The Effect of Intravenous Midazolam on Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting

Efficacy of remimazolam tosilate versus propofol for total intravenous anaesthesia in urological surgery: A randomised clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Remimazolam is a novel ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine sedative that acts on the gamma-aminobutyric acid type A receptor (GABAAR).

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacies of remimazolam (RMZ), and propofol (PROP) combined with remifentanil and cisatracurium for total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) in patients undergoing urological surgery.

DESIGN

A prospective, single-blind, randomised, noninferiority clinical trial.

SETTING

Single centre from 1 January 2022 to 30 March 2022.

PATIENTS

A total of 146 adult patients undergoing elective urological surgery.

INTERVENTION

Patients were randomly allocated in a 1 : 1 ratio to the PROP or RMZ groups. In the PROP group, anaesthesia was induced with propofol at 100 mg min -1 to reach a bispectral index score (BIS) of 40 to 60. After loss of consciousness (LOC), intravenous fentanyl 3 μg kg -1 was administered, followed by cisatracurium 0.3 mg kg -1 . Patients were intubated 3 min after cisatracurium administration. Anaesthesia was maintained with the combination of propofol (plasma concentration: 2.5 to 4 μg ml -1 ) and remifentanil (plasma concentration: 2.5 to 4 ng ml -1 ). In the RMZ group, anaesthesia was induced with remimazolam tosilate starting at 10 mg kg -1  h -1 to reach a BIS of 40 to 60 and maintained between 0.2 and 2 mg kg -1  h -1 . After LOC, fentanyl and cisatracurium were administered and intubation was performed as in the PROP group. Anaesthesia was maintained with a combination of remimazolam (0.2 to 2 mg kg -1  h -1 ) and remifentanil (plasma concentration: 2.5 to 4 ng ml -1 ).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the TIVA success rate. The predefined noninferiority margin considered an absolute difference of 6% in the primary outcome between the groups. The secondary outcomes were vital signs, anaesthesia and surgery characteristics, and adverse events.

RESULTS

All patients completed the trial. The success rates of TIVA with remimazolam and propofol were 100 and 98.6%, respectively. The incidence of hypotension during anaesthesia was lower in the RMZ group (26%) than in the PROP group (46.6%) ( P  = 0.016). The median [IQR] total consumption of ephedrine during anaesthesia was higher in the PROP group 10 [0 to 12.5] mg than in the RMZ group 0 [0 to 10] mg ( P  = 0.0002). The incidence of injection pain was significantly higher in the PROP group (76.7%) than in the RMZ group (0; P  < 0.001). No significant differences in the controllability of the anaesthesia depth, anaesthesia and surgery characteristics, or vital signs were observed between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Remimazolam demonstrated noninferior efficacy to propofol combined with remifentanil and cisatracurium for TIVA in patients undergoing urological surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chictr.org.cn, identifier: ChiCTR2100050923.

CLINICAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2100050923, Principal investigator: Xuehai Guan, Date of registration: 8 November 2021, https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=133466 ).

The effect of perioperative benzodiazepine administration on postoperative nausea and vomiting: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Despite recent systematic reviews suggesting their benefit for postoperative nausea, vomiting, or both (PONV) prevention, benzodiazepines have not been incorporated into guidelines for PONV prophylaxis because of concerns about possible adverse effects. We conducted an updated meta-analysis to inform future practice guidelines.

METHODS

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of all languages comparing benzodiazepines with non-benzodiazepine comparators in adults undergoing inpatient surgery. Our outcomes were postoperative nausea, vomiting, or both. We assessed risk of bias for RCTs using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. We pooled data using a random-effects model and assessed the quality of evidence for each outcome using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

RESULTS

We screened 31 413 abstracts and 950 full texts. We included 119 RCTs; 104 were included in quantitative synthesis. Based on moderate certainty evidence, we found that perioperative benzodiazepine administration reduced the incidence of PONV (52 studies, n=5086, relative risk [RR]: 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66-0.89; number needed to treat [NNT] 16; moderate certainty), postoperative nausea (55 studies, n=5916, RR: 0.72, 95% CI 0.62-0.83; NNT 21; moderate certainty), and postoperative vomiting (52 studies, n=5909, RR: 0.74, 95% CI 0.60-0.91; NNT 55; moderate certainty).

CONCLUSIONS

Moderate quality evidence shows that perioperative benzodiazepine administration decreases the incidence of PONV. The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis will inform future clinical practice guidelines.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL

The protocol for this systematic review was pre-registered with PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42022361088) and published in BMJ Open (PMID 31831540).

The safety of remimazolam versus propofol in gastroscopic sedation: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis was designed to compare the safety and efficiency of remimazolam with those of propofol in patients undergoing gastroscope sedation.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Ovid, Wanfang Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, SINOMED, and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies that reported on remimazolam versus propofol for gastroscope sedation from establishment to February 25, 2023. The sedative efficiency and the incidence of adverse events were assessed as outcomes. Version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool was used to assess the risk of bias. Review Manager 5.4 and STATA 17 were used to perform all statistical analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 26 randomized controlled trials involving 3,641 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed that remimazolam had a significantly lower incidence of respiratory depression (risk ratio [RR] = 0.40, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.28-0.57; p < 0.01, GRADE high), hypoxemia (RR = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.23-0.49; p < 0.01, GRADE high), bradycardia (RR = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.23-0.51; p < 0.01, GRADE high), dizziness (RR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.31-0.65; p < 0.01, GRADE high), injection site pain (RR = 0.06, 95% CI: 0.03-0.13; p < 0.01, GRADE high), nausea or vomiting (RR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.62-1.00; p = 0.05, GRADE moderate), and hypotension (RR = 0.36, 95% CI: 0.26-0.48; p < 0.01, GRADE low).

