The effect of flumazenil on midazolam-induced depression of the ventilatory response to hypoxia during isohypercarbia

Effects of anesthetics, sedatives, and opioids on ventilatory control

This article provides a comprehensive, up to date summary of the effects of volatile, gaseous, and intravenous anesthetics and opioid agonists on ventilatory control. Emphasis is placed on data from human studies. Further mechanistic insights are provided by in vivo and in vitro data from other mammalian species. The focus is on the effects of clinically relevant agonist concentrations and studies using pharmacological, that is, supraclinical agonist concentrations are de-emphasized or excluded.

Midazolam-related drug interactions: detection of risk situations to the patient safety in a brazilian teaching hospital

PURPOSE

To identify clinically significant drug interactions and potentially related adverse drug events associated with the use of midazolam.

METHODS

Retrospective data analysis was performed at a single tertiary Brazilian Teaching Hospital from an electronic database derived from the Hospital's computerized physician order entry system over 1 year. Records from patients who received injectable midazolam within a period of 24 hours before flumazenil use were selected. Patients' orders were checked for the presence of clinically significant drug interactions and for the inclusion and discontinuation of potential trigger medications for adverse drug events related to midazolam.

RESULTS

A total of 7431 patients were exposed to midazolam, representing 28% of all patients admitted to the hospital. Twenty-six (0.35%) patients received flumazenil within 24 hours after midazolam, corresponding to more than one third of the orders for flumazenil. Clinically significant drug interactions were observed in prescriptions of drugs preceding the use of flumazenil for 23 (88%) of these patients. The most prevalent group of drug interactions were related to the prescription of central nervous system depressants (22 cases), mainly opiate agonists. Analysis of inclusion and discontinuation of drugs demonstrated that the first order for opiates preceded the use of flumazenil in 31% of the cases and, except for tramadol, all opiates were discontinued after its administration, highlighting the potential of these drugs to act as triggers for adverse drug events.

CONCLUSIONS

Midazolam-related drug interactions are not infrequent and may conduce to serious adverse drug events, including hypotension, respiratory depression, and arrest. Efforts directed toward monitoring interactions and preventing injuries from midazolam use are expected to have a substantial impact on patient safety concerning the use of midazolam.

Sudden death after major head and neck surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review will discuss the mortality after major ear, nose and throat surgery, particularly sudden death. It will also discuss the postoperative follow-up of patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Sudden death is a rare event after major ear, nose and throat surgery, and occurs mainly during the first three postoperative days.

SUMMARY

In more recent studies, the mortality rate after neck dissection was below 4%, which is at a lower value than reported in previous studies. Sudden deaths have been described, however, mainly during the first three postoperative days. Alcoholism and perioperative hypotension are two predictive factors for cardiac complications. Careful follow-up of these patients during the early postoperative period should be performed to reduce the mortality by shortening the delay of care.

Procedural Sedation and Analgesia in the Emergency Department: What Are the Risks?

The practitioner of emergency medicine is routinely faced with patients in need of emergent procedures and pain control and sedation. Our challenge is to make our patients' experiences as painless and as safe as possible, while maximizing our ability to perform the procedure at hand; this is not always an easy task given the propensity of each human body to react differently to interventions and stimuli. We can best meet this challenge by understanding how our patients and pharmaceutical agents intermingle in the risk-benefit equation we formulate before starting our "experiment." Coupling this information with fundamentally sound patient care and monitoring will minimize bad experiences with PSA for both the patient and practitioner.

