Propofol and Midazolam versus Propofol Alone for Sedation following Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A Randomized, Placebo-controlled Trial
Open Access
- 1 April 2002
- journal article
- clinical trial
- Published by SAGE Publications in Anaesthesia and Intensive Care
- Vol. 30 (2), 171-178
- https://doi.org/10.1177/0310057x0203000208
Abstract
The aim was to compare the efficacy and side-effects of propofol combined with a constant, low dose of midazolam versus propofol alone for sedation. In a prospective, randomized and double-blinded study, 60 male patients scheduled for elective coronary bypass grafting were enrolled. Postoperatively, patients were stratified to receive either a continuous intravenous infusion of midazolam 1 mg/h or placebo. Target Ramsay sedation score was 3 to 5 corresponding to conscious sedation. An intention-to-treat design for propofol was performed to reach target sedation. Efficacy of sedation was statistically significantly higher in the group midazolam+intention-to-treat with propofol compared with the group placebo+intention-to-treat with propofol (91% vs 79%; P=0.0005). Nine of 27 patients in the midazolam group (33.4%) and nine of 26 patients in the placebo group (34.6%) needed no supplementary propofol. Weaning time from mechanical ventilation was longer in the midazolam group whether or not they required supplemental propofol when compared with placebo group (all: 432±218 min vs 319±223 min; P=0.04; supplementary propofol: 424±234 min vs 265±175 min; P=0.03). The cumulative number of patients remaining intubated was significantly higher in the group midazolam+propofol compared with the group placebo+propofol (P=0.03). In conclusion, target sedation is reached slightly more often by the co-administration of propofol and a low dose of midazolam, but weaning time from mechanical ventilation is prolonged by the co-administration of propofol and a low dose of midazolam.Keywords
This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- Effect of gender on fast-track recovery after coronary artery bypass graft surgeryJournal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia, 2001
- A Lack of Evidence of Superiority of Propofol Versus Midazolam for Sedation in Mechanically Ventilated Critically Ill Patients: A Qualitative and Quantitative Systematic ReviewAnesthesia & Analgesia, 2001
- Female Gender Associates with Increased Duration of Intubation and Length of Stay after Coronary Artery SurgeryAnesthesiology, 2000
- Risk Factors of Delayed Extubation, Prolonged Length of Stay in the Intensive Care Unit, and Mortality in Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Graft with Fast-track Cardiac AnesthesiaAnesthesiology, 1999
- Synergistic sedation with propofol and midazolam in intensive care patients after coronary artery bypass graftingCritical Care Medicine, 1998
- The risk of coronary artery surgery in women: A matched comparison using preoperative severity of illness scoringJournal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia, 1996
- Comparative Effects of Nitric Oxide Inhibition on the Coronary Vasomotor Responses to Etomidate, Propofol, and Thiopental in Anesthetized DogsAnesthesia & Analgesia, 1994
- Vasodilation and Mechanism of Action of Propofol in Porcine Coronary ArteryAnesthesiology, 1994
- Pharmacokinetic interactions between midazolam and propofol: an infusion studyBritish Journal of Anaesthesia, 1994
- The Role of the GABAA Receptor/Chloride Channel Complex in AnesthesiaAnesthesiology, 1993