CONCLUSIONS

Remimazolam can be used safely in gastroscopic sedation and reduces the incidence of respiratory depression, hypoxemia, bradycardia, injection site pain, and dizziness compared with propofol, and doesn't increase the incidence of nausea and vomiting.

Analgesic Effects of Regional Analgesic Techniques in Pediatric Inguinal Surgeries: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Various regional analgesic techniques have been used in pediatric inguinal surgery to facilitate postoperative recovery. However, each technique's relative performance was undetermined owing to the lack of quantitative analysis.

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science for randomized controlled trials that compared regional analgesia in pediatric inguinal surgeries. After critical study screening and selection, a random-effects network meta-analysis was performed. The primary outcome was the time to the first rescue analgesic after surgery, and the secondary outcomes were the number of patients requiring rescue analgesics after surgery, postoperative pain scores, incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, and other adverse events.

RESULTS

This network meta-analysis included 69 randomized controlled trials (4636 patients) that compared 10 regional analgesic techniques. Our study revealed that the quadratus lumborum and transversus abdominis plane blocks had the longest time to the first rescue analgesic after pediatric inguinal surgeries, by 7.7 hours (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.0-10.3) and 6.0 hours (95% CI, 3.9-8.2) when compared with the control group, respectively. In the subgroup involving only inguinal hernia repair, the quadratus lumborum block significantly prolonged the time to the first rescue analgesic than all other regional analgesics. In contrast, in the subgroup involving orchidopexies, only the caudal block significantly prolonged the time to the first rescue analgesic when compared with the control group (4.1 hours; 95% CI, 0.7-7.5). Wound infiltration and landmark-based ilioinguinal-iliohypogastric block had relatively poor analgesic effects than other regional analgesics. No serious adverse effects related to the regional analgesic techniques were reported in any of the included studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The quadratus lumborum and transversus abdominis plane blocks had the longest time to the first rescue analgesic and the least rescue analgesic requirement for pediatric inguinal surgeries. Specifically, the quadratus lumborum block had the longest analgesic duration in inguinal hernia repair, and the caudal block was found to be the only regional analgesia that extended the time to the first rescue analgesic in pediatric orchidopexy. Most included randomized controlled trials had some concern or a high risk of bias, and future studies should focus on providing high-quality evidence to further clarify the analgesic effects of regional analgesia for pediatric inguinal surgeries.

Comparison of the antiemetic efficacy of a combination of midazolam with ramosetron and midazolam with palonosetron for postoperative nausea and vomiting prophylaxis in laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

A multimodal therapeutic strategy for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) benefits moderate- and high-risk surgical patients. We compared the efficacy of a combination of midazolam and ramosetron and a combination of midazolam and palonosetron for PONV prophylaxis in patients scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

METHODS

We enrolled 68 patients aged 20 to 65 years undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Patients were randomly allocated to the midazolam 0.05 mg/kg with ramosetron 0.3 mg (MR) or midazolam 0.05 mg/kg with palonosetron 0.075 mg (MP) groups. The incidence of PONV, severity of nausea, use of rescue antiemetics, and pain severity were evaluated at 2, 24, and 48 hours after surgery.

RESULTS

The incidence (38.2% vs 5.9%) and severity of postoperative nausea were significantly lower in the MP group at 2 hours after surgery (P < .05). There were no significant differences in the incidence of vomiting, use of rescue antiemetics, or pain severity between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

The combination of midazolam with palonosetron significantly decreased the incidence and severity of postoperative nausea compared with midazolam combined with ramosetron, especially in the early postoperative phase (0-2 hours) in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Association Between the Use of Midazolam During Cardiac Anesthesia and the Incidence of Postoperative Delirium: A Retrospective Cohort Study Using a Nationwide Database

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association between the intraoperative administration of midazolam and the incidence of postoperative delirium in patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

DESIGN

Retrospective observational cohort study.

SETTING

The Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination database.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged 65 years and older who underwent cardiovascular surgery (excluding transcatheter surgeries, multiple surgeries per admission, and preoperative delirium) between April 1, 2015, and October 31, 2019.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Patients who received midazolam (midazolam group) were compared with those who did not receive midazolam (no midazolam group). The primary outcome was the incidence of postoperative delirium. The secondary outcomes were the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, mortality, and duration of intensive care unit stay and hospitalization. Propensity scores were estimated using logistic regression based on the covariates. The outcomes were compared using stabilized inverse probability of treatment-weighting analyses. Among the 16,185 patients analyzed, 10,633 (65.7%) received midazolam. No significant differences were observed in the incidences of postoperative delirium (odds ratio [OR] 0.95; 95% CI 0.87-1.03; p = 0.21) and hospital mortality (OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.76-1.11; p = 0.39) between the groups; however, the midazolam group had slightly longer durations of intensive care unit stay (3.5 [3.5-3.6] v 3.3 [3.3-3.4] days, p < 0.001) and hospitalization (31.5 [31.1-31.9] v 29.4 [28.8-29.9] days, p < 0.001), and slightly lower incidences of postoperative nausea and vomiting (OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.85-0.99; p = 0.03). The sensitivity analyses supported these results.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative administration of midazolam may not induce postoperative delirium in patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

Remimazolam's Effects on Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting Are Similar to Those of Propofol after Laparoscopic Gynecological Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

(1) Background: Remimazolam is a novel benzodiazepine that prevents postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), is more effective than volatile anesthetics, and was recently approved for use in Japan. (2) Methods: This prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial study aimed to compare the efficacy of remimazolam and propofol as general anesthetics in terms of the incidence of PONV after laparoscopic gynecological surgery (UMIN000046237). High-risk female patients who underwent general anesthesia with either remimazolam or propofol for the maintenance of anesthesia were enrolled. The primary outcome was the incidence of PONV in the two groups (i.e., REM versus PROP) 2 h and 24 h after surgery. The incidence of vomiting without nausea, rescue antiemetic use, and the severity of nausea were also evaluated. (3) Results: No significant differences in PONV were identified between the REM and PROP groups at 2 h or 24 h. Furthermore, no differences were observed in any of the measured parameters, and no adverse events were reported. (4) Conclusions: The results of the present study suggest that remimazolam may be as effective as propofol in preventing PONV; however, further investigation is necessary to identify possible differences between these two agents.

