Genetically engineered mouse models of human cardiovascular disease provide an opportunity to understand critical pathophysiological mechanisms. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) provides precise reproducible assessment of cardiac structure and function, but, in contrast to echocardiography, requires that the animal be immobilized during image acquisition. General anesthetic regimens yield satisfactory images, but have the potential to significantly perturb cardiac function. The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of general anesthesia and a new deep sedation regimen, respectively, on cardiac function in mice as determined by CMR, and to compare them to results obtained in mildly sedated conscious mice by echocardiography.
In 6 mildly sedated normal conscious mice assessed by echo, heart rate was 615 ± 25 min-1 (mean ± SE) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was 0.94 ± 0.01. In the CMR studies of normal mice, heart rate was slightly lower during deep sedation with morphine/midazolam (583 ± 30 min-1), but the difference was not statistically significant. General anesthesia with 1% inhaled isoflurane significantly depressed heart rate (468 ± 7 min-1, p < 0.05 vs. conscious sedation). In 6 additional mice with ischemic LV failure, trends in heart rate were similar, but not statistically significant. In normal mice, deep sedation depressed LVEF (0.79 ± 0.04, p < 0.05 compared to light sedation), but to a significantly lesser extent than general anesthesia (0.60 ± 0.04, p < 0.05 vs. deep sedation).
In mice with ischemic LV failure, ejection fraction measurements were comparable when performed during light sedation, deep sedation, and general anesthesia, respectively. Contrast-to-noise ratios were similar during deep sedation and during general anesthesia, indicating comparable image quality. Left ventricular mass measurements made by CMR during deep sedation were nearly identical to those made during general anesthesia (r2 = 0.99, mean absolute difference < 4%), indicating equivalent quantitative accuracy obtained with the two methods. The imaging procedures were well-tolerated in all mice.
In mice with normal cardiac function, CMR during deep sedation causes significantly less depression of heart rate and ejection fraction than imaging during general anesthesia with isoflurane. In mice with heart failure, the sedation/anesthesia regimen had no clear impact on cardiac function. Deep sedation and general anesthesia produced CMR with comparable image quality and quantitative accuracy.
Over a period of years general anesthesia has been a standard anesthetic technique for defibrillation threshold (DFT) testing at the time of implant. DFT testing without general anesthesia cover has gained limited acceptance. Use of local anesthesia combined with deep sedation for DFT testing might facilitate and simplify these procedures by reducing the procedural time, staff time, avoiding inefficient service in organizing anesthetic cover; thereby improving patient compliance.
The objective of this study was to evaluate feasibility, safety and efficacy of conscious sedation for DFT testing during Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) implantation.
Data of 87 non-selected patients who achieved adequate sedation with titrated doses of midazolam and pethidine were analyzed retrospectively. These medications were administered by a circulating nurse under the supervision of the implanting physicians. All hemodynamic measures, treatment and complications were monitored and recorded throughout the procedure.
A retrospective analysis of data from 87 patients who underwent ICD implantation and DFT testing under conscious sedation at our center was reported. The mean dose of midazolam and pethidine administered was 4.9 ± 1.8 and 47.7 ± 20 mg, respectively. During the period of conscious sedation, no patient depicted episode of sustained apnea. No major complication or mortality was reported.
Use of conscious sedation as an alternative to the use of general anesthesia for DFT testing during ICD implantation is found to be feasible, safe and effective, with an added advantage of reduced procedural time and improved patient compliance.
Conscious sedation; Defibrillation threshold testing; Implantable cardioverter defibrillators
The relative efficacy and safety of drugs and combinations used clinically in dentistry as premedicants to alleviate patient apprehension are largely unsubstantiated. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of agents used for parenteral sedation through controlled clinical trials, it is first necessary to identify which drugs, doses, and routes of administration are actually used in practice. A survey instrument was developed to characterize the drugs used clinically for anesthesia and sedation by dentists with advanced training in pain control. A random sample of 500 dentists who frequently use anesthesia and sedation in practice was selected from the Fellows of the American Dental Society of Anesthesiology. The first mailing was followed by a second mailing to nonrespondents after 30 days. The respondents report a variety of parenteral sedation techniques in combination with local anesthesia (the response categories are not mutually exclusive): nitrous oxide (64%), intravenous conscious sedation (59%), intravenous “deep” sedation (47%), and outpatient general anesthesia (27%). Drugs most commonly reported for intravenous sedation include diazepam, methohexital, midazolam, and combinations of these drugs with narcotics. A total of 82 distinct drugs and combinations was reported for intravenous sedation and anesthesia. Oral premedication and intramuscular sedation are rarely used by this group. Most general anesthesia reported is done on an outpatient basis in private practice. These results indicate that a wide variety of drugs is employed for parenteral sedation in dental practice, but the most common practice among dentists with advanced training in anesthesia is local anesthesia supplemented with intravenous sedation consisting of a benzodiazepine and an opioid or a barbiturate.
