Efficacy of two oral premedicants: midazolam or a low‐dose combination of midazolam–ketamine for reducing stress during intravenous cannulation in children undergoing CT imaging

Background: Pain, anxiety and fear of needles make intravenous cannulation extremely difficult in children. We assessed the efficacy and safety of oral midazolam and a low‐dose combination of midazolam and ketamine to reduce the stress and anxiety during intravenous cannulation in children undergoing computed tomography (CT) imaging when compared to placebo. Methods: Ninety‐two ASA I or II children (1–5 years) scheduled for CT imaging under sedation were studied. Children were randomized to one of the three groups. Group M received 0.5 mg·kg^?1 midazolam in 5 ml of honey, group MK received 0.25 mg·kg^?1 midazolam mixed with 1 mg·kg^?1 ketamine in 5‐ml honey and group P received 5‐ml honey alone, orally. In 20–30 min after premedication, venipuncture was attempted at the site of eutectic mixture of local anesthetics cream. Sedation scores and venipuncture scores were recorded. Primary outcome of the study was incidence of children crying at venipuncture (venipuncture score of 4). Results: Significantly more children cried during venipuncture in placebo group compared to the other two groups (19/32 (59%) in group P vs 1 each in groups M and MK, (P < 0.001) (RR 2.37, 95% CI 1.55‐3.63). In 20–30 min after premedication, group P had more children in sedation score 1 or 2 (crying or anxious) compared to the other two groups (P < 0.05). At this time, group MK showed more children in calm and awake compared to group M (P = 0.02). At venipuncture, group P had more children in venipuncture score 3 or 4 (crying or withdrawing) compared to group M or MK (P < 0.05), while groups M and MK were comparable. Conclusion: A low‐dose combination of oral midazolam and ketamine or oral midazolam alone effectively reduces the stress during intravenous cannulation in children undergoing CT imaging without any adverse effects. However, the combination provides more children in calm and quiet state when compared to midazolam alone at venipuncture.     

Oral ketamine or midazolam or low dose combination for premedication in children

This randomized controlled trial was designed to evaluate whether the combination of low dose oral midazolam (0.25 mg/kg) and low dose oral ketamine (3 mg/kg) provides better premedication than oral midazolam (0.5 mg/kg) or oral ketamine (6 mg/kg). Seventy-eight children of ASA physical status I or II scheduled for elective ophthalmic surgery were randomly divided into three groups and given premedication in the holding area 30 minutes before surgery. Two subjects from each group vomited the medication and were excluded, leaving 72 subjects for further analysis. The onset of sedation was earlier in the combination group than the other two groups. At 10 minutes after premedication 12.5% in the combination group had an acceptable sedation score compared with none in the other two groups. After 20 minutes 54% in the combination group had an acceptable sedation score, 21% in the midazolam group and 16% in the ketamine group (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in the parental separation score, response to induction and emergence score. The mean time for best parental separation score was significantly less in the combination group (19+/-8 min) than either the midazolam (28+/-7) or ketamine (29+/-7 min) groups (P<0.05). Recovery was earlier in the combination group, as the time required to reach a modified Aldrete score of 10 was significantly less in the combination group (22+/-5 min) than in the oral midazolam (36+/-11 min) or ketamine (38+/-8 min) groups. The incidence of excessive salivation was significantly higher in the ketamine alone group (P<0.05). In conclusion, the combination of oral ketamine (3 mg/kg) and midazolam (0.25 mg/kg) has minimal side effects and gives a faster onset and more rapid recovery than ketamine 6 mg/kg or midazolam 0.5 mg/kg for premedication in children.     