GABA(A) receptor-mediated inspiratory termination evoked by vagal stimulation in decerebrate cats

To identify the GABAergic inhibitory mechanisms involved in inspiratory termination or off-switching (IOS), the effects of a specific enhancer of GABA(A) receptors, midazolam, and an antagonist, bicuculline, on vagally evoked inspiratory inhibitions and IOS were investigated in decerebrate cats. Stimulation of vagal afferents at late inspiration provoked either reversible inspiratory inhibition or IOS, depending on the stimulus intensity. Each response occurred at a constant latency (phase 1). The reversible response was triphasic, consisting of an early (phase 2) inhibition, a brief (phase 3) excitation and a late (phase 4) inhibition in the phrenic neurogram, and early (phase 2) IPSPs, brief (phase 3) EPSPs and late (phase 4) IPSPs in bulbar inspiratory (I) neurones. With an increasing stimulus intensity, phase 4 inhibitions were increased in amplitude and duration, leading to IOS. Midazolam (0.1 mg/kg i.v.) increased more selectively phase 4 IPSPs than phase 2 IPSPs in I neurones, and decreased the threshold for evoking IOS by producing an earlier and larger phase 4 IPSPs. Bicuculline (1.0 mg/kg i.v.) had an opposite effect. These results suggest that the late inhibitory response evoked by vagal stimulation in the I neuronal pool organizes an initial phase of IOS which is mediated by GABA(A) receptors.

Synergistic interaction between the effects of propofol and midazolam with fentanyl on phrenic nerve activity in rabbits

BACKGROUND

It has been shown that the depressive effects of both propofol and midazolam on consciousness are synergistic with opioids, but the nature of their interactions on other physiological systems, e.g. respiration, has not been fully investigated. The present study examined the effect of propofol and midazolam alone and in combination with fentanyl on phrenic nerve activity (PNA) and whether such interactions are additive or synergistic.

METHODS

PNA was recorded in 27 anaesthetised and artificially ventilated rabbits. In three groups, propofol, fentanyl and midazolam were administered intravenously in incremental doses to construct dose-response curves for the depressant effects of each one on PNA. In another two groups, the effect of pretreatment with either fentanyl 1 microgram.kg-1 i.v. or midazolam 0.05 mg.kg-1 i.v. on the effects of propofol and fentanyl respectively on PNA were studied.

RESULTS

Propofol and fentanyl caused a dose-dependent depression of PNA with complete abolition at the highest total doses of 16 mg.kg-1 i.v. and 32 micrograms.kg-1 i.v., respectively. In contrast, midazolam in incremental doses to a total of 0.8 mg.kg-1 reduced mean PNA by 63%, but approximately 12% of PNA remained at a total dose as high as 6.4 mg.kg-1. The mean ED50s, calculated from dose-response curves, were 5.4 mg.kg-1, 3.9 micrograms.kg-1 and 0.4 mg.kg-1 for propofol, fentanyl and midazolam, respectively. Initial doses of either fentanyl 1 microgram.kg-1 i.v. or midazolam 0.05 mg.kg-1 i.v. acted synergistically with subsequent doses of either propofol or fentanyl to abolish PNA at total doses of 8 mg.kg-1 and 8 micrograms.kg-1, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Fentanyl has a synergistic interaction with both propofol and midazolam on PNA and hence potentially on respiration.

Complications of sedation with midazolam in the intensive care unit and a comparison with other sedative regimens

OBJECTIVE

To describe the various complications that have been reported with use of midazolam for sedation in the intensive care unit (ICU).

DATA SOURCES

Publications in scientific literature.

DATA EXTRACTION

Computer search of the literature.

SYNTHESIS

Sedation is required in the ICU in order for patients to tolerate noxious stimuli, particularly mechanical ventilation. Under- and oversedation can lead to complications. To sedate patients in the ICU, midazolam is commonly administered via titrated, continuous infusions. Cardiorespiratory effects tend to be minimal; however, hypotension can occur in hypovolemic patients. Prolonged sedation after cessation of the midazolam infusion may be caused by altered kinetics of the drug in critically ill patients or by accumulation of active metabolites. In addition, paradoxical and psychotic reactions have been rarely reported. Tolerance and tachyphylaxis may occur, particularly with longer-term infusions (> or = 3 days). Benzodiazepine withdrawal syndrome has also been associated with high dose/long-term midazolam infusions. Compared with propofol infusions, midazolam infusions have been associated with a decreased occurrence of hypotension but a more variable time course for recovery of function after the cessation of the infusion. Lorazepam is a more cost-effective choice for long-term (> 24 hrs) sedation.

