Advertisement

Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia

, Volume 44, Issue 1, pp 26–30 | Cite as

Conscious sedation for interventional neuroradiology: a comparison of midazolam and propofol infusion

  • Pirjo H. Manninen
  • Andrew SH Chan
  • David Papworth
Reports of Investigation

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to compare two conscious sedation techniques, midazolam (M) and propofol (P), for interventional neuroradiology by assessment of the incidence of complications and satisfaction scores.

Methods

Forty patients were randomized to receive 0.75 μg · kg−1 fentanyl and a M or P bolus followed by an infusion; (M I5 μg · kg−1 + 0.5 μg · kg−1 · min−1: P 0.5 mg · kg−1 + 25 μg · kg−1 min−1). The incidences of complications and untoward events requinng intervention were documented. These included respiratory depression, excessive pain, inappropriate movements and the inability to examine the patient. The satisfaction of the anaesthetic technique from the perspective of both the neuroradiologist and the patient was scored.

Results

The incidence and types of complications were not different between the two groups. Pain occurred in 12 patients (6M, 6P), inappropriate movements in 17 (7M, 10P) and respiratory changes in 10 patients (2M, 8P).

Conclusions

Both techniques were satisfactory and the incidence of complications was similar for both groups.

Keywords

Fentanyl Midazolam Esmolol Conscious Sedation Visual Analogue Score 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Résumé

Objectif

Cette étude visait à comparer deux méthodes de sédation consciente, le midazolam (M) et le propofol (P) pour les interventions neuroradiologiques en évaluant l’incidence des complications et le degré de satisfaction.

Méthodes

Quarante patients ont été répartis aléatoirement pour recevoir fentanyl 0, 75 μg · kg−1 et un bolus de P ou de M suivi par une perfusion : (M 15 μg · kg−1 + 0, 5 μg · kg−1 min−1; P 0,5 mg · kg−1 + 25 μg · kg−1 min−1). L’incidence des complications et des effets indésirables nécessitant une intervention a été enregistrée. La dépression respiratoire, la douleur exagérée, les mouvements inappropriés et l’incapacité de subir l’examen étaient considérés comme indésirables. Un score équivalent au degré de satisfaction à l’égard de la technique anesthésique était attribué en tenant compte du point de vue de l’anesthésiste et de celui du radiologiste.

Résultats

Lincidence et le type de complication ne différaient pas entre les deux groupes. La douleur a été rapportée par 12 patients (6M, 6P), des mouvements inappropriés chez 17 patients (7M, 10P) et des altérations de la respiration chez 10 patients (2M, 8P).

Conclusion

Les deux techniques ont été satisfaisantes et l’incidence des complications était la même dans les deux groupes.

References

  1. 1.
    Debrun G, Vinuela F, Fox A, Drake CG. Embolization of cerebral arteriovenous malformations with bucrylate. J Neurosurg 1982; 56: 615–27.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Eskridge JM. Interventional neuroradiology. Radiology 1989; 172: 991–1006.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Viuela F, Dion JE, Duckwiler G, et al. Combined endovascular embolization and surgery in the management of cerebral arteriovenous malformations: experience with 101 cases. J Neurosurg 1991; 75: 856–64.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jafar JJ, Davis AJ, Berenstein A, Choi IS, Kupersmith MJ. The effect of embolization with N-butyl cyanoacrylate prior to surgical resection of cerebral arteriovenous malformations. J Neurosurg 1993; 78: 60–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lewis AI, Tomsick TA, Tew JM Jr. Management of 100 consecutive direct carotid-cavernous fistulas: results of treatment with detachable balloons. Neurosurgery 1995; 36: 239–45.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    O’Mahony BJ, Bolsin SNC. Anaesthesia for closed embolisation of cerebral arteriovenous malformations. Anaesth Intensive Care 1988; 16: 318–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Young WL, Pile-Spellman J. Anesthetic considerations for interventional neuroradiology. Anesthesiology 1994; 80: 427–56.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Manninen PH, Gignac EM, Gelb AW, Lownie SP. Anesthesia for interventional neuroradiology. J Clin Anesth 1995; 7: 448–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Luessenhop AJ. Interventional Neuroradiology: a neurosurgeon’s perspective. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1990; 11: 625–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Reves JG, Fragen RJ, Vinik HR, Greenblatt DJ. Midazolam: pharmacology and uses. Anesthesiology 1985; 62: 310–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wilson E, David A, Mackenzie N, Grant IS. Sedation during spinal anaesthesia: comparison of propofol and midazolam. Br J Anaesth 1990; 64: 48–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kestin IG, Harvey PB, Nixon C. Psychomotor recovery after three methods of sedation during spinal anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 1990; 64: 675–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pace NA, Victory RA, White PF. Anesthetic infusion techniques — how to do it. J Clin Anesth 1992; 4: S45–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mackenzie N, Grant IS. Propofol for intravenous sedation. Anaesthesia 1987; 42: 3–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Smith I, Monk TG, White PF, Ding T. Propofol infusion during regional anesthesia: sedative, amnestic, and anxiolytic properties. Anesth Analg 1994; 79: 313–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fanard L, Van Steenberge A.Demeire X, van der Puyl F. Comparison between propofol and midazolam as sedative agents for surgery under regional anaesthesia. Anaesthesia 1988; 43 (Suppl): 87–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Patterson KW, Casey PB, Murray JP.O’Boyle CA, Cunningham AJ. Propofol sedation for outpatient upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: comparison with midazolam. Br J Anaesth 1991; 67: 108–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lownie SP. Clinical and technical complications of endovascular therapy in the central nervous system. Seminars in Interventional Radiology 1993; 10: 243–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Canadian Anesthesiologists 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pirjo H. Manninen
    • 1
  • Andrew SH Chan
    • 1
  • David Papworth
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Anaesthesia, The Toronto Hospital, Western DivisionUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations