent reduction in the hypertensive response to subsequent injection of naloxone. Clonidine was about 12 times more potent than guanfacine in inhibiting this autonamic symptom of withdrawal. Both drugs were less effective at blocking body shakes and escapes, however, when all symptoms were combined in a ranked score, guanfacine was less effective than clonidine at reducing the ranked abstinence intensity score. Since clonidine blocked the autonomic component of withdrawal at doses more consistent with its clinical anti-withdrawal actions, it is possible that 1) measurement of behavioral signs of withdrawal in rats is a less sensitive index than is measurement of autonomic changes associated with withdrawal, or, 2) a reduction in autonomic outflow in general is most relevant to suppressing the apparent intensity of the abstinence syndrome.     

Optimization of conscious sedation in plastic surgery.

The administration of conscious sedation by the plastic surgeon must be safe, efficient, and consistent. In the proper setting, with trained staff and appropriate backup, conscious sedation can allow optimal patient satisfaction with expedient recovery in addition to cost containment. The highly effective local anesthesia afforded by dilute, high-volume ("tumescent") infiltration extends the use of conscious sedation to cases previously performed under general anesthesia or deep sedation. The purpose of this analysis was to identify variables in conscious sedation that affect traditional outcome parameters in ambulatory surgery, particularly the duration of recovery and adverse events such as nausea and emesis. All perioperative and operative records of 300 consecutive patients having plastic surgical procedures under conscious sedation were carefully reviewed. Patients were ASA class I or II by requisite. Conscious sedation followed a standardized administration protocol, using incremental doses of two agents: midazolam (0.25 to 1 mg) and fentanyl (12.5 to 50 mcg). A subset of patients received preoperative oral sedation. Multivariate statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS 8.0 for Windows (SPSS Inc., Chicago, Ill.). Of the 300 patients, same-day discharge was intended for 281. Eight procedure categories were defined. No anesthetic complications occurred. As expected, recovery time was significantly correlated with the duration and type of procedure (p < 0.001) and the total dosage of both intraoperative sedative agents (p < 0.001). Interestingly, a negative correlation with advancing age existed (p < 0.001), likely reflecting the significantly higher intraoperative sedative dosing in younger patients (p < 0.001). When controlled for the effects of procedure duration and intraoperative sedative dosing, two other variables-use of preoperative oral sedation and postoperative nausea/emesis-significantly lengthened recovery time (p = 0.0001 for each). Fifteen unintended admissions occurred secondary to nausea, prolonged drowsiness, or pain control needs. Conscious sedation is an effective anesthetic choice for routine plastic surgical procedures, many of which would commonly be performed under general anesthesia. In our experience with a carefully structured and controlled conscious sedation protocol, the technique has proven to be safe and effective. This analysis of outcome parameters identified two important and potentially avoidable causes of recovery delay following conscious sedation-oral premedication and nausea/emesis. Nausea and emesis were particularly problematic in that they were responsible for 11 of 15 (73 percent) unintended admissions. Preoperative sedation is valuable in certain circumstances, and its use is not discouraged; however, its benefits must be weighed against its unwanted effects, which can include a prolongation of recovery.