Remimazolam dose for successful insertion of a supraglottic airway device with opioids: a dose-determination study using Dixon's up-and-down method

PURPOSE

Remimazolam, an ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine, was recently approved in numerous jurisdictions as an induction drug for general anesthesia. We aimed to determine the doses of remimazolam that would allow placement of a supraglottic airway device (SGD) in 50% and 95% of nonparalyzed patients (ED50 and ED95).

METHODS

In this prospective study, 30 American Society of Anesthesiology Physical Status I-II grade female patients scheduled for hysteroscopic surgery were enrolled. Anesthesia was induced with 1 μg·kg-1 of fentanyl and continuous infusion of remimazolam without neuromuscular blockade. An i-gel® SGD was inserted 2.5 min after the start of remimazolam infusion. We used Dixon's up-and-down method and isotonic regression to determine the ED50 and ED95 of remimazolam for insertion of an SGD.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients were included in the final analysis. The ED50 and ED95 of remimazolam required for successful i-gel insertion were 8.8 mg·kg-1·hr-1 (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.3 to 10.6) and 10.7 mg·kg-1·hr-1 (95% CI, 10.6 to 11.7), respectively. A nonfully relaxed jaw was found in 7/13 patients (54%) in the success group and 14/15 patients (93%) in the failure group (difference in proportions, 40%; 95% CI, 7 to 65; P = 0.02). Bucking or other movements during SGD insertion only occurred in the failure group (11/15, 73%).

CONCLUSION

In 95% of nonparalyzed female patients undergoing hysteroscopy, 10.7 mg·kg-1·hr-1 of remimazolam with 1 μg·kg-1 of fentanyl facilitates i-gel insertion. Remimazolam showed a high incidence of poor jaw relaxation and bucking or other movements during SGD insertion.

STUDY REGISTRATION

Clinical Trial Registry of the Republic of Korea (KCT0006527, https://cris.nih.go.kr ; registered 1 September 2021; principal investigator: Ji Seon Jeong).

COMPARISON OF INTRAMUSCULAR VERSUS INTRAVENOUS KETAMINE FOR SEDATION IN CHILDREN UNDERGOING MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING EXAMINATION

OBJECTIVE

The aim: To compare efficacy of intramuscular (IM) versus intravenous (IV) ketamine for sedation in children undergoing brain MRI scanning in children.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Materials and methods: Children who required elective brain MRI were selected for this study. They were randomly divided into two groups; group I received 1.5 mg/kg IV Ketamine and group II received 4 mg/kg IM ketamine. In each group supplementary 0.1 mg/kg midazolam intravenously before positioning on MRI table was given. Patients were monitored for pulse rate, SPO2, and respiratory wave.

RESULTS

Results: Children who received IM ketamine had significantly shorter scan time and a greater success rate of sedation with first dose than the IV group. The proportions of scan interruption and scan repeat were significantly higher among the IV group than in the IM group. The scan time was longer among the IV group than in the IM group with significantly more scan interruption and repeat. Satisfaction with sedation as expressed by the technicians was significantly more in the IM group than in IV group (98.1% vs. 80.8%, P= 0.004).

CONCLUSION

Conclusions: Intramuscular ketamine injection was predicted to have a better sedative success rate and takes less time to complete than intravenous admin¬istration. This makes IM ketamine more appealing in certain conditions.

A Remimazolam and Remifentanil Anesthetic for a Pediatric Patient With a Medium-Chain Acyl-CoA Dehydrogenase Deficiency: A Case Report

Medium-chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase (MCAD) deficiency is one of the most common fatty acid oxidation disorders. The choice of anesthetics and blood glucose management are crucial to prevent metabolic decompensation. A 5-year-old Japanese boy with MCAD deficiency was scheduled to undergo surgery for an inguinal hernia. Glucose was continuously infused perioperatively, and his glucose concentrations were within the normal range. Anesthesia was induced and maintained with remimazolam, remifentanil, and intermittent rocuronium. No metabolic decompensation was observed. This case indicates the importance of a continuous intravenous glucose infusion, and that remimazolam can be the first-line anesthetic for a patient with MCAD deficiency.

Effects of midazolam co-induction to general anesthesia: A randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to determine the potential advantages of midazolam co-induction with general anesthesia (GA) over the use of propofol alone.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled, single-blinded clinical trial of 102 patients, aged 18 to 65, American Society of Anesthesiologists II and III, who underwent elective laparoscopic gallbladder surgery. Patients were randomly divided into 3 groups: the placebo group (C) received 1 mL of 0.9% saline intravenously and the test groups received intravenous midazolam at doses of 0.03 mg/kg (M1) or 0.06 mg/kg (M2) before induction of GA. We assessed effects of midazolam co-induction on arterial pressure and heart rate (HR) in the early stage of GA prior to surgical incision and effects on perioperative and postoperative glycemia and cortisol levels. Systolic/mean/diastolic (SAP/MAP/DAP) arterial pressure and HR were measured 4 times (preoperative, on the third, sixth and ninth minute after atracurium administration). Cortisol was measured on 3 occasions (preoperatively, 60 minutes after surgical incision, and the following morning) and glucose on 4 occasions (preoperatively, 15 and 60 minutes after incision, and the following morning). We also assessed the incidence of postoperative anxiety, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), and propofol requirement for induction.