CONCLUSION

Continuous infusion midazolam provides effective sedation in the ICU with few complications overall, especially when the dose is titrated.

Pharmacology of flumazenil

Flumazenil, an imidazobenzodiazepine, is the first benzodiazepine antagonist available for clinical use. It is a specific competitive antagonist at benzodiazepine receptors, which are associated with receptors for gamma-aminobutyric acid, the most important inhibitory neurotransmitter in the central nervous system. Administered orally, it has a low bioavailability and the preferred route is intravenous. Its usual clinical role is to reverse the effects of benzodiazepine sedation; however, administered before, or with, other benzodiazepines, it modifies their effects, the extent of such modification depending on the dose, duration of effect and relative receptor affinity of the agonist. Flumazenil also reverses adverse physiological effects of benzodiazepines. Its indications include reversal of benzodiazepine-induced sedation, termination of benzodiazepine-induced anaesthesia, return of spontaneous respiration and consciousness in intensive care patients and the treatment of paradoxical reactions to benzodiazepines. Other potential indications include its use in hepatic encephalopathy, alcohol intoxication and coma; however, these claims still require substantiation. Following sedation reversed with flumazenil, minimal residual effects of the agonist can sometimes be detected using psychomotor tests and are due to the relatively short half-life of flumazenil, but are of no clinical consequence. There is concern that flumazenil could precipitate an acute withdrawal syndrome following long-term benzodiazepine administration; however, the available evidence suggests otherwise and that it could be useful in the treatment of benzodiazepine tolerance. The existence of flumazenil is important, with implications for future research and the development of minimally invasive therapy and day-case surgery. With increasing pressures on non-anaesthetically trained practitioners to perform sedation, flumazenil has important implications for safety.

The role of flumazenil in the critically ill

Flumazenil is a specific benzodiazepine antagonist. It competitively inhibits the action of benzodiazepines at gamma aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptors in the central nervous system and thus reverses the sedative effects of benzodiazepines. Usually, it is given intravenously as a bolus dose or as an infusion. It has a short duration of action. Flumazenil is extensively metabolized to compounds that have minimal benzodiazepine antagonistic properties. Reversal of sedation can be useful in many conditions that are often encountered in the critically ill. The adverse effects of its use are usually predictable and, with sufficient clinical monitoring, are usually avoidable. These properties make it a useful and safe drug when used appropriately.

Sedative and ventilatory effects of midazolam infusion: effect of flumazenil reversal

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of flumazenil (1 mg i.v.) on the ventilatory response of premedicated patients receiving a continuous infusion of midazolam for sedation. After assessing baseline ventilatory function using a modified Read rebreathing method for determining hypercapnic ventilatory drive, 16 healthy outpatients were administered fentanyl, 50 micrograms i.v., and midazolam 2 mg i.v., followed by a variable-rate midazolam infusion, 0.3-0.5 mg.min-1. Upon termination of the midazolam infusion, serum midazolam concentrations were measured and ventilatory function was reassessed. Then, 10 ml either saline or flumazenil (1 mg) were administered according to a randomized, double-blind protocol. Ventilatory function was subsequently measured at 5 min, 30 min and 60 min intervals after study drug. Compared with the baseline value, midazolam infusion reduced tidal volume and increased respiratory rate and alveolar dead space. However, midazolam did not decrease the slope of the CO2-response curve. Flumazenil reduced the degree of midazolam-induced sedation and the decrease in tidal volume (P < 0.05), but not the change in resting respiratory rate. In some patients, the ventilatory response to hypercarbia actually decreased after flumazenil administration compared with the immediate prereversal (sedated) values. It is concluded that midazolam infusion, 0.43 mg.min-1, did not impair CO2-responsiveness. Flumazenil's effect on central ventilatory drive was more variable than its reversal of midazolam-induced sedation.