Oral preanaesthetic medication for children: double-blind randomized study of a combination of midazolam and ketamine vs midazolam or ketamine alone

Anxiolysis and sedation with oral midazolam are common practice in paediatric anaesthesia. However, good or excellent results are seen in only 50-80% of cases. For this reason, we investigated if addition of a low dose of oral ketamine (MIKE: ketamine 3 mg kg-1, midazolam 0.5 mg kg-1) resulted in better premedication compared with oral midazolam 0.5 mg kg-1 or ketamine 6 mg kg-1 alone, in a prospective, randomized, double-blind study. We studied 120 children (mean age 5.7 (range 2-10) yr) undergoing surgery of more than 30 min duration. After oral premedication in the ward and transfer, the child's condition in the induction room was evaluated by assigning 1-4 points to the quality of anxiolysis, sedation, behaviour at separation from parent and during venepuncture (transfer score). On days 1 and 7 after operation, parents were interviewed for changes in behaviour (eating, sleep, dreams, toilet training), recollection and satisfaction, using a standardized questionnaire. The groups were similar in age, sex, weight, intervention and duration of anaesthesia. The transfer score was significantly better in the MIKE group (12.5 (95% confidence interval (CI) 11.9-13.1)) than in the ketamine or midazolam groups (10.6 (9.8- 11.4) and 11.5 (10.7-12.3), respectively). Success rates for anxiolysis and behaviour at separation were greater than 90% with the combination, approximately 70% with midazolam and only 51% with ketamine alone. The incidence of salivation, excitation and psychotic symptoms was low in all groups. Vertigo and emesis before induction were significantly more frequent after ketamine premedication. During recovery, there were no differences in sedation or time of possible discharge. After 1 week, parents reported nightmares (ketamine five, midazolam three, MIKE one), restless sleep (five/four/four) or negative memories (three/four/one). There were no major or continuing disturbances in behaviour or development. In summary, significantly better anxiolysis and separation were observed with a combination of ketamine and midazolam, even in awake children (sedation was not successful according to the preset criteria), than with midazolam or ketamine alone. Duration of action and side effects of the combination were similar to those of midazolam. The combination of both drugs in strawberry flavoured glucose syrup (pH 4.5 approximately) is chemically stable for 8 weeks.      

A comparison of two different doses of ketamine with midazolam and midazolam alone as oral preanaesthetic medication on recovery after sevoflurane anaesthesia in children

BACKGROUND: This investigation prospectively evaluated the effect of oral premedication of two different doses of ketamine with midazolam and midazolam alone on the recovery of children after sevoflurane anaesthesia. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind study, 79 children (aged 1-8 years, ASA physical status I or II) were assigned to receive one of three premedications in a volume of 0.5 ml x kg(-1): group 1 received midazolam 0.5 mg x kg(-1) (MD); group 2 received midazolam 0.5 mg x kg(-1) with ketamine 1.8 mg x kg(-1) (MK-1); and group 3 received midazolam 0.5 mg x kg(-1) with ketamine 3 mg x kg(-1) (MK-2). The reactions of the children during administration were noted. Anaesthesia was induced by facemask with incremental sevoflurane administration. All children received alfentanil (15 micro g x kg(-1)). Tracheal intubation was facilitated by mivacurium (0.2 mg x kg(-1)). Anaesthesia was maintained with sevoflurane and an additional dose of alfentanil, if necessary. During recovery, the time interval between discontinuation of anaesthesia and arousal (spontaneous ventilation, extubation) were recorded. RESULTS: Emergence (spontaneous ventilation, extubation) and recovery times (discharge, Aldrete score=9) did not differ significantly between groups (P=0.24, P=0.59 and P=0.145, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of midazolam and ketamine as oral preanaesthetic medication did not significantly affect the recovery time of children after sevoflurane anaesthesia.     

