Korttila K, Tarkkanen J
Br J Anaesth. 1985 Jun;57(6):581-6. doi: 10.1093/bja/57.6.581.
Bronchoscopy was performed in 76 outpatients using local anaesthesia plus diazepam 0.2 mg kg-1 i.v. or midazolam 0.05 or 0.1 mg kg-1 i.v. Patient co-operation and ease of bronchoscopy were good in all patients. Two hours after injection, 67% (diazepam 0.2 mg kg-1), 36% (midazolam 0.05 mg kg-1) and 75% (midazolam 0.1 mg kg-1) of the patients failed to recall the insertion of the bronchoscope. Similarly, when asked on the following day, only 22%, 52% and 8%, respectively, of the patients remembered bronchoscopy. Two hours after sedation, the patients' performances in three psychomotor tests were similar to those measured before sedation in each group, but the patients' ability to stand steadily and walk along a straight line reverted to normal significantly (P less than 0.05) more slowly in patients receiving midazolam 0.1 mg kg-1 than in the patients given diazepam. The results suggest that midazolam offers no advantage over diazepam in terms of speed of recovery of psychomotor function, when doses of similar potency are given for bronchoscopy.
对76名门诊患者进行了支气管镜检查，采用局部麻醉加静脉注射0.2mg/kg地西泮或0.05或0.1mg/kg咪达唑仑。所有患者的患者配合度和支气管镜检查的难易程度都很好。注射后两小时，67%（地西泮0.2mg/kg）、36%（咪达唑仑0.05mg/kg）和75%（咪达唑仑0.1mg/kg）的患者无法回忆起支气管镜的插入过程。同样，在第二天询问时，分别只有22%、52%和8%的患者记得支气管镜检查。镇静两小时后，每组患者在三项心理运动测试中的表现与镇静前测量的表现相似，但接受0.1mg/kg咪达唑仑的患者比接受地西泮的患者更缓慢地显著恢复（P<0.05）稳定站立和沿直线行走的能力。结果表明，在支气管镜检查中给予相似效力的剂量时，咪达唑仑在心理运动功能恢复速度方面并不比地西泮有优势。
