Dexmedetomidine-ketamine and midazolam-ketamine combinations for sedation in pediatric patients undergoing extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: a randomized prospective study

被引:32
|
作者
Koruk, Senem [1 ]
Mizrak, Ayse [1 ]
Gul, Rauf [1 ]
Kilic, Ertugrul [1 ]
Yendi, Fatih [1 ]
Oner, Unsal [1 ]
机构
[1] Gaziantep Univ, Sch Med, Dept Anesthesiol & Reanimat, TR-27310 Sehitkamil, Gaziantep, Turkey
关键词
Dexmedetomidine; Sedation; ESWL; Pediatrics; TERM FOLLOW-UP; CARDIAC-CATHETERIZATION; CHILDREN; PROPOFOL; HUMANS; ANESTHESIA; PHARMACOKINETICS; VOLUNTEERS; ANALGESIA; EFFICACY;
D O I
10.1007/s00540-010-1023-1
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) requires sedation in pediatric patients. Dexmedetomidine is a relatively new agent used for sedation. The aim of this randomized prospective study was to compare the effects of dexmedetomidine-ketamine and midazolam-ketamine combinations on the recovery time, hemodynamic and respiratory variables, and side effects in pediatric patients undergoing ESWL. Fifty pediatric patients aged between 2 and 15 years who were scheduled for elective ESWL were randomized into two groups. In Group D we applied dexmedetomidine at1 mu g/kg, given over 10 min, and a bolus of 1 mg/kg ketamine for sedation. In Group M we applied midazolam at a 0.05 mg/kg bolus dose 10 min before the procedure and a 1 mg/kg bolus of ketamine. We measured and monitored the hemodynamic variables, oxygen saturation, and recovery time, and we also monitored the side effects. Four patients in group D refused to complete the study; 21 patients in group D and 25 patients in group M completed the study. We found the recovery time [eye-opening time (9.3 +/- A 4.5 vs. 16.2 +/- A 6.5 min; p < 0.001), verbal response time (12.8 +/- A 4.9 vs. 19.2 +/- A 7.2 min; p < 0.001), and the cooperation time (17.1 +/- A 5.0 vs. 23.3 +/- A 7.7 min; p < 0.001)] to be shorter in the dexmedetomidine group. Also, the heart rate values were lower in the dexmedetomidine group at the 20th minute of the procedure (99.1 +/- A 19.0 vs. 118.7 +/- A 7.3 beats/min; p = 0.016). In this study we found the recovery time to be shorter, with hemodynamic stability, in the dexmedetomidine group, compared with the midazolam group. So we can conclude that dexmedetomidine may be a good and safe alternative agent for sedation, with a shorter recovery period than midazolam, in the pediatric population.
引用
收藏
页码:858 / 863
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Dexmedetomidine–ketamine and midazolam–ketamine combinations for sedation in pediatric patients undergoing extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: a randomized prospective study
    Senem Koruk
    Ayse Mizrak
    Rauf Gul
    Ertugrul Kilic
    Fatih Yendi
    Unsal Oner
    [J]. Journal of Anesthesia, 2010, 24 : 858 - 863
  • [2] Midazolam-ketamine versus dexmedetomidine-ketamine combinations for anesthesia of pediatric patients undergoing cardiac catheterization
    Menshawi, Mohammed Abdelsalam
    Fahim, Hany Magdy
    [J]. AIN SHAMS JOURNAL OF ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2019, 11 (1)
  • [3] Comparative study between dexmedetomidine-ketamine and fentanyl-ketamine combinations for sedation in patients undergoing extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. A randomized double blinded study
    El sayed, Ayman A.
    Assad, Osama M.
    El tahawy, Mohamad S.
    [J]. EGYPTIAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2015, 31 (01) : 35 - 41
  • [4] Comparative evaluation of intranasal midazolam-ketamine, dexmedetomidine-ketamine, midazolam-fentanyl, and dexmedetomidine-fentanyl combinations for procedural sedation and analgesia in pediatric dental patients: a randomized controlled trial
    Agarwal, Abhilasha
    Ansari, Afroz Alam
    Nath, Rajendra
    Chak, Rakesh Kumar
    Singh, Rajeev Kumar
    Khanna, Richa
    Singh, Prem Raj
    [J]. JOURNAL OF DENTAL ANESTHESIA AND PAIN MEDICINE, 2023, 23 (02) : 69 - 81
  • [5] Comparison of intranasal dexmedetomidine-midazolam, dexmedetomidine-ketamine, and midazolam-ketamine for premedication in paediatric patients: a double-blinded randomized trial
    Vaishnavi, B. D.
    Goyal, Shilpa
    Sharma, Ankur
    Kothari, Nikhil
    Kaloria, Narendra
    Sethi, Priyanka
    Bhatia, Pradeep
    [J]. ANAESTHESIOLOGY INTENSIVE THERAPY, 2023, 55 (02) : 103 - 108
  • [6] A Comparison of Oral Midazolam-ketamine, Dexmedetomidine-fentanyl, and Dexmedetomidine-ketamine Combinations as Sedative Agents in Pediatric Dentistry: A Triple-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial
    Jaikaria, Astha
    Thakur, Seema
    Singhal, Parul
    Chauhan, Deepak
    Jayam, Cheranjeevi
    Syal, Kartik
    [J]. CONTEMPORARY CLINICAL DENTISTRY, 2018, 9 : S197 - S203
  • [7] Midazolam–ketamine versus dexmedetomidine–ketamine combinations for anesthesia of pediatric patients undergoing cardiac catheterization
    Mohammed Abdelsalam Menshawi
    Hany Magdy Fahim
    [J]. Ain-Shams Journal of Anesthesiology, 11
  • [8] Dexmedetomidine-ketamine and propofol-ketamine combinations for anesthesia in spontaneously breathing pediatric patients undergoing cardiac catheterization
    Tosun, Zeynep
    Akin, Aynur
    Guler, Gulen
    Esmaoglu, Aliye
    Boyaci, Adern
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CARDIOTHORACIC AND VASCULAR ANESTHESIA, 2006, 20 (04) : 515 - 519
  • [9] Re: Comparison of Ketamine with Midazolam versus Ketamine with Fentanyl for Pediatric Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy Procedure: A Randomized Controlled Study Editorial Comment
    Assimos, Dean G.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2019, 201 (01): : 26 - 26
  • [10] Propofol-ketamine versus dexmedetomidine-ketamine for sedation during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in pediatric patients: a randomized clinical trial
    Amer, Akram M.
    Youssef, Azza M.
    El-Ozairy, Hala S.
    El-Hennawy, Ahmed M.
    [J]. REVISTA BRASILEIRA DE ANESTESIOLOGIA, 2020, 70 (06): : 620 - 626