To evaluate if the standard anesthetic regimen – topical combined with intracameral anesthesia without sedation – in a population-based cohort of unselected cataract surgery cases is adequate, optimal, and good practice, or if improvements are necessary.
We conducted a prospective, observational study on all cases of cataract surgery during a 1-year period at one institution (n=1249). Data were collected from the patients’ records. Outcome measures were use of preoperative sedation, type of anesthesia, complications, and adverse events. In a subgroup of patients (n=124) satisfaction with the anesthetic regimen was evaluated using a short questionnaire.
Most cases (90%, 1125/1249) had combined topical and intracameral anesthesia without sedation. Patients who chose preoperative sedation (midazolam hydrochloride sublingually) were significantly younger and more often female (P=0.0001 and P=0.011, respectively). In the questionnaire subgroup, the median pain score after surgery was 0.7 (visual analog scale, 0–10). A pain score of 1.9 or less was reported by 76% of the patients. Patients reporting a pain score of 2 or more had sedation and additional anesthetics more often. No significant difference was found regarding age, sex, pulse rate, oxygen saturation, first or second eye surgery, or adverse intraoperative events for patients with pain scores of 1.9 or less and 2 or more.
This large population-based series of small-incision phacoemulsification surgery shows that combined topical and intracameral anesthesia without sedatives is well tolerated for most phacoemulsification patients. It is also effective in cases when complications or adverse events occur. It is important to be responsive to the individual patient’s needs and adjust operating procedures if necessary, as there were a few patients who experienced insufficient anesthesia.
anesthesia; local/methods; phacoemulsification; cataract extraction; humans; prospective observational studies
General descriptions or “snapshots” of sedation/general anesthesia practices during dental care are very limited in reviewed literature. The objective of this study was to determine commonalities in dental sedation/anesthesia practices, as well as to accumulate subjective information pertaining to sedation/anesthesia care within the dental profession. This questionnaire-based survey was completed by participating anesthesia providers in the United States. A standardized questionnaire was sent via facsimile, or was delivered by mail, to 1500 anesthesia providers from a randomized list using an online database. Data from the returned questionnaires were entered onto an Excel spreadsheet and were imported into a JMP Statistical Discovery Software program for analyses. Quantitative evaluations were confined to summation of variables, an estimation of means, and a valid percent for identified variables. A total of 717 questionnaires were entered for data analysis (N = 717). Data from this study demonstrate the wide variation that exists in sedation/anesthesia care and those providing its administration during dental treatment in the United States. The demographics of this randomized population show anesthesia providers involved in all disciplines of the dental profession, as well as significant variation in the types of modalities used for sedation/anesthesia care. Data from this study reveal wide variation in sedation/anesthesia care during dental treatment. These distinctions include representation of sedation/anesthesia providers across all disciplines of the dental profession, as well as variations in the techniques used for sedation/anesthesia care.
Anesthesia; Dentistry; Practice characteristics; Techniques
Moderate intravenous (IV) sedation combined with local anesthesia is common for outpatient oral surgery procedures. An ideal sedative agent must be safe and well tolerated by patients and practitioners. This study evaluated fospropofol, a relatively new sedative/hypnotic, in comparison to midazolam, a commonly used benzodiazepine, for IV moderate sedation during oral and maxillofacial surgery. Sixty patients were randomly assigned to either the fospropofol or the midazolam group. Each participant received 1 μg/kg of fentanyl prior to administration of the selected sedative. Those in the fospropofol group received an initial dose of 6.5 mg/kg, with 1.6 mg/kg supplemental doses as needed. Those in the midazolam group received initial doses of 0.05 mg/kg, followed by 0.02 mg/kg supplemental doses. The quality of sedation in each patient was evaluated with regard to (a) onset of sedation, maintenance, and recovery profile; (b) patient and surgeon satisfaction; and (c) hemodynamic stability and adverse effects. The fospropofol group demonstrated shorter physical recovery times than midazolam patients, taking a mean of 11.6 minutes versus 18.4 minutes for physical recovery (P = .007). Cognitive recovery comparison did not find any difference with a mean of 7.5 minutes versus 8.8 minutes between the 2 drug groups (P = .123). The fospropofol group had a higher rate of local anesthetic injection recall (90.5 vs 44.4%, P = .004). Other parameters of recall were comparable. Two adverse effects demonstrated significance, with more patients in the midazolam group experiencing tachycardia (48.2 vs 9.4%, P = .001), and more patients in the fospropofol group experiencing perineal discomfort (40.6 vs 0, P < .001). No significant difference was found in any other measures of sedation safety, maintenance, or satisfaction. Fospropofol, when administered intravenously by a dentist anesthesiologist at the indicated dose in this study, appears to be a safe, well-tolerated alternative to midazolam for intravenous moderate sedation during minor oral surgery procedures.