RESULTS

SAP/MAP/DAP were significantly higher in M2 immediately after induction compared to the other study groups (P = .002/.004/.013). Midazolam co-induction led to a significant reduction in postoperative anxiety (P = .03), reduced cortisol concentration 60 minutes after surgical incision (P < .001) and propofol requirements (P < .001).

CONCLUSION SUBSECTIONS

Midazolam co-induction prevented a marked decline in SAP/MAP/DAP immediately after induction of GA, led to reduced postoperative anxiety and cortisol response to surgery, and reduced propofol requirements for induction.

Maternal and neonatal outcomes with the addition of intrathecal midazolam as an adjuvant to spinal anesthesia in cesarean delivery: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To determine the efficacy and safety, in terms of maternal and neonatal outcomes, of adding intrathecal midazolam to spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery in healthy pregnant women.

DESIGN

A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was conducted. PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science were searched manually, and citation screening was completed on May 20, 2021.

SETTING

Most of the included data were collected in the operating room and postoperative recovery area.

PATIENTS

A total of 1382 healthy parturients undergoing cesarean delivery with single-shot spinal anesthesia were recruited in 19 eligible randomized controlled trials.

INTERVENTIONS

Single intrathecal midazolam adjuvant was compared to a control, with the local anesthetic dose in spinal anesthesia identical between the intervention and control groups.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcomes were time to first analgesic use, maternal adverse effects, and neonatal Apgar scores at 1 and 5 min. The secondary outcomes were the onset and duration of the sensory and motor blocks.

MAIN RESULTS

Adjuvant intrathecal midazolam prolonged the time to the first analgesic (mean difference [MD]: 59.96 min, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [23.12, 96.79]) and decreased perioperative maternal nausea and/or vomiting (odds ratio [OR], 0.28; 95% CI: [0.17, 0.45]). However, more sedation events were observed with midazolam (OR, 3.93; 95% CI: [1.12, 13.78]). There was no significant difference in the neonatal Apgar scores at 1 or 5 min (MD: -0.29, 95% CI: [-0.61, 0.03]; MD: -0.00, 95% CI: [-0.11, 0.1], respectively). Intrathecal midazolam also shortened sensory and motor block onset by less than 1 min and prolonged sensory block duration but had no significant effect on motor block duration.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence indicates that intrathecal midazolam, as an adjuvant to spinal anesthesia, provides modest analgesic and significant antiemetic effects at the cost of more sedation events in cesarean delivery patients. The neonatal Apgar score was not affected by intrathecal midazolam administration. However, more objective, sensitive, and long-term measurements of neonatal safety and maternal neurological effects should be performed in the future.

Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Female Patients Undergoing Breast and Gynecological Surgery: A Narrative Review of Risk Factors and Prophylaxis

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) have been widely studied as a multifactorial entity, being of female gender the strongest risk factor. Reported PONV incidence in female surgical populations is extremely variable among randomized clinical trials. In this narrative review, we intend to summarize the incidence, independent predictors, pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions for PONV reported in recently published clinical trials carried out in female patients undergoing breast and gynecologic surgery, as well as the implications of the anesthetic agents on the incidence of PONV. A literature search of manuscripts describing PONV management in female surgical populations (breast surgery and gynecologic surgery) was carried out in PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase databases. Postoperative nausea and vomiting incidence were highly variable in patients receiving placebo or no prophylaxis among RCTs whereas consistent results were observed in patients receiving 1 or 2 prophylactic interventions for PONV. Despite efforts made, a considerable number of female patients still experienced significant PONV. It is critical for the anesthesia provider to be aware that the coexistence of independent risk factors such as the level of sex hormones (pre- and postmenopausal), preoperative anxiety or depression, pharmacogenomic pleomorphisms, and ethnicity further enhances the probability of experiencing PONV in female patients. Future RCTs should closely assess the overall risk of PONV in female patients considering patient- and surgery-related factors, and the level of compliance with current guidelines for prevention and management of PONV.

The Perioperative Use of Benzodiazepines for Major Orthopedic Surgery in the United States

BACKGROUND

Despite numerous indications for perioperative benzodiazepine use, associated risks may be exacerbated in elderly and comorbid patients. In the absence of national utilization data, we aimed to describe utilization patterns using national claims data from total hip/knee arthroplasty patients (THA/TKA), an increasingly older and vulnerable surgical population.

METHODS

We included data on 1,863,996 TKAs and 985,471 THAs (Premier Healthcare claims data, 2006-2019). Benzodiazepine utilization (stratified by long- and short-acting agents) was assessed by patient- and health care characteristics, and analgesic regimens. Given the large sample size, standardized differences instead of P values were utilized to signify meaningful differences between groups (defined by value >0.1).

RESULTS

Among 1,863,996 TKA and 985,471 THA patients, the utilization rate of benzodiazepines was 80.5% and 76.1%, respectively. In TKA, 72.6% received short-acting benzodiazepines, while 7.9% received long-acting benzodiazepines, utilization rates 68.4% and 7.7% in THA, respectively. Benzodiazepine use was particularly more frequent among younger patients (median age [interquartile range {IQR}]: 66 [60-73]/64 [57-71] among short/long-acting compared to 69 [61-76] among nonusers), White patients (80.6%/85.4% short/long-acting versus 75.7% among nonusers), commercial insurance (36.5%/34.0% short/long-acting versus 29.1% among nonusers), patients receiving neuraxial anesthesia (56.9%/56.5% short/long-acting versus 51.5% among nonusers), small- and medium-sized (≤500 beds) hospitals (68.5% in nonusers, and 74% and 76.7% in short- and long-acting benzodiazepines), and those in the Midwest (24.6%/25.4% short/long-acting versus 16% among nonusers) in TKA; all standardized differences ≥0.1. Similar patterns were observed in THA except for race and comorbidity burden. Notably, among patients with benzodiazepine use, in-hospital postoperative opioid administration (measured in oral morphine equivalents [OMEs]) was substantially higher. This was even more pronounced in patients who received long-acting agents (median OME with no benzodiazepines utilization 192 [IQR, 83-345] vs 256 [IQR, 153-431] with short-acting, and 329 [IQR, 195-540] with long-acting benzodiazepine administration). Benzodiazepine use was also more frequent in patients receiving multimodal analgesia (concurrently 2 or more analgesic modes) and regional anesthesia. Trend analysis showed a persistent high utilization rate of benzodiazepines over the last 14 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on a representative sample, 4 of 5 patients undergoing major orthopedic surgery in the United States receive benzodiazepines perioperatively, despite concerns for delirium and delayed postoperative neurocognitive recovery. Notably, benzodiazepine utilization was coupled with substantially increased opioid use, which may project implications for perioperative pain management.