Intranasal sufentanil/midazolam versus ketamine/midazolam for analgesia/sedation in the pediatric population prior to undergoing multiple dental extractions under general anesthesia: a prospective, double-blind, randomized comparison

This article details a double-blind, randomized study evaluating the efficacy and safety of intranasal sufentanil and intranasal midazolam (S/M) when compared with intranasal ketamine and intranasal midazolam (K/M) for sedation and analgesia in pediatric patients undergoing dental surgery. Fifty healthy ASA status 1 children aged 5-7 years, weighing 15-20 kg, and having 6 or more teeth extracted, were randomly allocated to 2 groups of 25 patients each (n = 50). In the S/M group, 25 children received intranasal sufentanil 20 microg, and intranasal midazolam 0.3 mg/kg 20 minutes before the induction of anesthesia. In the K/M group, 25 children received intranasal ketamine 5 mg/kg and intranasal midazolam 0.3 mg/kg 20 minutes before the induction of anesthesia. Sevoflurane in nitrous oxide and oxygen was used for induction and maintenance of anesthesia. This study demonstrated the safety and efficacy of both methods with ease of administration, combined with a rapid onset of action. Both groups were equally sedated. A smooth mask induction of anesthesia was experienced in the majority of children. Effective postoperative analgesia for multiple dental extractions was provided. The intranasal administration of drugs for sedation and analgesia has some promising features in preschool children undergoing multiple dental extractions.     

Evaluation of relatively low dose of oral transmucosal ketamine premedication in children: a comparison with oral midazolam

BACKGROUND: Oral Transmucosal ketamine (lollipop) has been shown to be an effective, harmless preoperative medication for children. However, its efficacy was not compared with commonly used premedication drugs. We, therefore, compared the efficacy of oral transmucosal ketamine with oral midazolam for premedication in children. METHODS: Fifty-five children (2-6 years of age) were randomized to receive orally either a lollipop containing 50 mg of ketamine (the group K; n = 27) or syrup containing 0.5 mg.kg(-1) of midazolam (the group M; n = 28) before minor surgery. A five points-sedation score (1 = asleep to 5 = agitated; scores 2 and 3 were defined as 'effective') on arrival in the operating room and a three points-acceptance score of separation from the parents and a three points-mask cooperation score at induction of anesthesia (1 = easy to 3 = markedly resistant; score 3 was defined as 'poor') were used. RESULTS: Sedation scores in group K were significantly higher than those in group M (P = 0.012), and the incidence of 'effective' in sedation was significantly lower in group K than in group M (P = 0.036). The incidence of 'poor' at separation from the parents and for mask cooperation was significantly higher in group K than in group M (P = 0.017, P = 0.019, respectively). CONCLUSION: These results indicate that a relatively low dose of oral transmucosal ketamine premedication provides no benefits over oral midazolam in children.     

A comparison of midazolam with trimeprazine as an oral premedicant for children

The effect of oral premedication was investigated in a double-blind, randomised trial in 85 children undergoing tonsillectomy and/or adenoidectomy. Orally administered midazolam 0.5 mg.kg⁻¹ given 30 min pre-operatively was compared with trimeprazine 2 mg.kg⁻¹ given 90 min pre-operatively and a placebo preparation. Compliance, sedation and ease of induction were assessed as were the duration and quality of recovery. Following premedication with midazolam none of the patients was anxious, crying or distressed on leaving the ward, compared with 2/28 in the trimeprazine group and 5/28 in the placebo group (p =0.0007). More patients were calm and quiet on arrival in the anaesthetic room following midazolam than following trimeprazine, with both premedicant agents comparing favourably with placebo. There was no significant difference between the three groups in the time to recovery or the sedation score on discharge to the ward. Midazolam is a safe and effective oral premedicant for children.     