Fospropofol; Midazolam; Moderate sedation; Outpatient surgery; IV conscious sedation; Benzodiazepine; Propofol
Brain function monitors have improved safety and efficiency in general anesthesia; however, they have not been adequately tested for guiding conscious sedation for periodontal surgical procedures. This study evaluated the patient state index (PSI) obtained from the SEDline monitor (Sedline Inc., San Diego, CA) to determine its capacity to improve the safety and efficiency of intravenous conscious sedation during outpatient periodontal surgery. Twenty-one patients at the periodontics clinic of Baylor College of Dentistry were admitted to the study in 2009 and sedated to a moderate level using midazolam and fentanyl during periodontal surgery. The PSI monitoring was blinded from the clinician, and the following data were collected: vital signs, Ramsay sedation scale (RSS), medications administered, adverse events, PSI, electroencephalography, and the patients' perspective through visual analogue scales. The data were correlated to evaluate the PSI's ability to assess the level of sedation. Results showed that the RSS and PSI did not correlate (r = −0.25) unless high values associated with electromyographical (EMG) activity were corrected (r = −0.47). Oxygen desaturation did not correlate with the PSI (r = −0.08). Satisfaction (r = −0.57) and amnesia (r = −0.55) both increased as the average PSI decreased. In conclusion, within the limits of this study, PSI appears to correlate with amnesia, allowing a practitioner to titrate medications to that effect. It did not provide advance warning of adverse events and had inherent inaccuracies due to EMG activity during oral surgery. The PSI has the potential to increase safety and efficiency in conscious sedation but requires further development to eliminate EMG activity from confounding the score.
It has been postulated that Multiple sclerosis (MS) stems from a narrowing in the veins that drain blood from the brain, known medically as chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency, or CCSVI. It has been proposed that balloon angioplasty should alleviate the symptoms of MS. This procedure is also known as The “Liberation Procedure”. Accordingly, a clinical study was undertaken to determine the effects of dexmedetomidine in patients undergoing the liberation procedure.
To assess the effectiveness of dexmedetomidine in providing adequate sedation and pain relief for patients undergoing the liberation procedure.
Settings and design:
A prospective, nonrandomized observational study of 60 consecutive adult patients undergoing the liberation procedure under monitored anesthesia care (MAC) who will receive dexmedetomidine as an anesthetic agent.
A total of 60 adult patients were enrolled in the study. Dexmedetomidine was administered to all patients in a loading dose of 1 mcg/kg, which was followed by a maintenance dose of 0.2–0.5 mcg/kg/h. The evaluation of quality of sedation was based on Ramsay Sedation and the quality of analgesia was assessed using the visual analog scale. The following parameters were measured continuously: heart rate, mean arterial pressure and hemoglobin oxygen saturation. Patients were asked to answer the question, “How would you rate your experience with the sedation you have received during surgery?” using a seven-point Likert-like verbal rating scale.
Repeated measurements were analyzed by repeated measures ANOVA for HR and BP.
Most of our patients were satisfied with their sedation. In most of the patients, MAP and HR dropped after the bolus dose of dexmedetomidine, and the drop was statistically significant.
Dexmedetomidine can be used as a sole sedative agent in patients undergoing the liberation procedure.
Dexmedetomidine; monitored anesthesia care; multiple sclerosis liberation procedure
To assess the effectiveness of intrauterine local anesthesia in reducing pain associated with outpatient gynecologic procedures.
We searched online databases PubMed or MEDLINE, Embase, Google Scholar, and Clinicaltrials.gov, and hand-searched reference lists from reviews evaluating pain control methods for gynecologic office procedures. We identified randomized controlled trials using intrauterine local anesthetic in gynecologic procedures.
Titles and abstracts were screened for 1,236 articles. We identified 45 potential articles for inclusion. We excluded 22 of these studies because: 1) they were not randomized controlled trials; 2) they did not describe a quantifiable dose of medication used in the study; 3) they did not investigate an intrauterine anesthetic; 4) they did not study a potentially awake, outpatient procedure; and 5) they did not clearly report results or represented duplicate publication. Twenty-three articles were ultimately included for review.
Tabulation, Integration, and Results
Two authors independently reviewed full search results and assessed eligibility for inclusion, and independently abstracted data from all articles that met criteria for inclusion. Disagreements regarding eligibility or abstraction data were adjudicated by a third independent person. Our primary endpoint was reported effect of intrauterine local anesthesia on patient-reported pain scores. Due to heterogeneity in study methods, outcome measures, and reporting of outcomes, results could not be combined in a meta-analysis. Good evidence supports use of intrauterine anesthesia in endometrial biopsy and curettage, as five good-quality studies reported reduced pain scores while only one good-quality study reported negative results. We found moderate evidence to support intrauterine anesthesia in hysteroscopy, as one good-quality study and two fair or poor quality studies reported reduced pain scores, while two good-quality studies had negative results. Good evidence suggests that intrauterine anesthesia is not effective in hysterosalpingography; three good-quality studies reported that pain scores were not reduced, and no good quality studies showed beneficial effect in that procedure.
