Darlong V, Shende D, Subramanyam M S, Sunder R, Naik A
Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Anaesth Intensive Care. 2004 Apr;32(2):246-9. doi: 10.1177/0310057X0403200214.
This randomized controlled trial was designed to evaluate whether the combination of low dose oral midazolam (0.25 mg/kg) and low dose oral ketamine (3 mg/kg) provides better premedication than oral midazolam (0.5 mg/kg) or oral ketamine (6 mg/kg). Seventy-eight children of ASA physical status I or II scheduled for elective ophthalmic surgery were randomly divided into three groups and given premedication in the holding area 30 minutes before surgery. Two subjects from each group vomited the medication and were excluded, leaving 72 subjects for further analysis. The onset of sedation was earlier in the combination group than the other two groups. At 10 minutes after premedication 12.5% in the combination group had an acceptable sedation score compared with none in the other two groups. After 20 minutes 54% in the combination group had an acceptable sedation score, 21% in the midazolam group and 16% in the ketamine group (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in the parental separation score, response to induction and emergence score. The mean time for best parental separation score was significantly less in the combination group (19+/-8 min) than either the midazolam (28+/-7) or ketamine (29+/-7 min) groups (P<0.05). Recovery was earlier in the combination group, as the time required to reach a modified Aldrete score of 10 was significantly less in the combination group (22+/-5 min) than in the oral midazolam (36+/-11 min) or ketamine (38+/-8 min) groups. The incidence of excessive salivation was significantly higher in the ketamine alone group (P<0.05). In conclusion, the combination of oral ketamine (3 mg/kg) and midazolam (0.25 mg/kg) has minimal side effects and gives a faster onset and more rapid recovery than ketamine 6 mg/kg or midazolam 0.5 mg/kg for premedication in children.
这项随机对照试验旨在评估低剂量口服咪达唑仑(0.25毫克/千克)与低剂量口服氯胺酮(3毫克/千克)联合用药是否比口服咪达唑仑(0.5毫克/千克)或口服氯胺酮(6毫克/千克)能提供更好的术前用药效果。78例美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)身体状况为I或II级、计划接受择期眼科手术的儿童被随机分为三组,并在手术前30分钟于等候区给予术前用药。每组有两名受试者呕吐了药物,被排除在外,剩余72名受试者进行进一步分析。联合用药组的镇静起效时间比其他两组更早。术前用药后10分钟时,联合用药组有12.5%的受试者镇静评分可接受,而其他两组均无。20分钟后,联合用药组有54%的受试者镇静评分可接受,咪达唑仑组为21%,氯胺酮组为16%(P<0.05)。在父母分离评分、诱导反应和苏醒评分方面无显著差异。联合用药组达到最佳父母分离评分的平均时间(19±8分钟)显著短于咪达唑仑组(28±7分钟)或氯胺酮组(29±7分钟)(P<0.05)。联合用药组恢复更早,因为达到改良Aldrete评分为10所需的时间,联合用药组(22±5分钟)显著短于口服咪达唑仑组(36±11分钟)或氯胺酮组(38±8分钟)。单独使用氯胺酮组流涎过多的发生率显著更高(P<0.05)。总之,口服氯胺酮(3毫克/千克)与咪达唑仑(0.25毫克/千克)联合用药副作用最小,在儿童术前用药中比6毫克/千克氯胺酮或0.5毫克/千克咪达唑仑起效更快、恢复更迅速。