枸橼酸钠对先天性心脏病患儿咪达唑仑口服术前用药效果的影响

目的 探讨枸橼酸钠对先天性心脏病患儿咪达唑仑口服术前用药效果的影响.方法 选择拟行房缺修补术、室缺修补术或动脉导管结扎术的患儿40例,年龄2～6岁,体重12～20 kg,ASA分级Ⅱ或Ⅲ级,随机分为2组(n=20):对照组(C组)和枸橼酸钠组(S组).口服术前用药:S组为咪达唑仑0.12 ml/kg、氯胺酮0.12 ml/kg、葡萄糖0.12 ml/kg和枸橼酸钠0.12 ml/kg,等容积混合;C组为咪达唑仑0.12 ml/kg、氯胺酮0.12 ml/kg和葡萄糖0.24 ml/kg,等容积混合.用pH值1.75的盐酸模拟胃液,与两组配置好的药液在体外混合,分别测定两组混合药液的pH值.记录术前焦虑评分,口服术前药(0.48 ml/kg)后,记录咪达唑仑起效时间、镇静评分和与父母分离评分.入室后记录HR、MAP和SpO2,记录患儿对静脉穿刺反应评分和服药后的不良反应发生情况.结果 与盐酸混合后C组药物pH值为1.97,S组为4.52.两组患儿均成功口服术前药物.与C组比较,S组与父母分离评分、镇静评分和静脉穿刺反应评分降低,咪达唑仑起效时间缩短(P＜0.05),术前焦虑评分差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05);两组患儿入室时HR、MAP和SpO2均在正常范围.两组患儿在服药后均未出现恶心呕吐、呼吸抑制等不良反应.结论 作为先天性心脏病患儿口服术前用药时,枸橼酸钠可提高药液的pH值,缩短咪达唑仑起效时间,加强镇静效果.     

Oral sedation with midazolam and diphenhydramine compared with midazolam alone in children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of oral midazolam and midazolam-diphenhydramine combination to sedate children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: We performed a prospective randomized double-blind study in 96 children who were randomly allocated into two groups. Group D received oral diphenhydramine (1.25 mg x kg(-1)) with midazolam (0.5 mg x kg(-1)), and Group P received oral placebo with midazolam (0.5 mg x kg(-1)) alone. Sedation scores, onset and duration of sleep were evaluated. Adverse effects, including hypoxemia, failed sedation, and the return of baseline activity, were documented. RESULTS: Diphenhydramine facilitated an earlier onset of midazolam sedation (P < 0.01), and higher sedation scores (P < 0.01). In children who received midazolam alone, 20 (41%) were inadequately sedated, compared with 9 (18%) children who received midazolam and diphenhydramine combination (P < 0.01). Time to complete recovery was not significantly different between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates that the combination of oral diphenhydramine with oral midazolam resulted in safe and effective sedation for children undergoing MRI. The use of this combination might be more advantageous compared with midazolam alone, resulting in less sedation failure during MRI.     

Comparison of a combination of midazolam and diazepam and midazolam alone as oral premedication on preanesthetic and emergence condition in children

BACKGROUND: Preanesthetic anxiety and emergence agitation are major challenges for anesthesiologists in pediatric anesthesia. Thus, midazolam has been used as premedication for children. However, midazolam alone is not effective for emergence agitation. The present study tested the effect of a combination of midazolam and diazepam on the preanesthetic condition and emergence behavior in children. METHODS: Forty-two children were allocated to one of three groups: the NoPre group received no premedication; the Mi group received midazolam 0.5 mg kg(-1) orally; and the Mi + Di group received midazolam 0.25 mg kg(-1) and diazepam 0.25 mg kg(-1) orally. When anesthesia was induced with 7% sevoflurane in 100% oxygen, qualities of mask induction and sedation were rated. Anesthesia was maintained with sevoflurane (3-5%) in 100% oxygen. During emergence from anesthesia, the score of the child's emergence behavior was rated. RESULTS: Children in the Mi and Mi + Di groups were more sedated than those in the NoPre group. A combination of midazolam and diazepam provided a better quality of mask induction, when compared with no premedication. Also, the children in the Mi + Di group were less agitated than those in the other groups during the emergence. CONCLUSION: Children in the Mi + Di group were significantly more sedated at induction of anesthesia and less agitated during emergence from anesthesia.     

Premedication in children: a comparison of oral midazolam and oral clonidine

BACKGROUND: Oral premedication is widely used in pediatric anesthesia to reduce preoperative anxiety and ensure smooth induction. Midazolam is currently the most commonly used premedicant, but good results have also been reported with clonidine. The aim of the present study was to compare clinical effects of oral midazolam and oral clonidine. METHODS: We performed a prospective open study in 64 children who were randomly assigned to receive either oral midazolam 0.5 mg.kg (-1) (group M) or oral clonidine 4 microg.kg (-1) (group C) prior to mask induction. Drug acceptance, preoperative sedation and anxiolysis, quality of mask acceptance, recovery profile and parental satisfaction were evaluated. RESULTS: The taste of oral clonidine was judged as significantly better; 14% of children rejected oral midazolam. Onset of sedation was significantly faster after premedication with midazolam (30+/-13.1 min) than with clonidine (38.5+/-14.6 min), but level of sedation was significantly better after premedication with clonidine. Quality of mask induction was equally successful in both groups. A steal-induction was performed in 66% of patients of group C, but none in group M. We observed a trend towards an increased incidence of emergence agitation after premedication with midazolam. Parental satisfaction was significantly higher in group C. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, premedication with oral clonidine appeared to be superior to oral midazolam. Quality of mask acceptance was comparable between groups, but oral clonidine was better accepted by the child, produced more effective preoperative sedation, showed a trend towards better recovery from anesthesia and had a higher degree of parental satisfaction.     

咪唑安定复合氯胺酮用于小儿基础麻醉的临床研究

目的　研究咪唑安定复合氯胺酮肌注或口服用于小儿基础麻醉的可能性。方法　 80例 1～ 8岁、ASAⅠ～Ⅱ级的患儿随机等分成四组 :A组 ,肌注氯胺酮 6mg/kg ;B组 ,肌注氯胺酮 4mg/kg +口服咪唑安定 0 2mg/kg ;C组 ,口服氯胺酮 5mg/kg +咪唑安定 0 5mg/kg ;D组 ,口服咪唑安定0 7mg/kg。观察各组麻醉诱导效果、循环呼吸变化及不良反应。 结果　 (1)B组与A组相比 ,起效更快 ,术中不良反应发生率更低 (P <0 0 5 ) ,而麻醉诱导效果无明显差异 (P >0 0 5 ) ;(2 )C组与A组相比 ,小儿更为合作 (P <0 0 1) ,HR增加不明显 (P >0 0 5 ) ,但起效更慢 (P <0 0 5 ) ,镇静程度不如后者 (P <0 0 5 ) ,但 80 %的患儿尚能与父母分离。结论　咪唑安定复合氯胺酮肌注用于小儿麻醉诱导要优于单纯肌注氯胺酮 ,而咪唑安定复合氯胺酮口服仍不失为一种可行的诱导方法。     

Two doses of oral ketamine,given with midazolam,for premedication in children

BACKGROUND: Oral premedication is common practice in paediatric anaesthesia. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of premedication using oral ketamine, with midazolam. METHODS: Clinical randomized and blind-study on 120 patients, aged between 2 and 6 years, listed for minor surgery. Patients were divided in three groups: first group (group MK1) received midazolam and ketamine at the doses of 0.3 mgxkg-1 and 1 mgxkg-1, respectively; the second (group MK2) received 0.3 mgxkg-1 of midazolam and 2 mgxkg-1 of ketamine; the control group 0.5 mgxkg-1 of midazolam (group M). Success of premedication was assessed by assigning 1-4 points to the quality of anxiolysis and sedation every 5 min after drug administration and then at the moment of separation from parents, entrance to theatre and response to mask induction of general anaesthesia. RESULTS: More patients were successfully premedicated in the MK2 group, statistical significance was observed after 20 min (p<0.05). The MK2 group accepted separation from parents (p<0.05) and face mask for induction of anaesthesia (p<0.05) more willingly. Side effects were observed in 4 MK2 group patients (nausea, headache and diplopia), but all these effects resolved spontaneously. CONCLUSIONS: Two mgxkg-1 of ketamine given orally with midazolam improve anxiolysis and sedation and achieve more success of premedication, better acceptance of parental separation and better acceptance of face mask for induction of anaesthesia.     