Adverse Events during Vitreoretinal Surgery under Adequacy of Anesthesia Guidance—Risk Factor Analysis

Vitreoretinal surgeries require the administration of general anesthesia (GA) in selected groups of patients. The administration of intraoperative rescue narcotic analgesia (IRNA) during GA poses the risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). The surgical pleth index (SPI), a crucial component of the adequacy of anesthesia (AoA) guidance of GA, optimizes the intraoperative titration of IRNA. The current analysis evaluated the risk factors for the occurrence of PONV and the oculo-cardiac reflex (OCR) in patients undergoing pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) under AoA guidance. In total, 175 patients undergoing PPV were randomly allocated to receive either GA with SPI-guided IRNA administration using fentanyl alone or in addition to different preoperative analgesia techniques. Any incidence of PONV or OCR was recorded. Obesity, overweight, smoking status, motion sickness, postoperative intolerable pain perception, female gender, fluid challenge and arterial hypertension did not correlate with an increased incidence of PONV or OCR under AoA guidance. Diabetes mellitus, regardless of insulin dependence, was found to correlate with the increased incidence of PONV. The AoA regimen including SPI guidance of IRNA presumably created similar conditions for individual subjects, so no risk factors of the occurrence of PONV or OCR were found, except for diabetes mellitus. We recommend using AoA guidance for GA administration to reduce OCR and PONV rates.

Management of postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults: current controversies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) continue to plague the surgical patient population with an adverse impact on postoperative outcomes. The aim of this review is to critically assess current evidence for PONV management, including studies evaluating baseline risk reduction and antiemetic prophylaxis, to provide a pragmatic approach to prevention and treatment of PONV in routine clinical practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

Multiple recent reviews and guidelines have been published on this topic with some limitations. In the current ERAS era, all patients irrespective of their PONV risk should receive two to three antiemetics for prophylaxis. Patients at a high risk of PONV [i.e. prior history of PONV, history of motion sickness, high opioid requirements after surgery (e.g. inability to use nonopioid analgesic techniques)] should receive three to four antiemetics for prophylaxis.

SUMMARY

This review provides a practical approach to PONV prevention based on recent literature.

General anesthetic techniques for enhanced recovery after surgery: Current controversies

General anesthesia technique can influence not only immediate postoperative outcomes, but also long-term outcomes beyond hospital stay (e.g., readmission after discharge from hospital). There is lack of evidence regarding superiority of total intravenous anesthesia over inhalation anesthesia with regards to postoperative outcomes even in high-risk population including cancer patients. Optimal balanced general anesthetic technique for enhance recovery after elective surgery in adults includes avoidance of routine use preoperative midazolam, avoidance of deep anesthesia, use of opioid-sparing approach, and minimization of neuromuscular blocking agents and appropriate reversal of residual paralysis. Given that the residual effects of drugs used during anesthesia can increase postoperative morbidity and delay recovery, it is prudent to use a minimal number of drug combinations, and the drugs used are shorter-acting and administered at the lowest possible dose. It is imperative that the discerning anesthesiologist consider whether each drug used is really necessary for accomplishing perioperative goals.

Effect of Adding Midazolam to Dual Prophylaxis for Preventing Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting

Multimodal prophylaxis for postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) has been recommended, even in low-risk patients. Midazolam is known to have antiemetic properties. We researched the effects of adding midazolam to the dual prophylaxis of ondansetron and dexamethasone on PONV after gynecologic laparoscopy. In this prospective, randomized, double-blinded trial, 144 patients undergoing gynecological laparoscopic surgery under sevoflurane anesthesia were randomized to receive either normal saline (control group, n = 72) or midazolam 0.05 mg/kg (midazolam group, n = 72) intravenously at pre-induction. All patients were administered dexamethasone 4 mg at induction and ondansetron 4 mg at the completion of the laparoscopy, intravenously. The primary outcome was the incidence of complete response, which implied the absence of PONV without rescue antiemetic requirement until 24 h post-surgery. The complete response during the 24 h following laparoscopy was similar between the two groups: 41 patients (59%) in the control group and 48 patients (72%) in the midazolam group (p = 0.11). The incidence of nausea, severe nausea, retching/vomiting, and administration of rescue antiemetic was comparable between the two groups. The addition of 0.05 mg/kg midazolam at pre-induction to the dual prophylaxis had no additive preventive effect on PONV after gynecologic laparoscopy.

Comparison of palonosetron with combined palonosetron and midazolam for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is an undesirable complication in patients undergoing general anesthesia. Combination therapy via different mechanisms of action for antiemetic prophylaxis has been warranted for effective treatment of PONV. This study was designed to compare the prophylactic antiemetic effect between midazolam combined with palonosetron (group MP) and palonosetron alone (group P) after laparoscopic cholecystectomy surgeries.

