Inhalational anaesthesia

Postoperative agitation in preschool children following emergence from sevoflurane or halothane anesthesia: a randomized study on the forestalling effect of midazolam premedication versus parental presence at induction of anesthesia

OBJECTIVE

The effect of midazolam premedication on forestalling postoperative agitation in children is not yet concluded. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of midazolam premedication and parental presence during anesthetic induction on the incidence of postoperative agitation in pediatric patients.

METHODS

One hundred sixty-seven children between 2 years and 7 years of age, undergoing anesthesia for outpatient surgery, were enrolled and randomly divided into four groups: sevoflurane anesthesia with parental presence without premedication, sevoflurane anesthesia with oral midazolam premedication, halothane anesthesia with parental presence without premeditation, and halothane anesthesia with oral midazolam premedication. The children randomized to the premedication groups took oral midazolam 0.5mg/kg 20-30 minutes before anesthetic induction. For patients in the groups without premedication, one of the parents was present throughout the induction of anesthesia. One recovery room nurse blinded to the group assignment observed the patients and recorded the agitation scores all through their stay in the postanesthesia care unit.

RESULTS

Postoperative agitation was significantly less in patients who received halothane anesthesia with oral midazolam premedication (p<0.002).

CONCLUSION

Based on our data, the presence of a parent at induction of sevoflurance anesthesia was as effective as midazolam premedication in decreasing the incidence of postoperative agitation. Midazolam premedication, however, decreased postoperative agitation when halothane was used as the anesthetic agent.

Inhalational techniques in ambulatory anesthesia

In the current health care environment, anesthesia practitioners are frequently required to reevaluate their practice to be more efficient and cost-effective. Although IV induction with propofol and inhalational induction with sevoflurane are both suitable techniques for outpatients, patients prefer IV induction. Maintenance of anesthesia with the newer inhaled anesthetics (ie, desflurane and sevoflurane) provide for a rapid early recovery as compared with infusion of propofol (ie, TIVA), while allowing easy titratability of anesthetic depth. Titration of hypnotic sedatives using BIS monitoring may reduce the time to awakening and thereby may facilitate fast tracking (ie, bypassing the PACU) and reduce hospital stay. Inhalational anesthesia is associated with a higher incidence of PONV, but no differences have been demonstrated with respect to late recovery (eg, PACU stay and home readiness). Although clinical differences between desflurane and sevoflurane appear to be small, desflurane may be associated with faster emergence, particularly in elderly and morbidly obese patients. Balanced anesthesia with IV propofol induction and inhalation anesthesia with N2O for maintenance, and an LMA for airway management, may be an optimal technique for ambulatory surgery. Inhalational anesthesia may have an economic advantage over a TIVA technique.