Effectiveness of preoperative sedation with rectal midazolam, ketamine, or their combination in young children.

To determine which of three types of rectal sedation was most effective preoperatively in facilitating parental separation and intravenous cannulation in young children, 100 children 3.0 +/- 1.7 (mean +/- SD) yr of age were randomly assigned to four equal groups. One group (M-K-A) received rectal midazolam (0.5 mg/kg), ketamine (3 mg/kg), and atropine (0.02 mg/kg). The other sedation groups received the same doses of midazolam and atropine (M-A) or ketamine and atropine (K-A) alone, and the control group (A) received only rectal atropine. Most children in either the M-K-A (100%) or M-A (92%) groups separated easily from their parents without struggling or crying, significantly more than in the K-A (60%) or A (64%) groups. However, more children in the M-K-A group (44%) were asleep during separation than in the M-A group (8%; P < 0.05). Only 20% of the children in the M-A or M-K-A groups cried during intravenous catheter placement, significantly less than in the K-A (56%) or A (92%) groups. Intravenous catheter placement was also successful significantly more often in the M-A (80%) and M-K-A (84%) groups than in the K-A (48%) or A (40%) groups. Complications were similar among the groups, but there was evidence that midazolam prolonged recovery time in some patients. Rectal midazolam with or without ketamine is a useful technique when intravenous catheter placement before induction of anesthesia is desired.     

Oral midazolam is an effective premedication for children having day-stay anaesthesia.

The effect of oral premedication was studied in a double-blind, randomised trial of 200 children undergoing day-stay anaesthesia. Midazolam 0.25 mg/kg, midazolam 0.5 mg/kg, diazepam 0.5 mg/kg or a placebo was given orally one hour prior to anaesthesia. Patient state was assessed at nine stages, from administration of the premedication up to and including induction of anaesthesia, using a four-point behavioural scale. Patient state was also assessed postoperatively in the recovery area and the day-stay ward. There was no difference between the four groups until induction of anaesthesia. At this stage 82% of children were either asleep or awake and calm. Patients who received midazolam 0.5 mg/kg were more likely to be asleep or awake and calm at induction rather than other groups (P = 0.05). Children receiving midazolam 0.5 mg/kg or diazepam 0.5 mg/kg slept longest in the post anaesthetic recovery room (P less than 0.005), and spent most time there (P less than .005). There was no difference between groups in the length of time spent in the day-stay ward or in the number of overnight admissions. The study shows that a high proportion of unsedated children are calm at induction of anaesthesia and that oral midazolam is an effective premedication in children for day-stay anaesthesia.     

Ketamine and midazolam is an inappropriate preinduction combination in uncooperative children undergoing brief ambulatory procedures

BACKGROUND: We prospectively studied the effects of intramuscular (i.m.) ketamine alone, or combined with midazolam, on mask acceptance and recovery in young children who were uncooperative during induction of anaesthesia. METHODS: The Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was obtained to study 80 children, 1-3 years, scheduled for bilateral myringotomies and tube insertion (BMT). Mask induction was attempted in all the children. Those who were uncooperative were randomly assigned to one of the four preinduction treatment groups: group I, ketamine 2 mg.kg(-1); group II, ketamine 2 mg.kg(-1) combined with midazolam 0.1 mg.kg(-1); group III, ketamine 2 mg.kg(-1) with midazolam 0.2 mg.kg(-1); or group IV, ketamine 1 mg.kg(-1) with midazolam 0.2 mg.kg(-1). Anaesthesia was continued with nitrous oxide and halothane by facemask. RESULTS: Children in all treatment groups achieved satisfactory sedation in less than 3 min following the administration of the preinduction drug(s). Compared with patients who received halothane induction (comparison group), the use of ketamine alone did not significantly (P > 0.0167, a Bonferroni corrected significance level) delay recovery and discharge times (18.8 +/- 2.5 and 82.5 +/- 30.7 min vs 12.6 +/- 4.6 and 81.0 +/- 33.8 min, P = 0.030 and P = 0.941, respectively). Patients who received ketamine/midazolam combinations, however, had significantly longer recovery and discharge times vs halothane (32.3 +/- 14.0 and 128.0 +/- 36.6 min, P = 0.001, P = 0.007, respectively). These times were so clinically unacceptable, that the study had to be terminated with only 17 patients receiving study drugs. CONCLUSIONS: It is concluded that ketamine/midazolam combination is not appropriate for preinduction of anaesthesia in paediatric ambulatory patients because of unacceptably prolonged recovery and delayed discharge times.     

