Intranasal Fentanyl Combined with Oral Midazolam for Pediatric Dental Sedation: A Controlled Randomized Blinded Crossover Clinical Trial.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of intranasal fentanyl combined with oral midazolam to oral midazolam alone in pediatric dental patients. Methods: Thirty-two uncooperative healthy children aged three to six years old, who met the inclusion criteria, were randomly assigned to receive oral midazolam (0.7 mg/kg) with either intranasal fentanyl (one µg/kg) or intranasal placebo (saline). A controlled, randomized, double-blinded, crossover clinical trial design was followed so that each child received both regimens. Data collected included the onset of sedation, working time, sedation and behavior assessment, and occurrence of side effects. Results: The onset of sedation time was not statistically different between the two groups (P=0.62), while the median working time of the midazolam/fentanyl sedation was sig- nificantly longer than the midazolam sedation (P<0.001). Sedation scores were significantly better with the midazolam/fentanyl sedation regimen at separation from parents (P=0.032), local anesthesia administration (P=0.018), rubber dam application (P=0.035), after five minutes of dental treatment (P=0.035), after 10 minutes (P=0.039), after 15 minutes (P=0.012), and after 20 minutes (P=0.038). Behavior scores were significantly better with the midazolam/fentanyl sedation only at local anesthesia administration (P=0.021), rubber dam placement (P=0.004), and after five minutes of dental treatment (P=0.049). Minor side effects occurred in 12.5 percent of sedation procedures and were not significantly associated with either of the two groups (P=0.70). Conclusion: The combination of oral midazolam with intranasal fentanyl sedation, when compared to oral midazolamas a single agent, significantly improved sedation and behavior during local anesthesia and operative dentistry for healthy three- to six-year-old children in addition to prolonged sedation working time.

Parker Flex-It stylet is as effective as GlideRite Rigid stylet for orotracheal intubation by Glidescope.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate Parker Flex-It stylet as an alternative to GlideRite Rigid stylet to aid tracheal intubation with the Glidescope.  METHODS: This prospective randomized trial was conducted at King Abdulaziz University Hospital, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia between May and December 2014. Sixty American Society of Anesthesiologists I-II patients were randomly assigned to one of 2 equal groups receiving intubation by Glidescope using either  GlideRite Rigid stylet (Group GS) or Parker Flex-It stylet (Group PS). The total intubation time, ease of intubation, incidences of successful intubation at first attempt, number of intubation attempts, use of optimization maneuvers, and possible complications were recorded.   RESULTS: No significant differences between both groups regarding the total intubation time (p=0.08) was observed. Intubation was significantly easier in group PS compared with group GS as measured by visual analogue scale (p=0.001) with no significant differences between the groups regarding the rate of successful tracheal intubation from first attempt (p=0.524). However, the number of attempts at intubation and usage of external laryngeal manipulation were similar in both groups (p greater than 0.05). The incidence of sore throat, dysphagia, hoarseness, and trauma were significantly higher in group GS (p less than 0.05).  CONCLUSION: Parker Flex-It stylet is as effective as GlideRite Rigid stylet when used by experienced operators in patients with normal airways using Glidescope; however, it is easier and less traumatic.

Intranasal dexmedetomidine vs midazolam for premedication in children undergoing complete dental rehabilitation: a double-blinded randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: This prospective, randomized, double-blind study was designed to evaluate the use of intranasally administered dexmedetomidine vs intranasal midazolam as a premedication in children undergoing complete dental rehabilitation. METHODS: Seventy-two children of American Society of Anesthesiology classification (ASA) physical status (I & II), aged 3-6 years, were randomly assigned to one of two equal groups. Group M received intranasal midazolam (0.2 mg·kg(-1)), and group D received intranasal dexmedetomidine (1 µg·kg(-1)). The patients' sedation status, mask acceptance, and hemodynamic parameters were recorded by an observer until anesthesia induction. Recovery conditions, postoperative pain, and postoperative agitation were also recorded. RESULTS: The median onset of sedation was significantly shorter in group M 15 (10-25) min than in group D 25 (20-40) min (P = 0.001). Compared with the children in group M, those in group D were significantly more sedated when they were separated from their parents (77.8% vs 44.4%, respectively) (P = 0.002). Satisfactory compliance with mask application was 58.3% in group M vs 80.6% in group D (P = 0.035). The incidences of postoperative agitation and shivering were significantly lower in Group D compared with group M. Thirteen children (36.1%) in group M, showed signs of nasal irritation with teary eyes, and none of these signs was seen in the children in group D (P = 0.000). There were no incidences of bradycardia, hypotension, in either of the groups during study observation. CONCLUSION: Intranasal dexmedetomidine (1 µg·kg(-1)) is an effective and safe alternative for premedication in children; it resulted in superior sedation in comparison to 0.2 mg·kg(-1) intranasal midazolam. However, it has relatively prolonged onset of action.

