This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Urquhart, M. L. Articles by White, P. F. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Urquhart, M. L. Articles by White, P. F.

Comparison of Sedative Infusions During Regional Anesthesia—Methohexital, Etomidate, and Midazolam

Department of Anesthesia, Stanford University, Stanford, California and the Department of Anesthesiology, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri.

Abstract

Using a randomized, double-blind study design, the intra-and postoperative sedative effects of three intravenous central nervous system depressants were compared in 64 patients during regional anesthesia. After establishing regional anesthesia, methohexital 59 ± 29 mg IV, etomidate 12.6 ± 8mgIV, or midazolam 3.7 ± 1.5 mg IV (mean dose ± sd) were infused in a titrated fashion over 5–15 minutes to achieve similar end points of sedation. This level of sedation was then maintained with a variable-rate infusion of either methohexital 180 ± 65 mg/hr, etomidate 32 ± 12 mg/hr, or midazolam 7.5 ± 4 mg/hr (mean dose ± SD) To maintain a stable level of sedation, changes in the maintenance infusion rate were required more frequently with methohexital (4.6 ± 3 times) than with etomidate (2.6 ± 2 times) or midazolam (2.7 ± 3 times). Decreases in oxygen saturation below 95% were more frequent with midazolam than with methohexital and etomidate, while recall of intraoperative events was less frequent after midazolam. Observer evaluations found less sedation in the methohexital and etomidate groups than in the midazolam group during the early postoperative period. However, the patients' evaluation of residual sedative effects (e.g., postoperative sedation visual analogue scores) and discharge times from the recovery room were similar in all three groups. Nevertheless, patients given midazolam had significantly greater impairment of performance on the digit-symbol substitution test in the early postoperative period than did patients given either methohexital or etomidate

Key Words: ANESTHETICS, INTRAVENOUS—methohexital, etomidate, midazolam • ANESTHETIC TECHNIQUES, REGIONAL ANESTHESIA—sedation

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. M. Sa Rego, Y. Inagaki, and P. F. White The Cost-Effectiveness of Methohexital Versus Propofol for Sedation During Monitored Anesthesia Care Anesth. Analg., April 1, 1999; 88(4): 723 - 723. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. N. Avramov and P. F. White Etomidate: Its Pharmacologic and Physiologic Effects Seminars in Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia, July 1, 1997; 1(2): 132 - 141. [PDF]