METHODS

A prospective randomized controlled trial was investigated in non-smoking female. Eighty-eight patients were randomly divided into 2 groups with 44 patients each. Group MP received 0.05 mg/kg of midazolam intravenously before induction of anesthesia whereas group P received the same volume of normal saline. Immediately after anesthetic induction, 0.075 mg of palonosetron was administered to both the groups. The incidence and severity of PONV were assessed during 2 time intervals (0-2 hours, 2-24 hours), postoperatively.

RESULTS

The incidence of PONV during 24 hours after surgery was lower in group MP as compared to group P. There was also a significant difference in the use of rescue antiemetics. The severity of nausea was significantly lower in group MP as compared to group P, in the initial 2 hours after surgery. The incidence of side effects was similar between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

In the prevention of PONV, midazolam combined with palonosetron, administered during induction of anesthesia was more effective as compared to palonosetron alone.

Midazolam versus dexamethasone-ondansetron in preventing post-operative nausea-vomiting in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries

BACKGROUND

Midazolam reduces post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) when compared to a placebo or when used as an adjuvant to other antiemetics. The present study was designed to compare midazolam with a combination of dexamethasone-ondansetron in preventing PONV.

METHODS

One hundred and twenty patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries having 2 or more risk factors for PONV (simplified Apfel score) were randomised into 2 groups of 60 each. Patients in group D received 8-mg dexamethasone and 4-mg ondansetron for PONV prophylaxis while those in group M received 2-mg midazolam towards the end of surgery. The proportion of patients (frequency) who had PONV, post-operative nausea (PON) and post-operative vomiting (POV) was noted over 24 hours over the following intervals: 0-2 hours, 2-24 hours and 0-24 hours.

RESULTS

The frequency of PONV at 24 hours in group D and group M was 30% and 33.3% respectively and was not significantly different (P = .70). There was no difference in the time to achieve post-anaesthesia discharge score of ≥9 between the two groups {5 minutes (5, 5) in group D; 5 minutes (1.25, 5) in group M, P = .48}. Ten patients in group D and 11 in group M required a rescue antiemetic over 24 hours (P = .81). The frequency of PON, POV and PONV as well as the median PONV score was similar at all time periods.

CONCLUSION

Midazolam does not result in significantly different frequency of PONV than a combination of dexamethasone-ondansetron.

Updates and controversies in anesthesia for advanced interventional pulmonology procedures

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Advanced bronchoscopic procedures continues to grow, and are now commonly used to diagnose and/or treat a variety of pulmonary conditions that required formal thoracic surgery in past decades. Pharmacologic developments have provided new therapeutic options, as have technical advances in both anesthesia and interventional pulmonology. This review discusses technical and clinical issues and advances in providing anesthesia for advanced bronchoscopic procedures. It also discusses some controversial issues that have yet to be fully resolved.

RECENT FINDINGS

We discuss anesthetic considerations for new procedures such as the new technology used in electromagnetic navigation bronchoscopy, and bronchoscopic cryotherapy. We also review new ventilation strategies as well as pharmacologic advances and recent trends in the utilization of anesthetic adjuvants, and the use of short-acting opioids like remifentanil, and alpha agonist sedatives such as dexmedetomidine.

SUMMARY

The anesthetic framework and the discussions presented here should help forge effective communication between the interventional pulmonologist and the anesthesiologist In the Bronchoscopy Suite nonoperating room anesthesia with the goal of enhancing patient safety.

Current status of perioperative hypnotics, role of benzodiazepines, and the case for remimazolam: a narrative review

Anaesthesiologists and non-anaesthesiologist sedationists have a limited set of available i.v. hypnotics, further reduced by the withdrawal of thiopental in the USA and its near disappearance in Europe. Meanwhile, demand for sedation increases and new clinical groups are using what traditionally are anaesthesiologists' drugs. Improved understanding of the determinants of perioperative morbidity and mortality has spotlighted hypotension as a potent cause of patient harm, and practice must be adjusted to respect this. High-dose propofol sedation may be harmful, and a critical reappraisal of drug choices and doses is needed. The development of remimazolam, initially for procedural sedation, allows reconsideration of benzodiazepines as the hypnotic component of a general anaesthetic even if their characterisation as i.v. anaesthetics is questionable. Early data suggest that a combination of remimazolam and remifentanil can induce and maintain anaesthesia. Further work is needed to define use cases for this technique and to determine the impact on patient outcomes.

Dexmedetomidine-remifentanil vs propofol-remifentanil for monitored anesthesia care during hysteroscopy: Randomized, single-blind, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Although dexmedetomidine has been used as either the anesthetic agent for light sedation or as an adjunct to other sedatives, no study has investigated the usefulness of dexmedetomidine as the main sedative agent for invasive and painful procedures. The purpose of this study was to compare the safety of dexmedetomidine-remifentanil and propofol-remifentanil during monitored anesthesia care (MAC) for hysteroscopy.

METHODS

Female patients undergoing hysteroscopy were randomly assigned to either the dexmedetomidine (group D) or the propofol group (group P). The study drug (0.6 ml/kg; dexmedetomidine 2 μg/ml or propofol 4 mg/ml) was loaded for 10 minutes followed by 0.1 to 0.5 ml/kg/hour to maintain a bispectral index of 60 to 80 during the procedure. In both groups, remifentanil was infused using a target-controlled-infusion system with a target concentration of 2 ng/ml and titrated during the procedure. The incidence rates of intraoperative respiratory depression in both groups were compared. Postoperative pain and patients satisfaction were also compared.

RESULTS

A total of 69 female patients were included in this study. Dexmedetomidine significantly decrease the incidence of respiratory depression compared with propofol (15/34 [44.1%] vs 5/35 [14.3%], P = .006, group P and D, respectively). Postoperative pain and patients satisfaction score did not differ between the groups.

CONCLUSION

The combination of dexmedetomidine-remifentanil can reduce the incidence of respiratory depression without increasing hemodynamic complications compared with propofol-remifentanil for MAC during hysteroscopy.