Evaluation of "no touch" extubation technique on airway-related complications during emergence from general anesthesia.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Awake "no touch" extubation requires performing extubations only when the patient spontaneously wakes up without any kind of stimulation during emergence from general anesthesia. The aim of this study was to evaluate absolutely awake extubation "no touch" technique in adult patients, scheduled for elective nasal and paranasal sinus surgeries under general anesthesia as regard to emergence airway complications. METHODS: A total of 60 adult patients were randomly allocated into one of two equal groups according to the method of extubation: Group I: Standard fully awake, Group II: Absolutely "no touch" awake extubation (absolutely no stimulation no touch was allowed until patients were able to open their eyes). The incidence of laryngospasm and its grade according to a four-point scale was reported. Occurrence of airway events (excessive secretions, breath-holding, coughing, hoarseness, biting, as well as the number and severity of any desaturation episodes), oozing from the wound, and postoperative sore throat were also recorded. The heart rate (HR), systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) blood pressure measured at the end of surgery served as baseline values, and subsequent measurements were taken within 30 minutes after the end of surgery. RESULTS: There was absolutely no case of laryngeal spasm or episode of desaturation among patients who were extubated with the "no touch" technique. On the other hand, there were 3 cases of laryngeal spasm in standard fully awake group. Severity of coughing, excessive secretions and breath holding, hoarseness, biting, and occurrence of non-purposeful movements of the limbs were significantly less in the absolutely "no touch" technique awake technique. The changes in HR, SBP, and DBP during emergence extubation were significantly less in "no touch" technique technique group. However, oozing from the wound was significantly higher with standard fully awake extubation. However, there were no significant differences between the two groups regarding the incidence of postoperative sore throat (39 and 36%, respectively). CONCLUSION: The results of the present study showed that awake "no touch" technique technique for tracheal extubation produces less airway-related complications, as well as minimal hemodynamic response during emergence from general anesthesia in nasal and paranasal surgeries. It could be a safe alternative for tracheal extubation in airway surgery.

Procedural sedation analgesia.

The number of noninvasive and minimally invasive procedures performed outside of the operating room has grown exponentially over the last several decades.Sedation, analgesia, or both may be needed for many of these interventional or diagnostic procedures. Individualized care is important when determining if a patient requires procedural sedation analgesia (PSA). The patient might need an anti-anxiety drug, pain medicine, immobilization, simple reassurance, or a combination of these interventions. The goals of PSA in four different multidisciplinary practices namely; emergency, dentistry, radiology and gastrointestinal endoscopy are discussed in this review article. Some procedures are painful, others painless. Therefore, goals of PSA vary widely. Sedation management can range from minimal sedation, to the extent of minimal anesthesia. Procedural sedation in emergency department (ED) usually requires combinations of multiple agents to reach desired effects of analgesia plus anxiolysis. However, in dental practice, moderate sedation analgesia (known to the dentists as conscious sedation) is usually what is required. It is usually most effective with the combined use of local anesthesia. The mainstay of success for painless imaging is absolute immobility. Immobility can be achieved by deep sedation or minimal anesthesia. On the other hand, moderate sedation, deep sedation, minimal anesthesia and conventional general anesthesia can be all utilized for management of gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Oral midazolam premedication for children undergoing general anaesthesia for dental care.

Objectives. To assess the efficacy and safety of injectable midazolam administered orally in 3 different doses in children undergoing complete dental rehabilitation under GA. Subjects and Methods. 60 children aged 2-6 years were enrolled in the study. The children were randomly assigned to one of 3 groups and received orally 0.5, 0.75, or 1.0 mg/kg of injectable midazolam mixed with apple juice 30 minutes before separation from parents. The following measurements were assessed: patient's acceptance of the medication, reaction to separation from parents, sedation scores, and recovery conditions. Results. More children were comfortable with parent separation in the group that received the 1.0 mg/kg dose (90%) compared to the group that received the 0.75 mg/kg dose (75%) and the group that received the 0.5 mg/kg dose (55%). The number of children who had desirable sedation was similar in the 0.75 mg/kg and 1.0 mg/kg dose groups. Twenty five percent of the children in the group that received the 0.5 mg/kg dose did not allow venepuncture before induction of GA, and induction of GA was poor for 20% of the children in this group. An increasing number of children scored excellent in terms of ease of venepuncture in 0.75 mg/kg dose group (10%) and in the 1.0 mg/kg dose group (20%) and in terms of induction of GA, 25% and 35%, respectively. Recovery of spontaneous ventilation and extubation was delayed by over 15 minutes in 2 children in the 1.0 mg/kg dose group. Conclusion. The dose of 0.75 mg/kg of injectable midazolam given orally as premedication is acceptable, effective, and safe.

Low central venous pressure anesthesia in major hepatic resection.

Blood loss and transfusion requirements are major determinants of morbidity and mortality following liver resection. This study evaluates the association of low central venous pressure [LCVP] with blood loss and blood transfusion during liver resection. Thirty consecutive hepatic resections were studied prospectively concerning CVP, volume of blood loss and volume of blood transfusion and renal outcome. Data were analyzed for those with a CVP < or = 5 mmHg, and > 5 mmHg. A multivariate analysis assessed potential confounding factors in the comparison. The mean blood loss in patients with a CVP of 5 mmHg or less was < 500 ml and that in those with a CVP > 5 mmHg was > 2000 ml. (p <0.001). Only two patients with a CVP of < or = 5 mmHg had a blood transfusion whereas 11 patients with a CVP > 5 mmHg required transfusion. No incidences of air embolism or permanent renal shutdown have been reported. It is concluded that the volume of blood loss and blood transfusion during liver resection correlates with the CVP during parenchymal transection. Lowering the CVP to less than 5 mmHg is a simple and effective technique to reduce blood loss during liver resection and delete the need for blood transfusion with its hazards.