Evidence was insufficient concerning first-trimester abortion, saline-infusion sonogram, tubal sterilization, and intrauterine device insertion.
Intrauterine local anesthesia can reduce pain in several gynecologic procedures including endometrial biopsy, curettage, and hysteroscopy, and may be effective in other procedures as well.
This report examines the effects of regional versus general anesthesia for infrainguinal bypass procedures performed in the treatment of critical limb ischemia (CLI).
Nonemergent infrainguinal bypass procedures for CLI (defined as rest pain or tissue loss) were identified using the 2005 to 2008 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database using International Classification of Disease, ninth edition, and Current Procedure Terminology codes. Patients were classified according to National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data as receiving either general anesthesia or regional anesthesia. The regional anesthesia group included those specified as having regional, spinal, or epidural anesthesia. Demographic, medical, risk factor, operative, and outcomes data were abstracted for the study sample. Individual outcomes were evaluated according to the following morbidity categories: wound, pulmonary, venous thromboembolic, genitourinary, cardiovascular, and operative. Length of stay, total morbidity, and mortality were also evaluated. Associations between anesthesia types and outcomes were evaluated using linear or logistic regression.
A total of 5,462 inpatient hospital visits involving infrainguinal bypasses for CLI were identified. Mean patient age was 69 ± 12 years; 69% were Caucasian; and 39% were female. In all, 4,768 procedures were performed using general anesthesia and 694 with regional anesthesia. Patients receiving general anesthesia were younger and significantly more likely to have a history of smoking, previous lower-extremity bypass, previous amputation, previous stroke, and a history of a bleeding diathesis including the use of warfarin. Patients receiving regional anesthesia had a higher prevalence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
Tibial-level bypasses were performed in 51% of procedures, whereas 49% of procedures were popliteal-level bypasses. Cases performed using general anesthesia demonstrated a higher rate of resident involvement, need for blood transfusion, and operative time. There was no difference in the rate of popliteal-level and infrapopliteal-level bypasses between groups. Infrapopliteal bypass procedures performed using general anesthesia were more likely to involve prosthetic grafts and composite vein. Mortality occurred in 157 patients (3%). The overall morbidity rate was 37%. Mean and median lengths of stay were 7.5 days (±8.1) and 6.0 days (Q1: 4.0, Q3: 8.0), respectively. Multivariate analyses demonstrated no significant differences by anesthesia type in the incidence of morbidity, mortality, or length of stay.
These results provide no evidence to support the systematic avoidance of general anesthesia for lower-extremity bypass procedures. These data suggest that anesthetic choice should be governed by local expertise and practice patterns.
Purpose of review
The elderly are the fastest growing segment of the population and undergo 25–30% of all surgical procedures. Postoperative cognitive problems are common in older patients following major surgery. The socioeconomic implications of these cognitive disorders are profound; cognitive decline is associated with a loss of independence, a reduction in the quality of life, and death. This review will focus on the two most common cognitive problems following surgery: postoperative delirium and postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD).
For years, preoperative geriatric consultation/screening was the only intervention proven to decrease postoperative delirium. There are, however, several recent publications indicating that preoperative and postoperative pharmacological and medical (hydration, oxygenation) management can reduce postoperative delirium. Spinal anesthesia with minimal propofol sedation has been shown to decrease the incidence of postoperative delirium in hip-fracture patients. Likewise, dexmedetomidine sedation in mechanically ventilated patients in the ICU is associated with less postoperative delirium and shorter ventilator times. Preoperative levels of education and brain function (cognitive reserve) may predict patients at risk for postoperative cognitive problems. Reduced white matter integrity is reported to place patients at a higher risk for both postoperative delirium and POCD.
The etiology of postoperative cognitive problems is unknown, but there is emerging evidence that decreased preoperative cognitive function contributes to the development of postoperative delirium and POCD. There is growing concern that inhalation anesthetics may be neurotoxic to the aging brain, but there are no human data evaluating this hypothesis to date. Randomized controlled trials evaluating interventions to improve long-term cognitive outcomes in elderly patients are urgently needed.
anesthesia; delirium; postoperative cognitive dysfunction; surgery
The α2-adrenoreceptor agonist, dexmedetomidine, provides excellent sedation with minimal cardiovascular instability or respiratory depression and may be a useful adjunct to facilitate smooth tracheal extubation.