Management strategies for the treatment and prevention of postoperative/postdischarge nausea and vomiting: an updated review

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and postdischarge nausea and vomiting (PDNV) remain common and distressing complications following surgery. The routine use of opioid analgesics for perioperative pain management is a major contributing factor to both PONV and PDNV after surgery. PONV and PDNV can delay discharge from the hospital or surgicenter, delay the return to normal activities of daily living after discharge home, and increase medical costs. The high incidence of PONV and PDNV has persisted despite the introduction of many new antiemetic drugs (and more aggressive use of antiemetic prophylaxis) over the last two decades as a result of growth in minimally invasive ambulatory surgery and the increased emphasis on earlier mobilization and discharge after both minor and major surgical procedures (e.g. enhanced recovery protocols). Pharmacologic management of PONV should be tailored to the patient’s risk level using the validated PONV and PDNV risk-scoring systems to encourage cost-effective practices and minimize the potential for adverse side effects due to drug interactions in the perioperative period. A combination of prophylactic antiemetic drugs with different mechanisms of action should be administered to patients with moderate to high risk of developing PONV. In addition to utilizing prophylactic antiemetic drugs, the management of perioperative pain using opioid-sparing multimodal analgesic techniques is critically important for achieving an enhanced recovery after surgery. In conclusion, the utilization of strategies to reduce the baseline risk of PONV (e.g. adequate hydration and the use of nonpharmacologic antiemetic and opioid-sparing analgesic techniques) and implementing multimodal antiemetic and analgesic regimens will reduce the likelihood of patients developing PONV and PDNV after surgery.

Prevention of Opioid-Induced Nausea and Vomiting During Treatment of Moderate to Severe Acute Pain: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial Comparing CL-108 (Hydrocodone 7.5 mg/Acetaminophen 325 mg/Rapid-Release, Low-Dose Promethazine 12.5 mg) with Conventional Hydrocodone 7.5 mg/Acetaminophen 325 mg

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the prevention of opioid-induced nausea and vomiting (OINV) and the relief of moderate to severe acute pain by CL-108, a novel drug combining a low-dose antiemetic (rapid-release promethazine 12.5 mg) with hydrocodone 7.5 mg/acetaminophen 325 mg (HC/APAP) was used.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled multidose study. After surgical extraction of two or more impacted third molar teeth (including at least one mandibular impaction), 466 patients with moderate to severe pain (measured on a categorical pain intensity scale [PI-CAT]) were randomized to CL-108, HC/APAP, or placebo. Over the next 24 hours, patients used the PI-CAT to assess pain at regular intervals whereas nausea, vomiting, and other opioid-related side effects were also assessed prospectively. Study medications were taken every four to six hours as needed; supplemental rescue analgesic and antiemetic medications were permitted. Co-primary end points were the incidence of OINV and the time-weighted sum of pain intensity differences over 24 hours (SPID24).

RESULTS

Relative to HC/APAP treatment alone, CL-108 treatment reduced OINV by 64% (P < 0.001). Treatment with CL-108 significantly reduced pain intensity compared with placebo (SPID24 = 16.2 vs 3.5, P < 0.001). There were no unexpected or serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

CL-108 is a safe and effective combination analgesic/antiemetic for the prevention of OINV during treatment of moderate to severe acute pain.

The effect of midazolam as premedication on the quality of postoperative recovery after laparotomy: a randomized clinical trial

PURPOSE

Despite the uncertain effects of anxiolytic premedication with benzodiazepines on the quality of postoperative recovery, perioperative benzodiazepine administration is still a common practice in many hospitals. We evaluated the effect of premedication with midazolam on the quality of recovery in hospitalized patients undergoing a laparotomy.

METHODS

We conducted a single-centre randomized placebo-controlled, double-blinded clinical trial from July 2014 to September 2015. We included 192 patients aged > 18 yr scheduled for elective laparotomy with a planned postoperative stay of ≥ three days. Participants were randomized into two groups to receive either midazolam 3 mg or sodium chloride 0.9% intravenously as premedication prior to surgery. Patients were followed up for up to one week after surgery. The primary outcome was the Quality of Recovery-40 (QoR-40) score on postoperative day (POD) 3. The secondary outcomes included the QoR-40 score on POD 7, and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, State-Trait Anger Scale, Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory, and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale scores.

RESULTS

The mean (standard deviation) postoperative QoR-40 scores on POD 3 were not significantly different in the midazolam group compared with controls [166.4 (17.0) vs 163.9 (19.8), respectively; mean difference, 2.3; 95% confidence interval, - 2.9 to 8.4; P = 0.35]. There were no between-group differences in any of the secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Administration of midazolam as premedication for laparotomy patients did not improve the quality of recovery up to one week after surgery. General prescription of midazolam as premedication can be questioned and might only suit some patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01993459); registered 29 October, 2013.

What is new in the battle against postoperative nausea and vomiting?

The issue of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) still poses a significant burden on our patients. Although rarely associated with a life-threatening condition, it is consistently considered as one of the most undesirable side effects of surgery and anesthesia. There are well-established risk factors for the development of PONV that include patient-related factors, anesthetic technique, use of volatile anesthetics, use of nitrous oxide, duration of anesthesia, opioid administration, and type of surgery. Because pharmacologic interventions for PONV are not without risks, practitioners must assess patient's risk status from low to high and consider the benefits of treatment. This review summarizes the current state of knowledge related to PONV and provides a practical approach toward risk assessment, prevention, and numerous treatment strategies.

Minimum Effective dose of Dexamethasone in Combination with Midazolam as Prophylaxis against Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting after Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Background:

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) affects 20% and 30% of patients. As many as 60%–80% patients at high risk may be affected. Dexamethasone (D) and midazolam (M) are well studied as antiemetic. Use of D can be associated with certain undesirable side effects so minimum dose is preferred. M is a routinely used premedicant. Hence, this study was designed with both D and M in high risk patients for PONV to find minimum effective dose of D.

