A study comparing the effect of premedication with intravenous midazolam or dexmedetomidine on ketamine-fentanyl sedoanalgesia in burn patients: A randomized clinical trial

Subhypnotic Intravenous Ketamine Improves Patient Satisfaction With Burn Wound Care: A Quality Improvement Project

Despite advancements in pain management for burn injuries, analgesia often fails to meet our patients' needs. We hypothesized that low doses of intravenous (IV) ketamine as an adjunct to our current protocol would be safe, improving both nurse and patient satisfaction with analgesia during hydrotherapy. Burn patients admitted who underwent hydrotherapy from June 1, 2021, to June 30, 2023 were surveyed. Ketamine was administered with the standard opioid-midazolam regimen. Demographics, oral morphine equivalents, midazolam, ketamine doses and time of administration, and adverse events were collected. Patient and nurse satisfaction scores were collected. The ketamine and no-ketamine groups were compared. P < .05 was considered significant. Eighty-five hydrotherapies were surveyed, 47 without ketamine, and 38 with ketamine. Demographics, comorbidities, %TBSA, and hospital length of stay were not different. The median amount of ketamine given was 0.79 mg/kg [0.59-1.06]. Patients who received ketamine were more likely to receive midazolam (100% vs 61.7%; P < .001), and both oral and IV opioids (94.7% vs 68.1%; P = .002) prior to hydrotherapy and less likely to receive rescue opioids or midazolam during hydrotherapy. Two patients in the ketamine group had hypertension (defined as SBP > 180) that did not require treatment. Nurses tended to be more satisfied with patient pain control when ketamine was used (10 [8-10] vs 9 [7-10], P = .072). Patient satisfaction was higher in the ketamine group (10 [8.8-10] vs 9 [7-10], P = .006). Utilizing subhypnotic dose of IV ketamine for hydrotherapy is safe and associated with increased patient satisfaction.

An Appraisal of Pharmacotherapy-Pertinent Literature Published in 2021 and 2022 for Clinicians Caring for Patients With Thermal or Inhalation Injury

Studies focusing on pharmacotherapy interventions to aid patients after thermal injury are a minor focus in burn injury-centered studies and published across a wide array of journals, which challenges those with limited resources to keep their knowledge current. This review is a renewal of previous years' work to facilitate extraction and review of the most recent pharmacotherapy-centric studies in patients with thermal and inhalation injury. Twenty-three geographically dispersed, board-certified pharmacists participated in the review. A Medical Subject Heading-based, filtered search returned 2336 manuscripts over the previous 2-year period. After manual review, 98 (4%) manuscripts were determined to have a potential impact on current pharmacotherapy practice. The top 10 scored manuscripts are discussed. Only 17% of those reviewed were assessed to likely have little effect on current practice. The overall impact of the current cohort was higher than previous editions of this review, which is encouraging. There remains a need for investment in well-designed, high-impact, pharmacotherapy-pertinent research for patients sustaining thermal or inhalation injuries.

Analgesic Efficacy of Oxycodone in Postoperative Dressings after Surgical Treatment of Burn Wounds: A Randomised Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to assess the analgesic efficacy of oxycodone at doses of 10 mg and 20 mg in dressings after surgery of burn wounds.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Twenty adult patients who underwent surgical treatment of third-degree burn wounds under general anaesthesia were included. Burn wounds were treated with dressings, to which oxycodone was added at 20 mg in Group 1 and 10 mg in Group 2. After the surgery, plasma oxycodone and noroxycodone concentrations were assayed, and pain intensity was assessed with Numerical Rating Scale (NRS).

RESULTS

In Group 1, no patient reported pain; in Group 2, four patients reported pain. The pain intensity, according to NRS, was 1-8. Plasma concentration of oxycodone in the blood serum was in the range of 1.24-3.15 ng/mL and 1.09-1.28 ng/mL in Group 1 and Group 2, respectively. Noroxycodone was not detected in the plasma. Adverse effects were not observed in any of the treated patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Oxycodone in dressings provides patients with adequate and safe analgesia.

Comparison of S-ketamine and midazolam for intravenous preoperative sedative and anxiolytic effects in preschool children: study protocol for a randomized controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Preoperative anxiety management is gaining particular attention in paediatric anaesthesia. Pharmacological and non-pharmacological resorts can be implemented to address this special issue. Despite the various approaches currently used for preoperative sedation in children, the different sedative and anti-anxiety effects between the newly marketed anaesthetic, S-ketamine, and the traditional sedative, midazolam, are still unclear.

METHODS

This is a patient- and assessor-blinded randomized controlled clinical trial. Participants (n = 110) will receive S-ketamine (0.5 mg/kg) or midazolam (0.08 mg/kg) intravenously administrated at a ratio of 1:1 in the anaesthesia holding area. The primary outcome of this study is the sedative effect evaluated via the change in the modified Yale preoperative anxiety scale. It will be performed at two timepoints: in the pre-anaesthetic holding area before premedication (baseline, marked as T0) and about 5 min after premedication in the operating room without the existence of their guardians (marked as T1). Our secondary objectives include the parent separation anxiety score, postoperative agitation, caregivers' and anaesthesia care providers' satisfaction, and mask compliance.

DISCUSSION

This randomized controlled trial is the first study to compare the anti-anxiety effect of intravenous S-ketamine and midazolam. We will provide a new approach for the clinical management of preoperative anxiety in preschool children posted for elective surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR2300069998. Registered on 30 March 2023.

Histamine H1 receptor antagonist attenuates catecholamine surge and organ injury after severe burns

Severe burns induce a catecholamine surge, causing severe damage to the organism and raising the possibility of multisystem organ failure. Few strategies are generally acceptable to reduce catecholamine surge and organ injury post-burn. We have previously shown that histamine can amplify the catecholamine surge. In addition, promethazine, a first-generation histamine H1 receptor antagonist, alleviates catecholamine surge and organ injury after severe burns in rats. However, evidence is lacking on whether promethazine benefits patients after severe burns. Currently, sedation and analgesia (such as midazolam and fentanyl) are commonly required for patients after severe burns. It remains unclear if patients after severe burns derive clinical benefit from histamine H1 receptor antagonists combined with sedation and analgesia. This study investigates the therapeutic effect of promethazine on patients after severe burns. Moreover, we test the therapeutic effect of cetirizine, a second-generation histamine H1 receptor antagonist, combined with sedation and analgesia in rats after severe burns. We find that promethazine-pethidine treatment shows a tendency for a lower level of total bilirubin than midazolam-fentanyl in patients 7-day after severe burn. Our study confirms that cetirizine combined with midazolam and fentanyl reduces catecholamine surge and liver and lung damage after severe burns in rats; the effects are better than midazolam and fentanyl treatment. In summary, for the first time, we suggest that histamine H1 receptor antagonist has the potential clinical value of reducing liver injury in patients after severe burns. In addition, we reveal that cetirizine combined with midazolam and fentanyl may be an ideal strategy for treating severe burns.

Efficacy of dexmedetomidine versus midazolam when combined with butorphanol for sedation and analgesia during burn dressing changes: A randomized clinical trial

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare dexmedetomidine-butorphanol (DB) and midazolam-butorphanol (MB) combinations for sedation, and analgesia in burn patients undergoing dressing changes.

Methods: A total of 56 ASA I–II burn patients were included in this single-center randomized clinical trial. The ages of these patients were between 20 and 60 years. TBSA ranged from 10% to 50%. They were randomized to group DB and group MB during dressing change. In the DB group, each patient received a bolus dose of dexmedetomidine (0.5 μg kg−1) and intermittent boluses of butorphanol (20 μg kg−1). In the MB group, each patient received a bolus dose of midazolam (0.05 mg kg−1) and intermittent boluses of butorphanol (20 μg kg−1). The primary outcomes were sedation scores and pain scores. The second outcomes were vital signs, side effects, and butorphanol consumption.

Results: The sedation scores of these two groups did not differ significantly (p &gt; 0.05), and the pain scores of these groups were not significantly different (p &gt; 0.05). More patients had hypotension in the DB group than in the MB group (6 versus 0, p = 0.01), but the number of patients who had respiratory depression was higher in the MB group compared with the DB group (4 versus 0, p = 0.038). Butorphanol consumption in the MB group was higher than in the DB group (p = 0.025).

Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine is comparable to midazolam when combined with butorphanol in burn patients during dressing change. Compared with midazolam, it has the advantage of opioid-sparing effect.

Clinical Trial Registration: [http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx&amp;proj=130622], identifier [ChiCTR2100049325].

Depth of Anesthesia Monitoring

The electroencephalogram (EEG) can be analyzed in its raw form for characteristic drug-induced patterns of change or summarized using mathematical parameters as a processed electroencephalogram (pEEG). In this article we aim to summarize the contemporary literature pertaining to the commonly available pEEG monitors including the effects of commonly used anesthetic drugs on the EEG and pEEG parameters, pEEG monitor pitfalls, and the clinical implications of pEEG monitoring for anesthesia, pediatrics, and intensive care.