JOURNAL HOME CME HOME THIS MONTH PAST ISSUES ETOC COLLECTIONS
AUTHORS REVIEWERS EDITORIAL BOARD FEEDBACK RSS HELP
A&A International Anesthesia Research Society
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Anesth Analg 1986; 65:933-937
© 1986 International Anesthesia Research Society
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Reitan, J. A.
Right arrow Articles by Braunstein, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Reitan, J. A.
Right arrow Articles by Braunstein, M.

Comparison of Psychomotor Skills and Amnesia after Induction of Anesthesia with Midazolam or Thiopental

John A. Reitan, MD, Wayne Porter, MD, and Molla Braunstein, MS

Received from the Department of Anesthesiology, University of California School of Medicine, Davis, California, and the Department of Anesthesiology, Breckenridge Hospital, Austin, Texas.

Abstract

In two groups of 31 healthy patients undergoing minor elective surgery, anesthesia was induced intravenously with either midazolam maleate, 0.2 mg/kg, or thiopental, 3.5 nig/kg. All subjects received 2 µg/kg fentanyl 5 min before the induction agents. Induction time with midazolam was significantly longer than with thiopental (97.1 ± 20.9 sec vs 59.4 ± 5.0 sec) and time to orientation postoperatively was significantly longer after midazolam (31.7 ± 4.2 min vs 11.0 ± 1.1 min). Continued recovery after orientation, measured by a series of psychomotor tests, was also significantly longer with midazolam than with thiopental. Anterograde amnesia was evident in 84.8% of the midazolam treated patients and in only 31.4% of the thiopental group. This degree of absence of recall was acknowledged positively by the affected patients. The protracted recovery period may limit the use of midazolam in short surgical procedures.

Key Words: ANESTHESIA, INTRAVENOUS—thiopental, midazolam • HYPNOTICS—benzodiazepines, midazolam, barbiturates, thiopental • MEMORY—amnesia • RECOVERY—psychomotor tests




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Canadian J. AnesthesiaHome page
I. T. Awad and F. Chung
Factors affecting recovery and discharge following ambulatory surgery: [Les facteurs influencant la recuperation et la sortie apres une operation en chirurgie ambulatoire].
Can J Anesth, September 1, 2006; 53(9): 858 - 872.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
S. I. Marshall and F. Chung
Discharge Criteria and Complications After Ambulatory Surgery
Anesth. Analg., March 1, 1999; 88(3): 508 - 508.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J PsychopharmacolHome page
B. Birch and H. V. Curran
The differential effects of flumazenil on the psychomotor and amnesic actions of midazolam
J Psychopharmacol, January 1, 1990; 4(1): 29 - 34.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins Anesthesia & Analgesia® is published for the International Anesthesia Research Society® by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins with the assistance of Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press®. Copyright 2006 by the International Anesthesia Research Society. Online ISSN: 1526-7598   Print ISSN: 0003-2999 HighWire Press
Copyright © 1986 by the International Anesthesia Research Society.