Materials and Methods:
Fifty American Society of Anesthesiologists grade I-II patients, aged 20-45 years, scheduled for elective general surgical, urological and gynecological surgeries were studied after randomization into two groups. Group A and B, received an intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine 0.75 mcg/kg or placebo respectively, over 15 minutes before anticipated time of end of surgery, in a double blind manner. Anesthesia techniques were standardized. Heart rate, systolic, diastolic, mean arterial pressures were recorded while starting injection, at 1, 3, 5, 10, 15 minutes after starting injection, during extubation, at 1, 3, 5 minutes after extubation, and thereafter every 5 minutes for 30 minutes. Quality of extubation was evaluated on a 5 point scale and postoperative sedation on a 6 point scale. Any event of laryngospasm, bronchospasm, desaturation, respiratory depression, vomiting, hypotension, undue sedation was noted.
Heart rate, systolic, diastolic, mean arterial pressures were significantly higher in group B (P < 0.05). Extubation quality score of majority of patients was 2 in group A and 3 in group B. Sedation score of most patients was 3 in group A and 2 in group B. Bradycardia and hypotension incidences were higher in group A. One patient in group A, two patients in group B had vomiting. No patient had any other side effects.
Dexmedetomidine 0.75 mcg/kg administered 15 minutes before extubation, stabilizes hemodynamics and facilitates smooth extubation.
α2-adrenoreceptor agonist; dexmedetomidine; extubation; hemodynamics
Gastrointestinal endoscopies are invasive and unpleasant procedures that are increasingly being used worldwide. The importance of high quality procedures (especially in colorectal cancer screening), the increasing patient awareness and the expectation of painless examination, increase the need for procedural sedation. The best single sedation agent for endoscopy is propofol which, due to its’ pharmacokinetic/dynamic profile allows for a higher patient satisfaction and procedural quality and lower induction and recovery times, while maintaining the safety of traditional sedation. Propofol is an anesthetic agent when used in higher doses than those needed for endoscopy. Because of this important feature it may lead to cardiovascular and respiratory depression and, ultimately, to cardiac arrest and death. Fueled by this argument, concern over the safety of its administration by personnel without general anesthesia training has arisen. Propofol usage seems to be increasing but it’s still underused. It is a safe alternative for simple endoscopic procedures in low risk patients even if administered by non-anesthesiologists. Evidence on propofol safety in complex procedures and high risk patients is less robust and in these cases, the presence of an anesthetist should be considered. We review the existing evidence on the topic and evaluate the regional differences on sedation practices.
Hypnotics and sedatives; Propofol; Conscious sedation; Endoscopy; Gastrointestinal
Patients in intensive care units (ICUs) are generally sedated for prolonged periods. Over-sedation and under-sedation both have negative effects on patient safety and resource use. We conducted a systematic review of the literature in order to establish the incidence of sub-optimal sedation (both over- and under-sedation) in ICUs.
We searched Medline, Embase and CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) online literature databases from 1988 to 15 May 2008 and hand-searched conferences. English-language studies set in the ICU, in sedated adult humans on mechanical ventilation, which reported the incidence of sub-optimal sedation, were included. All abstracts were reviewed twice by two independent reviewers, with all conflicts resolved by a third reviewer, to check that they met the review inclusion criteria. Full papers of all included studies were retrieved and were again reviewed twice against inclusion criteria. Data were doubly extracted. Study aims, design, population, comparisons made, and data on the incidence of sub-optimal, optimal, over-sedation or under-sedation were extracted.
There was considerable variation between included studies in the definition of optimal sedation and in the scale or method used to assess sedation. Across all included studies, a substantial incidence of sub-optimal sedation was reported, with a greater tendency toward over-sedation.
Our review suggests that improvements in the consistent definition and measurement of sedation may improve the quality of care of patients within the ICU.
The present study evaluates the effect of anesthesiologist's experience in providing deep sedation for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) on cost and safety. Methodology. Perioperative records of 1167 patients who underwent ERCP were divided on the basis of anesthesiologist assisting these procedures either on regular basis (Group R) or on ad hoc basis (Group N). Comparisons were made for anesthesia times, complication rates, and airway interventions. Results. Across all American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Classes, regular anesthesiologists were more efficient (overall mean anesthesia time in Group R was 24.82 ± 12.96 versus 48.63 ± 21.53 minutes in Group N). Within Group R, anesthesia times across all ASA classes were comparable. In Group N, anesthesia times for higher ASA status patients were significantly longer (ASA IV, 64.62 ± 35.78 versus ASA I, 45.88 ± 11.19 minutes). Intubation rates (0.76% versus 12.8%) and median minimal oxygen saturation (100% versus 97.01%) were significantly higher in Group R. Had Group R anesthesiologists performed all procedures, the hospital could have saved US $ 758536 (based upon operating room time costs). Conclusion. Experience in providing deep sedation improved patient safety and decreased the operating room turnaround time, thereby lowering operating room costs associated with these procedures.