Reevaluation of rectal ketamine premedication in children: comparison with rectal midazolam

BACKGROUND: Results of previous studies of rectal ketamine as a pediatric premedication are clouded because of lack of dose-response relation, inappropriate time of assessing sedative effects, and previous administration or coadministration of benzodiazepines. Therefore, the authors reevaluated the efficacy of rectally administered ketamine in comparison with 1 mg/kg rectal midazolam. METHODS: Sixty-six infants and children (age, 7-61 months) who were American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I and who were undergoing minor surgeries as in-patients were randomized to receive 5 mg/kg ketamine (n = 16), 7 mg/kg ketamine (n = 16), 10 mg/kg ketamine (n = 17), or 1 mg/kg midazolam (n = 17) via rectum. A blinded observer scored sedation 45 min and 15 min after administration of ketamine and midazolam, respectively, when children were separated from parent(s) for inhalational induction. All children underwent standardized general anesthesia with sevoflurane, nitrous oxide, and oxygen with endotracheal intubation. Blood pressure, heart rate, and oxyhemoglobin saturation were determined before, during, and after anesthesia. Postoperative recovery characteristics and incidence of adverse reactions were also assessed. RESULTS: Most children (88%) who received rectally 10 mg/kg ketamine or 1 mg/kg midazolam separated easily from their parents compared with those (31%) who received 7 or 5 mg/kg rectal ketamine (P < 0.05). Similarly, more children who received 10 mg/kg ketamine or 1 mg/kg midazolam underwent mask induction without struggling or crying compared with those who received 7 or 5 mg/kg ketamine (P < 0.05). There were no clinically significant changes in blood pressure, heart rate, and oxyhemoglobin saturation after administration of either drug. Immediately after surgery, more children receiving midazolam or 5 mg/kg ketamine were agitated compared with 7 or 10 mg/kg ketamine. Ketamine, 7 and 10 mg/kg, provided postoperative analgesia, but the largest dose of ketamine was associated with delayed emergence from general anesthesia. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that rectally administered ketamine alone produces dose-dependent sedative effects in children, when evaluated at its predicted peak plasma concentration. Ketamine, 10 mg/kg, has a delayed onset but is as effective as 1 mg/kg midazolam for sedating healthy children before general anesthesia. However, 10 mg/kg rectal ketamine is not recommended for brief surgeries because of prolonged postoperative sedation.     

The use of midazolam and small-dose ketamine for sedation and analgesia during local anesthesia.