Aims:

To determine the minimum dose of D that combined with M would provide effective prophylaxis of PONV after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) in patients at high risk for PONV.

Setting and Design:

This is a prospective, randomized double-blind trial.

Materials and Methods:

One hundred and fifty-five patients scheduled for elective LC were randomized to 5 groups of 31 each. Group C was given normal saline, and the rest were administered D 1 mg (group MD1), 2 mg (group MD2), 4 mg (group MD4), or 8 mg (group MD8) in combination with 0.04 mg/kg M at induction. The incidence of nausea, vomiting, severity of nausea, and the use of rescue antiemetic and postoperative pain was analyzed.

Statistical Analysis:

Chi-square test was used to compare incidence of study variables. Independent Student's t-test was used for continuous variables. Demographic data were compared using ANOVA. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results:

The incidence of nausea was significantly lower in group MD4 (29%) and MD8 (6%) compared to placebo group (71%) (P < 0.001) and of vomiting was significantly lower in groups of MD2 (58%), MD4 (48%), and MD8 (6%) compared with placebo (90%) (P < 0.001) at 24 h. There was significant reduction in nausea, pain severity, and incidence of use of rescue antiemetic in MD4 and MD8 groups with no discernable side effects of the drugs.

Conclusion:

We conclude that 4 mg D with M and 2 mg D with M is effective for prevention of nausea and vomiting, respectively, in patients at high risk for PONV undergoing LC.

Progress in understanding mechanisms of opioid-induced gastrointestinal adverse effects and respiratory depression

Opioids evoke analgesia through activation of opioid receptors (predominantly the μ opioid receptor) in the central nervous system. Opioid receptors are abundant in multiple regions of the central nervous system and the peripheral nervous system including enteric neurons. Opioid-related adverse effects such as constipation, nausea, and vomiting pose challenges for compliance and continuation of the therapy for chronic pain management. In the post-operative setting opioid-induced depression of respiration can be fatal. These critical limitations warrant a better understanding of their underpinning cellular and molecular mechanisms to inform the design of novel opioid analgesic molecules that are devoid of these unwanted side-effects. Research efforts on opioid receptor signalling in the past decade suggest that differential signalling pathways and downstream molecules preferentially mediate distinct pharmacological effects. Additionally, interaction among opioid receptors and, between opioid receptor and non-opioid receptors to form signalling complexes shows that opioid-induced receptor signalling is potentially more complicated than previously thought. This complexity provides an opportunity to identify and probe relationships between selective signalling pathway specificity and in vivo production of opioid-related adverse effects. In this review, we focus on current knowledge of the mechanisms thought to transduce opioid-induced gastrointestinal adverse effects (constipation, nausea, vomiting) and respiratory depression.

The Effect of Preoperative Pregabalin on Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting: A Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Nonopioid adjuvant medications are increasingly included among perioperative Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocols. Preoperative pregabalin has been shown to improve postoperative pain and limit reliance on opioid analgesia. Our group investigated the ability of preoperative pregabalin to also prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).

METHODS

Our group performed a meta-analysis of randomized trials that report outcomes on the effect of preoperative pregabalin on PONV endpoints in patients undergoing general anesthesia.

RESULTS

Among all included trials (23 trials; n = 1693), preoperative pregabalin was associated with a significant reduction in PONV (risk ratio [RR] = 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39-0.73; P = 0.0001), nausea (RR = 0.62; 95% CI, 0.46-0.83; P = 0.002), and vomiting (RR = 0.68; 95% CI, 0.52-0.88; P = 0.003) at 24 hours. Subgroup analysis designed to account for major PONV confounders, including the exclusion trials with repeat dosing, thiopental induction, nitrous oxide maintenance, and prophylactic antiemetics and including high-risk surgery, resulted in similar antiemetic efficacy. Preoperative pregabalin is also associated with significantly increased rates of postoperative visual disturbance (RR = 3.11; 95% CI, 1.34-7.21; P = 0.008) compared with a control.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative pregabalin is associated with significant reduction of PONV and should not only be considered as part of a multimodal approach to postoperative analgesia but also for prevention of PONV.

The effect of triazolam premedication on anxiety, sedation, and amnesia in general anesthesia

BACKGROUND

Benzodiazepines have been used preoperatively as part of an anesthesia regimen to attenuate the anxiety of patients. In this study, we aimed to examine the effect of oral triazolam, a short-acting benzodiazepine, on anxiety, sedation, and amnesia.

METHODS

Ninety patients, aged 20-55 years, were randomly assigned to receive no premedication, or to receive triazolam 0.25 mg or 0.375 mg 1 h before anesthesia. Anxiety score, sedation score, blood pressure, heart rate and psychomotor performance were measured on the evening before surgery and on the day of surgery. Additional tests of psychomotor performance were performed in the postanesthesia care unit and on the next day of surgery. The occurrence of amnesia, bispectral index (BIS), recovery profiles and patient satisfaction with overall anesthesia care were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Changes in the anxiety and sedation scores on the day of surgery were not significantly different among groups, whereas the increases in systolic blood pressure and heart rate were significantly less in both triazolam groups. The triazolam groups both showed a higher incidence of high satisfaction scores (≥ 2). The two triazolam groups also showed similar outcomes, except for a dose-dependent increase in the number of patients with amnesia and BIS values < 90. Delayed recovery from general anesthesia and psychomotor impairment were not observed in the triazolam groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Triazolam 0.25 mg or 0.375 mg reduced the hemodynamic changes associated with anxiety, produced potent amnesia, and improved patient satisfaction. We suggest that triazolam can be used effectively as anesthetic premedication in adults.