Background. Quality monitoring and improvement is prerequisite for efficient colonoscopy. Aim. To assess the effects of increased sedation administration on colonoscopy performance. Materials and Methods. During Era 1 we prospectively measured four colonoscopy quality indicators: sedation administration, colonoscopy completion rate, adenoma detection rate, and early complications rate in three cohorts: cohort A: intention for total colonoscopy cases; cohort B: cohort A excluding bowel obstruction cases; cohort C: CRC screening-surveillance cases within cohort B. We identified deficiencies and implemented our plan to optimize sedation. We prospectively evaluated its effects in both short- (Era 2) and long-term period (Era 3). Results. We identified that sedation administration and colonoscopy completion rates were below recommended standards. After sedation optimization its use rate increased significantly (38.1% to 55.8% to 69.5%) and colonoscopy completion rate increased from 88.3% to 90.6% to 96.4% in cohort B and from 93.2% to 95.3% to 98.3% in cohort C, in Eras 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Adenoma detection rate increased in cohort C (25.9% to 30.6% to 35%) and early complications rate decreased from 3.4% to 1.9% to 0.3%. Most endoscopists increased significantly their completion rate and this was preserved long-term. Conclusion. Increased sedation administration results in long-lasting improvement of colonoscopy quality indicators.
Inadequate access to oral health care places children at risk for caries. Disease severity and inability to cooperate often result in treatment with general anesthesia (GA). Sedation is increasingly popular and viewed as lower risk than GA in community settings. Currently, few data are available to quantify pediatric morbidity and mortality related to dental anesthesia.
Summarize dental anesthesia-related pediatric deaths described in media reports.
Review of media reports in the Lexis-Nexis Academic database and a private foundation website.
Dental offices, ambulatory surgery centers, and hospitals.
U.S.-based children (≤ 21 y.o.) who died subsequent to receiving anesthesia for a dental procedure between 1980–2011.
Most deaths occurred among 2 –5 year-olds (n=21/44); in an office setting (n=21/44), and with a general/pediatric dentist (n=25/44) as the anesthesia provider. In this latter group, 17/25 deaths were linked with a sedation anesthetic.
This series of media reports likely represent only a fraction of the overall morbidity and mortality related to dental anesthesia. These data may indicate an association between mortality and pediatric dental procedures under sedation, particularly in office settings. However, these relationships are difficult to test in the absence of a database that could provide an estimate of incidence and prevalence of morbidity and mortality. With growing numbers of children receiving anesthesia for dental procedures from providers with variable training, it is imperative to be able to track anesthesia-related adverse outcomes. Creating a national database of adverse outcomes will enable future research to advance patient safety and quality.
Anesthesia; Patient safety; Child; Conscious Sedation/adverse effects; Dental Anxiety/drug therapy; Treatment Outcome
The aim of this prospective, double-blinded study was to investigate the effects of clonidine in co-administration with bupivacaine during spinal anesthesia, regarding the onset and regression of motor and sensory block, postoperative analgesia and possible side effects.
We randomly selected 66 male patients (age 35 to 70), from the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class I–II; these patients were scheduled for transurethral surgical procedures. These patients were randomly allocated into two groups of 33 patients each: group B (bupivacaine) only received 0.5% isobaric bupivacaine 7.5 mg intrathecally and group BC (bupivacaine + clonidine) received bupivacaine 7.5 mg and clonidine 25 μg intrathecally. We performed the spinal anesthesia at a level of L3–L4 with a 25-gauge needle. We assessed the sensory block with a pin-prick, the motor block using the Bromage scale, analgesia with the visual analog scale and sedation with the modified Wilson scale. We also recorded the hemodynamic and respiratory parameters.
The groups were demographically similar. The mean time of achievement of motor block (Bromage 3) and sensory block at level T9 was significantly shorter in the BC group compared with B group (p = 0.002, p = 0.000, respeectively). The motor block regression time was not significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.237). The postoperative analgesia requirement was significantly longer in group BC compared with group B (p = 0.000). No neurological deficit, sedation or other significant adverse effects were recorded.
The intrathecal application of clonidine in combination with bupivacaine improves the duration and quality of spinal anesthesia; it also provides longer duration of postoperative analgesia, without significant side effects.
The purpose of this study was to compare and evaluate sedation with intravenous xylazine (1.1 mg/kg bodyweight [BW]) versus intravenous romifidine (100 micrograms/kg BW) followed by induction of anesthesia with intravenous diazepam (0.04 mg/kg BW) and ketamine (2.2 mg/kg BW). Twelve healthy horses were used in a blinded, randomized, cross-over design. Heart rate, presence of 2nd degree atrioventricular heart blocks (2 degrees AVB), respiratory rate, arterial blood pressures, blood gases, packed cell volume, total serum proteins, and duration of anesthesia and recumbency were recorded. Induction and recovery quality was evaluated using a 0 to 4 score. Response to stimulation with noise, pressure, and cutaneous electrical stimulation was assessed at 5 minute intervals during recumbency to evaluate the depth of anesthesia. Heart rate was lower and 2 degrees AVB more frequent in the romifidine group, while blood pressure was lower in the xylazine group. Duration of anesthesia was longer in the romifidine group (mean 20.8, s mean 2.3 min) versus the xylazine group (mean 15.8, s mean 1.6 min), while induction and recovery were excellent in both groups. Respiratory rates, blood gas values, packed cell volumes, and total protein levels did not differ between groups. The results indicate that romifidine premedication followed by diazepam and ketamine is a very satisfactory regime for short duration intravenous anesthesia in horses.
