[Premedication with midazolam: indispensable and good?]

[Drugs for intravenous induction of anesthesia: ketamine, midazolam and synopsis of current hypnotics]

Ketamine and midazolam form the endpoint of a series of articles about intravenous induction of anesthesia . Both substances can be used as single induction hypnotic drugs; however, in practice, this is unusual. Both substances, with the exception of a few very specific indications and clinical situations, are more frequently used in combination or with one of the more common alternatives propofol, barbiturates and etomidate. The reasons are the activity and side effects of both substances and their positive characteristics are used more as a supplement. In the concluding comparison the five discussed induction hypnotics are judged against each other. The use in certain clinical constellations and in special patient populations is evaluated individually for each substance. It is highlighted which drug appears most appropriate in which situation. As methohexital is nowadays only administered in very few clinical situations, this substance is not included in the comparative assessment.

Impact of PReOperative Midazolam on OuTcome of Elderly patients (I-PROMOTE): study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Premedication of surgical patients with benzodiazepines has become questionable regarding risk-benefit ratio and lack of evidence. Though preoperative benzodiazepines might alleviate preoperative anxiety, a higher risk for adverse events is described, particularly for elderly patients (≥ 65 years). Several German hospitals already withhold benzodiazepine premedication from elderly patients, though evidence for this approach is lacking. The patient-centred outcome known as global postoperative patient satisfaction is recognised as a substantial quality indicator of anaesthesia care incorporated by the American Society of Anesthesiologists. Therefore, we aim to assess whether the postoperative patient satisfaction after premedication with placebo compared to the preoperative administration of 3.75 mg midazolam in elderly patients differs.

METHODS

This study is a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, two-arm parallel, interventional trial, conducted in nine German hospitals. In total 614 patients (≥ 65-80 years of age) undergoing elective surgery with general anaesthesia will be randomised to receive either 3.75 mg midazolam or placebo. The primary outcome (global patient satisfaction) will be assessed with the validated EVAN-G questionnaire on the first postoperative day. Secondary outcomes will be assessed until the first postoperative day and then 30 days after surgery. They comprise among other things: functional and cognitive recovery, postoperative delirium, health-related quality of life assessment, and mortality or new onset of serious cardiac or pulmonary complications, acute stroke, or acute kidney injury. Analysis will adhere to the intention-to-treat principle. The primary outcome will be analysed with the use of mixed linear models including treatment effect and study centre as factors and random effects for blocks. Exploratory adjusted and subgroup analyses of the primary and secondary outcomes with regard to gender effects, frailty, pre-operative anxiety level, patient demographics, and surgery experience will also be performed.

DISCUSSION

This is, to the best of our knowledge, the first study analysing patient satisfaction after premedication with midazolam in elderly patients. In conclusion, this study will provide high-quality data for the decision-making process regarding premedication in elderly surgical patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03052660 . Registered on 14 February 2017. EudraCT 2016-004555-79 .