A Placebo-Controlled Randomized Trial Comparing Oral Midazolam, Dexmedetomidine, and Gabapentin on Prophylaxis of Emergence Agitation After Sevoflurane Anesthesia in Adenotonsillectomy.

IF 2.6 2区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Pain physician Pub Date : 2025-01-01
Mohammad Fouad Algyar, Ahmed Mohammed Abdelghany, Sherif Kamal Arafa, Amir Abouzkry Elsayed
{"title":"A Placebo-Controlled Randomized Trial Comparing Oral Midazolam, Dexmedetomidine, and Gabapentin on Prophylaxis of Emergence Agitation After Sevoflurane Anesthesia in Adenotonsillectomy.","authors":"Mohammad Fouad Algyar, Ahmed Mohammed Abdelghany, Sherif Kamal Arafa, Amir Abouzkry Elsayed","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Sevoflurane causes emergence agitation (EA) in up to 80% of pediatric patients.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Using midazolam, dexmedetomidine (DEX), and gabapentin, this work aimed to assess the prophylactic effect of oral premedication on EA incidence experienced by pediatric patients during recovery from sevoflurane anesthesia.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Randomized controlled trial.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Kafrelsheikh University, Kafrelsheikh, Egypt.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study was performed on 240 men and women aged 3 to 10 years who were scheduled for adenotonsillectomy. Patients were randomized into 4 equal-sized groups. Thirty minutes before general anesthesia, oral premedication was applied in the form an apple-flavored sugary fluid plus 0.5 mg/kg of midazolam in Group M, 4 µg/kg of DEX in Group D, 10 mg/kg of gabapentin in Group G, or no drugs whatsoever in Group P (placebo).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The incidence of EA was reduced more greatly in the M, D, and G groups than in the P group, and the D group's incidence of EA was lower than that of the M or G groups. The severity of EA exhibited a more significant reduction in the M, D, and G groups than in Group P. Similarly, the time until extubation was more prolonged in the M, D, and G groups than it was in the P group. Hemodynamics measurements were significantly lower in Groups M, D, and G than in Group P, and the D group had a lower hemodynamics measurement than did the M or G groups. Sedation scores were greater in the D and G groups than in the P group, and the D group had a higher sedation score than did Group M.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>This study used a small sample, took place at a single center, and had a short follow-up period.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Premedication using oral midazolam, DEX, or gabapentin reduced the incidence of EA, and DEX provided the best sedation and hemodynamics of all.</p>","PeriodicalId":19841,"journal":{"name":"Pain physician","volume":"28 1","pages":"31-38"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain physician","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Sevoflurane causes emergence agitation (EA) in up to 80% of pediatric patients.

Objectives: Using midazolam, dexmedetomidine (DEX), and gabapentin, this work aimed to assess the prophylactic effect of oral premedication on EA incidence experienced by pediatric patients during recovery from sevoflurane anesthesia.

Study design: Randomized controlled trial.

Setting: Kafrelsheikh University, Kafrelsheikh, Egypt.

Methods: This study was performed on 240 men and women aged 3 to 10 years who were scheduled for adenotonsillectomy. Patients were randomized into 4 equal-sized groups. Thirty minutes before general anesthesia, oral premedication was applied in the form an apple-flavored sugary fluid plus 0.5 mg/kg of midazolam in Group M, 4 µg/kg of DEX in Group D, 10 mg/kg of gabapentin in Group G, or no drugs whatsoever in Group P (placebo).

Results: The incidence of EA was reduced more greatly in the M, D, and G groups than in the P group, and the D group's incidence of EA was lower than that of the M or G groups. The severity of EA exhibited a more significant reduction in the M, D, and G groups than in Group P. Similarly, the time until extubation was more prolonged in the M, D, and G groups than it was in the P group. Hemodynamics measurements were significantly lower in Groups M, D, and G than in Group P, and the D group had a lower hemodynamics measurement than did the M or G groups. Sedation scores were greater in the D and G groups than in the P group, and the D group had a higher sedation score than did Group M.

Limitations: This study used a small sample, took place at a single center, and had a short follow-up period.

Conclusion: Premedication using oral midazolam, DEX, or gabapentin reduced the incidence of EA, and DEX provided the best sedation and hemodynamics of all.

一项比较口服咪达唑仑、右美托咪定和加巴喷丁预防七氟醚麻醉下腺扁桃体切除术后出现躁动的安慰剂对照随机试验。
背景:七氟醚导致多达80%的儿科患者出现躁动(EA)。目的:利用咪达唑仑、右美托咪定(DEX)和加巴喷丁,评估口服预用药对七氟醚麻醉患儿康复期EA发生率的预防作用。研究设计:随机对照试验。地点:埃及Kafrelsheikh大学。方法:本研究对240名年龄在3至10岁的男性和女性进行了腺扁桃体切除术。患者被随机分为4个大小相等的组。全麻前30分钟口服预用药:M组为苹果味含糖液体加咪达唑仑0.5 mg/kg, D组为右咪达唑仑4µg/kg, g组为加巴喷丁10 mg/kg, P组不加任何药物(安慰剂)。结果:与P组相比,M、D、G组EA发生率降低幅度更大,且D组EA发生率低于M、G组。与P组相比,M组、D组和G组EA的严重程度明显降低。同样,M组、D组和G组拔管时间比P组更长。M、D、G组血流动力学指标明显低于P组,且D组血流动力学指标低于M、G组。D组和G组的镇静评分高于P组,D组的镇静评分高于m组。局限性:本研究采用小样本,在单一中心进行,随访时间短。结论:用药前口服咪达唑仑、右美托咪定或加巴喷丁均可降低EA的发生率,其中右美托咪定的镇静作用和血流动力学效果最好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Pain physician
Pain physician CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
21.60%
发文量
234
期刊介绍: Pain Physician Journal is the official publication of the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP). The open access journal is published 6 times a year. Pain Physician Journal is a peer-reviewed, multi-disciplinary, open access journal written by and directed to an audience of interventional pain physicians, clinicians and basic scientists with an interest in interventional pain management and pain medicine. Pain Physician Journal presents the latest studies, research, and information vital to those in the emerging specialty of interventional pain management – and critical to the people they serve.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信