A comparative study to evaluate the efficacy of dexmedetomidine as a hypotensive agent in comparison to esmolol in Functional Endoscopic Sinus Surgery (FESS).
Forty patients ASA I or II scheduled for FESS were equally randomly assigned to receive either dexmedetomidine 1 μg/Kg over 10 min before induction of anesthesia followed by 0.4-0.8 μg/Kg/h infusion during maintenance (DEX group), or esmolol, loading dose 1mg/kg was infused over one min followed by 0.4-0.8 mg/kg/h infusion during maintenance (E group) to maintain mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) between (55-65 mmHg). General anesthesia was maintained with sevoflurane 2%-4%. The surgical field was assessed using Average Category Scale and average blood loss was calculated. Hemodynamic variables (MAP and HR); arterial blood gas analysis; plasma cortisol level; intraoperative fentanyl consumption; Emergence time and total recovery from anesthesia (Aldrete score ≥9) were recorded. Sedation score was determined at 15, 30, 60 min after tracheal extubation and time to first analgesic request was recorded.
Both DEX group and E group reached the desired MAP (55-65 mmHg) with no intergroup differences in MAP or HR. The for the quality of the surgical filed in the range of MAP (55-65 mmHg) were <=2 with no significant differences between group scores during hypotensive period. Mean intraoperative fentanyl consumption was significantly lower in DEX group than E group. Cortisol level showed no significant changes between or within groups. No significant changes were observed in arterial blood gases. Emergence time and time to achieve Aldrete score ≥9 were significantly lower in E group compared with DEX group. The sedation score were significantly lower in E group compared with DEX group at 15 and 30 minutes postoperatively. Time to first analgesic request was significantly longer in DEX group.
Both dexmedetomidine or esmolol with sevoflurane are safe agents for controlled hypotension and are effective in providing ideal surgical field during FESS. Compared with esmolol, dexmedetomidine offers the advantage of inherent analgesic, sedative and anesthetic sparing effect.
Controlled hypotension; dexmedetomidine; esmolol; functional endoscopic sinus surgery
The oral transmucosal formulation of fentanyl citrate (OTFC) has been reported to be an effective sedative, providing convenient and atraumatic sedation for children prior to general anesthesia or painful diagnostic procedures. Thirty-three young children (24-60 months of age) scheduled for outpatient general anesthesia for treatment of dental caries were enrolled in this randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial. To determine the effectiveness of the OTFC premedication, patient behavior was evaluated using three distinct outcome ratings. A sedation score rated behavior in the waiting room prior to OTFC as well as 10 minutes and 20 minutes after OTFC. A separation score rated the child's response to being separated from his/her parent or guardian for transport to the dental operatory. Finally, a cooperation score rated the child's acceptance of the mask induction. The OTFC formulation was well tolerated by most of the children in this study. Compared with the placebo oralet, the active OTFC improved behavior for separation from the parent (P < .05) and cooperation with the mask induction (P < .05). The duration of surgery and the time of recovery did not differ between placebo and active premedication. Side effects including respiratory and cardiovascular complications were reported more frequently in the active fentanyl group. Continuous monitoring of respiratory function is essential when using this unique and effective formulation of fentanyl for pediatric preanesthetic sedation.
AIM: To evaluate the effect of posterior lingual lidocaine swab on patient tolerance to esophagogastroduodenoscopy, the ease of performance of the procedure, and to determine if such use will reduce the need for intravenous sedation.
METHODS: Eighty patients undergoing diagnostic esophagogastroduodenoscopy in a tertiary care medical center were randomized to either lidocaine swab or spray. Intravenous meperidine and midazolam were given as needed during the procedure.
RESULTS: Patients in the lidocaine swab group (SWG) tolerated the procedure better than those in the spray group (SPG) with a median tolerability score of 2 (1, 4) compared to 4 (2, 5) (P < 0.01). The endoscopists encountered less difficulty performing the procedures in the SWG with lower median difficulty scores of 1 (1, 5) compared to 4 (1, 5) in the SPG (P < 0.01). In addition, the need for intravenous sedation was also lower in the SWG compared to the SPG with fewer patients requiring intravenous sedation (13/40 patients vs 38/40 patients, respectively, P < 0.01). The patients in the SWG were more satisfied with the mode of local anesthesia they received as compared to the SPG. In addition, the endoscopists were happier with the use of lidocaine swab.
CONCLUSION: The use of a posterior lingual lidocaine swab in esophagogastroduodenoscopy improves patient comfort and tolerance and endoscopist satisfaction and decreases the need for intravenous sedation.
Esophagogastroduodenoscopy; Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy; Local anesthesia; Lidocaine; Sedation
When using morphine as the sole analgesic during conduct of anesthesia, the fear of its adverse postoperative effects primarily sedation and respiratory depression may impede adequate dosing and analgesia.
Aim and Objectives:
This audit aims to explore the dosing schedules of morphine used during general anesthesia in our institution and to analyze whether the fear of major side effects leads to suboptimal dosing of morphine with inadequate pain relief.
Materials and Methods:
All subjects scheduled for surgery under general anesthesia wherein morphine was used exclusively for intraoperative analgesia were included in the audit. The audit proforma was completed by the attending anesthesiologist wherein the study period extended from beginning of anesthesia to immediate postoperative period.
The study population comprised of 158 patients having mean age 33 ± 14 years and mean weight 52 ± 14 kg. The dose of morphine administered at induction varied widely from 0.05 to 0.3 mg/kg i.v. The VAS (Visual Analogue Scale) score in immediate postoperative period varied from 0 to 10 (mean 1.7 ± 2.0) and sedation score from 1 to 5 (mean 3.94 ± 1.05). Inadequate analgesia with a VAS score ≥4 was seen in 15% patients. Morphine dosage of >0.1 mg/kg was associated with highly significant increase in quality of postoperative analgesia with VAS score <4, and an increase in sedation with sedation score ≤3 (P value < 0.01). However, none of the patients required active intervention for cardiorespiratory support.
The practice of dosing morphine in our institution is highly variable with doses ranging from 0.05 to 0.3 mg/kg. This results in inadequate analgesia in 15% patients in postoperative period. Titrating the dose of morphine to expected pain levels inflicted upon by surgical procedures may result in better pain control and less sedated patients postoperatively.
Audit; dosing schedules; morphine
Ultrasound-guided sciatic nerve block, in combination with femoral nerve and lateral femoral cutaneous nerve blocks, is frequently used to induce anesthesia for lower limb surgery. The anterior approach to the sciatic nerve is performed in the supine position and repositioning of the patient between injections is avoidable. We compared the relative utility and efficiency of anterior versus transgluteal sciatic nerve blocks in conjunction with femoral nerve and lateral femoral cutaneous nerve blockade.
Materials and Methods:
Twenty-four patients were enrolled in this prospective double-blind randomized study and were randomly divided into two equal groups: Anterior (Group A) and transgluteal (Group T). We evaluated the following parameters: ultrasound view quality, procedural duration, onset time to block, quality of anesthesia during surgery and postoperative analgesia, required administration of supplemental sedation or narcotics during surgery, amount of pethidine administered within 24 hours post surgery, and overall patient satisfaction.
There were no significant differences between patient groups with regard to the demographic data, onset time to block, quality of ultrasound view, use of narcotics to augment the anesthesia during surgery, and patient satisfaction. Although procedural completion time for the sciatic injection alone was shorter in Group T, the total completion time of all blocks together was significantly less in Group A.
Ultrasound-guided anterior blockade of the sciatic nerve has advantages over the transgluteal approach — it provides efficient anesthesia and results in excellent patient satisfaction.
Anterior; knee surgery; transgluteal; ultrasound-guided sciatic nerve block
State of the art sedation concepts on intensive care units (ICU) favor propofol for a time period of up to 72 h and midazolam for long-term sedation. However, intravenous sedation is associated with complications such as development of tolerance, insufficient sedation quality, gastrointestinal paralysis, and withdrawal symptoms including cognitive deficits. Therefore, we aimed to investigate whether sevoflurane as a volatile anesthetic technically implemented by the anesthetic-conserving device (ACD) may provide advantages regarding ‘weaning time’, efficiency, and patient’s safety when compared to standard intravenous sedation employing propofol.
This currently ongoing trial is designed as a two-armed, monocentric, randomized prospective phase II study including intubated intensive care patients with an expected necessity for sedation exceeding 48 h. Patients are randomly assigned to either receive intravenous sedation with propofol or sevoflurane employing the ACD. Primary endpoint is the comparison of the ‘weaning time’ defined as the time required from discontinuation of the sedating agent until sufficient spontaneous breathing occurs. Moreover, sedation depth evaluated by Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale and parameters of patient’s safety (that is, vital signs, laboratory monitoring of organ function) as well as the duration of mechanical ventilation and overall stay on the ICU are analyzed and compared. An intention-to-treat analysis will be carried out with all patients for whom it will be possible to define a wake-up time. In addition, a per-protocol analysis is envisaged. Completion of patient recruitment is expected by the end of 2012.
This clinical study is designed to evaluate the impact of sevoflurane during long-term sedation of critically ill patients on ‘weaning time’, efficiency, and patient’s safety compared to the standard intravenous sedation concept employing propofol.
Inhalative sedation; Intravenous sedation; Intensive care; Sevoflurane