A new system of infiltration anesthesia and sedation for plastic surgery

This technique produces patient cooperation during the phase of local anesthetic injection by judicious use of intravenous ketamine. The addition of diazepam and a narcotic drug to low-dose ketamine may account for a low incidence of hallucinations and psychic sensations. The use of a dilute solution of lidocaine and a very low concentration of epinephrine allows large areas to be anesthetized. The ultralow concentration of epinephrine provides effective vasoconstriction. The result is good patient acceptance, a stable blood pressure and heart rate, and a low incidence of complications classically associated with local anesthetic toxicity.     

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.     

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.     

Comparison of intranasal midazolam with intravenous diazepam for treating febrile seizures in children: prospective randomised study

ObjectiveTo compare the safety and efficacy of midazolam given intranasally with diazepam given intravenously in the treatment of children with prolonged febrile seizures.DesignProspective randomised study.SettingPaediatric emergency department in a general hospital.Subjects47 children aged six months to five years with prolonged febrile seizure (at least 10 minutes) during a 12 month period.InterventionsIntranasal midazolam (0.2 mg/kg) and intravenous diazepam (0.3 mg/kg).ResultsIntranasal midazolam and intravenous diazepam were equally effective. Overall, 23 of 26 seizures were controlled with midazolam and 24 out of 26 with diazepam. The mean time from arrival at hospital to starting treatment was significantly shorter in the midazolam group (3.5 (SD 1.8) minutes, 95% confidence interval 3.3 to 3.7) than the diazepam group (5.5 (2.0), 5.3 to 5.7). The mean time to control of seizures was significantly sooner (6.1 (3.6), 6.3 to 6.7) in the midazolam group than the diazepam group (8.0 (0.5), 7.9 to 8.3). No significant side effects were observed in either group.ConclusionSeizures were controlled more quickly with intravenous diazepam than with intranasal midazolam, although midazolam was as safe and effective as diazepam. The overall time to cessation of seizures after arrival at hospital was faster with intranasal midazolam than with intravenous diazepam. The intranasal route can possibly be used not only in medical centres but in general practice and, with appropriate instructions, by families of children with recurrent febrile seizures at home.     

Clinical evaluation of combination of dexmedetomidine and midazolam vs. dexmedetomidine alone for sedation during spinal anesthesia

BackgroundDexmedetomidine is a useful sedative agent for spinal anesthesia. However, it has been reported to decreases heart rate in a dose-dependent manner. In the present study, we compared the bolus dose of midazolam and bolus loaded dexmedetomidine over 10 min to determine additional sedation methods.MethodsA total of 100 patients who were classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I–II undergoing spinal anesthesia were randomly divided into two groups. In the combination of midazolam and dexmedetomidine group (group MD), 10 min after bolus loading of 0.05 mg/kg midazolam, 0.5 μg/kg/h dexmedetomidine was infused. In the dexmedetomidine group (group D), 1 μg/kg bolus dose of dexmedetomidine was infused over 10 min, and then 0.5 μg/kg/h dexmedetomidine was infused continuously.ResultsAt 10 min, the sedation depth of the two groups was approximately the same. In both groups, the bispectral index (BIS) was within the optimal range of 55–80 and the Ramsay Sedation Scale score was within the optimal range of 3–5. Both patient and surgeon satisfaction with sedation did not differ between groups. At 10 min, heart rate (beats/min) was significantly lower (P < .01) in group D and mean blood pressure (mm Hg) was significantly lower (P < .01) in group MD. The prevalence of bradycardia (P = .714), hypotension (P = .089), and hypoxia (P = .495) did not differ statistically between the two groups.ConclusionsMidazolam bolus and dexmedetomidine continuous infusion may be a useful additional sedation method for patients who have severe bradycardia.     

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.     

Isoflurane compared with midazolam for sedation in the intensive care unit.

OBJECTIVE--To compare isoflurane with midazolam for sedation of ventilated patients. DESIGN--Randomised control study. Setting--Intensive care unit in university teaching hospital. PATIENTS--Sixty patients aged 18-76 who required mechanical ventilation. INTERVENTIONS--Sedation with either 0.1-0.6% isoflurane in an air-oxygen mixture (30 patients) or a continuous intravenous infusion of midazolam 0.01-0.20 mg/kg/h (30 patients). Sedation was assessed initially and hourly thereafter on a six point scale. Incremental intravenous doses of morphine 0.05 mg/kg were given for analgesia as required. The trial sedative was stopped when the patient was judged ready for weaning from ventilatory support or at 24 hours (whichever was earlier). END POINT--Achievement of a predetermined level of sedation for as much of the time as possible. MAIN RESULTS--Isoflurane produced satisfactory sedation for a greater proportion of time (86%) than midazolam (64%), and patients sedated with isoflurane recovered more rapidly from sedation. CONCLUSION--Isoflurane is a promising alternative technique for sedation of ventilated patients in the intensive care unit.     

Effect of butorphanol,midazolam or ketamine on romifidine based sedation in horses during standing cheek tooth removal

Background

Standing surgery, especially dental procedures, are commonly performed in horses. This leads to an increasing demand for reliable sedation protocols. Therefore, it was the purpose of this study to investigate the influence of butorphanol, midazolam or ketamine on romifidine based sedation in horses during cheek tooth removal.

Methods

Forty horses presented for tooth extraction were divided in four groups using matched pair randomization. Group R was sedated with romifidine (bolus 0.03 mg/kg, followed by a constant rate infusion (CRI) 0.05 mg/kg/h) and group RB with romifidine (same dose) and butorphanol (0.02 mg/kg; CRI 0.04 mg/kg/h). Group RM received romifidine (same dose) and midazolam (0.02 mg/kg; CRI 0.06 mg/kg/h) whereas group RK was administered romifidine (same dose) and ketamine (0.5 mg/kg; CRI 1.2 mg/kg/h). If sedation was not adequate a top up bolus of romifidine (0.01 mg/kg) was administered. The quality of sedation and the conditions for tooth extraction, the level of ataxia, chewing, head and tongue movement were evaluated by using a scoring system. The investigator was blinded to the applied sedation protocol. Furthermore, serum cortisol concentrations before, during and after the procedure were analyzed to gain more information about the stress level of the horses.

Results

Horses in group RM showed significantly less chewing and tongue activity compared to horses sedated with romifidine alone or with butorphanol additionally, but also significantly higher levels of ataxia. The quality of sedation was significantly better if romifidine was administered in combination with ketamine compared to romifidine alone. Furthermore, horses of group RK needed less additional romifidine boli compared to all other groups. Blood cortisol concentrations during surgery in groups RB and RM remained unchanged. Horses of group R showed higher cortisol concentrations during sedation compared to horses of groups RB and RM.

Conclusion

Romifidine alone at an initial bolus dose of 0.03 mg/kg followed by a constant rate infusion of 0.05 mg/kg/h was insufficient to obtain an adequate level of sedation and led to increased stress levels, whereas the addition of butorphanol inhibited the stress response. The combination of romifidine with either midazolam or ketamine improved sedation quality and surgical conditions.

     

Apoptosis and plastic surgery

Apoptosis, or programmed cell death, is a phenomenon that is integral to development and cellular homeostasis. In the last decade, many of the essential molecules and pathways that control this phenomenon have been elucidated. Because apoptosis is involved in almost all physiologic and pathologic processes, the understanding of its regulation has significant clinical ramifications. This article reviews the basic understanding of programmed cell death in terms of the effector molecules and pathways. Areas of interest to plastic surgeons are reviewed as they pertain to apoptosis. These areas include allotransplantation, craniofacial and limb development, flap survival, wound healing, stem cell science, and physiologic aging. These topics have not yet been studied extensively in the context of cell death. In this review article, other related and more comprehensively studied scientific areas are used to extrapolate their relevance to apoptosis. Apoptosis is an increasingly better understood process. With the knowledge of how programmed cell death is controlled, combined with the improved ability to effectively perform genetic manipulation and to design specific chemical approaches, apoptosis is gaining clinical relevance. In the next few years, practical clinical breakthroughs will help the medical community to understand the phenomenon of apoptosis and how it relates to the needs of patients.