Small-dose ketamine in combination with sedative drugs has increasingly been used for sedation and analgesia in local anesthesia. We compared the clinical efficacy of midazolam with two different ketamine infusion regimens during plastic surgery under local anesthesia. Sixty patients undergoing plastic surgery procedures with local anesthesia were randomly assigned to two groups of 30 patients each in a double-blinded fashion. All patients received a bolus of 0.05 mg/kg midazolam, followed by a stepwise infusion: 1.67 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1) for the first 30 min, then reduced to 1.33 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1) for 90 min and subsequently to 1 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1). Two minutes before the infiltration of local anesthetic solution, a bolus of ketamine 0.3 mg/kg IV was administered, followed by a stepwise infusion of ketamine: Group A, 16.67 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1) for 30 min, 13.3 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1) for 90 min, and subsequently 10 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1); Group B, 8.33 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1) for 30 min, 6.67 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1) for 90 min, and then 5 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1). The level of sedation was evaluated by using the modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation scale. We observed the effects of the two ketamine infusion regimens on sedation levels, respiratory and cardiovascular variables, and perioperative side effects. In both groups, midazolam and ketamine produced adequate sedation (with Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation scores of 2-4) without significant respiratory and cardiovascular depression during surgery. However, there were fewer disruptive movements and there was less postoperative vomiting in Group B (P < 0.01). In conclusion, ketamine and midazolam provided satisfactory intraoperative sedation, analgesia, and amnesia in both groups. However, side effects associated with ketamine occurred less often in the smaller-dose ketamine group. IMPLICATIONS: Sedation and analgesia are often provided during local anesthesia. This study demonstrates that a small-dose ketamine infusion in combination with midazolam provided satisfactory intraoperative sedation, analgesia, and amnesia in healthy plastic-surgery patients when it was used to supplement local anesthesia.     

A double blind randomized comparison of oral trimeprazine-methadone and ketamine-midazolam for sedation of pediatric dental patients for oral surgical procedures.

The safety and efficacy of an oral sedation technique for children having minor oral surgical procedures under local anesthesia were studied. One hundred healthy children between the ages of 2 and 7 yr received either a combination of midazolam (0.35 mg/kg) and ketamine (5 mg/kg) (Group A), or a combination of trimeprazine (3 mg/kg) and methadone (0.2 mg/kg) (Group B) 30 min preoperatively. Hemodynamic parameters, adverse reactions, postoperative recovery, and behavior were evaluated. More children were asleep, but rousable to verbal commands, 30 min after drug administration in Group A (40%) than in Group B (8%). Immediately before the dental procedure, 46% of children in Group A were asleep in contrast to 8% of children in group B. Significantly more children in Group A were awake, coughing, crying, and moving purposefully 30 and 60 min after admission to the recovery room. Two children (4%) in Group A vomited. Ten (20%) children in Group A hallucinated compared to none in Group B. The surgeon rated the procedure as good or very good in 94% of children in Group A compared to 78% in Group B. Our results show that the combination of midazolam and ketamine, administered orally, is a safe, effective, and practical approach to managing children for minor oral surgical procedures under local anesthesia.     

Premedication with intranasal dexmedetomidine,midazolam and ketamine for children undergoing bone marrow biopsy and aspirate

BackgroundPreanesthetic medication in pediatrics is very helpful in relieving anxiety, fear, and psychological trauma due to maternal deprivation. Many drugs used in different routes aiming to alleviate stress and prevent psychological trauma. Of these drugs midazolam and ketamine are commonly used. We aimed in this work to compare both of them with dexmedetomidine which is α 2-agonist when used intranasally in children undergoing bone marrow biopsy and aspirate in sedation and premedication.Methods96 children aged 2–8 years with ASA physical status II scheduled for bone marrow biopsy and aspirate were divided into three groups 32 child in each one: (M group) who were premedicated with intranasal midazolam 0.2 mg/kg, (D group) who were premedicated with intranasal dexmedetomidine 1 μg/kg, and (K group) who were premedicated with intranasal ketamine 5 mg/kg. The degree of sedation was assessed every 5 min for 30 min by using a 4 point sedation scale. Also, child–parent separation was assessed and graded according to a 4 point scale at 30 min.ResultsWe found that dexmedetomidine group achieved a faster sedation score less than 3 at the point of 10 min, then all groups achieved a comparable sedation score till point of 25 min, both dexmedetomidine and midazolam groups had better sedation score than ketamine group at 30 min. Children achieved child–parents separation score grade 1 was significantly higher in dexmedetomidine group than midazolam and ketamine groups.ConclusionsMidazolam, ketamine and dexmedetomidine produced adequate sedation with little side effects. So, we prefer to use midazolam due its efficacy and safety as well as availability and its low price in comparison to ketamine and dexmedetomidine.