Oral ketamine or midazolam or low dose combination for premedication in children.

This randomized controlled trial was designed to evaluate whether the combination of low dose oral midazolam (0.25 mg/kg) and low dose oral ketamine (3 mg/kg) provides better premedication than oral midazolam (0.5 mg/kg) or oral ketamine (6 mg/kg). Seventy-eight children of ASA physical status I or II scheduled for elective ophthalmic surgery were randomly divided into three groups and given premedication in the holding area 30 minutes before surgery. Two subjects from each group vomited the medication and were excluded, leaving 72 subjects for further analysis. The onset of sedation was earlier in the combination group than the other two groups. At 10 minutes after premedication 12.5% in the combination group had an acceptable sedation score compared with none in the other two groups. After 20 minutes 54% in the combination group had an acceptable sedation score, 21% in the midazolam group and 16% in the ketamine group (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in the parental separation score, response to induction and emergence score. The mean time for best parental separation score was significantly less in the combination group (19+/-8 min) than either the midazolam (28+/-7) or ketamine (29+/-7 min) groups (P<0.05). Recovery was earlier in the combination group, as the time required to reach a modified Aldrete score of 10 was significantly less in the combination group (22+/-5 min) than in the oral midazolam (36+/-11 min) or ketamine (38+/-8 min) groups. The incidence of excessive salivation was significantly higher in the ketamine alone group (P<0.05). In conclusion, the combination of oral ketamine (3 mg/kg) and midazolam (0.25 mg/kg) has minimal side effects and gives a faster onset and more rapid recovery than ketamine 6 mg/kg or midazolam 0.5 mg/kg for premedication in children.

A comparison of intravenous ketoprofen versus pethidine on peri-operative analgesia and post-operative nausea and vomiting in paediatric vitreoretinal surgery.

AIM: To compare the efficacy of ketoprofen and pethidine for peri-operative analgesia and post-operative nausea and vomiting in children undergoing vitreoretinal surgery and surgery for retinal detachment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Children aged 7 to 16 years and ASA I status, undergoing vitreo-retinal surgery were randomly allocated to receive either ketoprofen 2mg/kg or pethidine 1mg/kg intravenously for peri-operative analgesia. In all patients, general anaesthesia was induced with thiopentone and intubation was facilitated with vecuronium bromide and maintained with 33% oxygen in nitrous oxide and isoflurane. Intra-operative and post-operative monitoring was done by an observer blinded to the technique. Intra-operative rescue analgesia was used if heart rate and/or blood pressure increased by 25% from pre-incision values. Post-operative pain and episodes of nausea and vomiting were evaluated at recovery (0 hour), 2, 6 and 24 hours intervals. Standard rescue analgesia and anti-emetic agents were administered if required. RESULTS: Eighty-six children were enrolled in the study. Forty-four received ketoprofen while 42 received pethidine. Intra-operative analgesia was comparable in both the groups and no significant difference was found in the requirement of intra-operative rescue analgesia, as well. Postoperatively 6/44 (13.6%) children in ketoprofen group had pain at recovery compared to 17/42 (40.4%) in pethidine group. Pain at 2, 6 and 24 hours, and postoperative analgesic requirement were not significantly different among the two groups. Post-operative nausea, vomiting, and antiemetic requirement were significantly less in the ketoprofen group at all time intervals. CONCLUSION: Ketoprofen is a satisfactory alternative analgesic to pethidine for vitreoretinal surgery and results in a lower incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting.