Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T21:38:01.724Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of diluent volume on post-operative analgesia and sedation produced by epidurally administered midazolam

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 August 2006

T. Nishiyama  and
K. Hanaoka
T. Nishiyama
Affiliation:
Department of Anesthesiology, The University of Tokyo, Faculty of Medicine, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113 Japan Present address: Department of Anesthesiology, Harbor-University of California, Los Angeles Medical Centre, 1000 West Carson Street, Torrance, CA 90509, USA.
K. Hanaoka
Affiliation:
Department of Anesthesiology, The University of Tokyo, Faculty of Medicine, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113 Japan
Get access

Abstract

We have studied the optimal diluent volume for post-operative analgesia and sedation produced by epidurally administered midazolam after upper abdominal surgery. Sixty patients were randomly allocated to four groups of 15 patients. When patients complained of pain after surgery, epidural midazolam 0.05 mg kg−1 in 3 mL saline (Group A), in 5 mL saline (Group B), in 10 mL saline (Group C) or in 15 mL saline (Group D) were injected as a bolus. The sedation was better and lasted longer in groups B and C than in the other two groups. Groups B and C also had significantly more extensive areas of analgesia than groups A and D from 30 min after the administration of midazolam. The interval to the second request for an analgesic was significantly shorter in Group D than in the other three groups. Memory retention of the pin-prick examination was reported by four patients in Group A. The present results indicate that 5–10 mL saline is the optimal volume for epidural injection when using midazolam 0.05 mg kg−1 for post-operative analgesia following upper abdominal surgery.

Keywords

epidural analgesiadrugsmidazolamsaline
Type
Original Article
Information
European Journal of Anaesthesiology , Volume 15 , Issue 3 , May 1998 , pp. 275 - 279
Copyright
1998 European Society of Anaesthesiology

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)