A comparison of oral midazolam, oral tramadol, and intranasal sufentanil premedication in pediatric patients

Fatma Bayrak, MD; Isil Gunday, MD; Dilek Memis, MD; Alparslan Turan, MD

doi:10.5055/jom.2007.0043

Authors

Fatma Bayrak, MD
Isil Gunday, MD
Dilek Memis, MD
Alparslan Turan, MD

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5055/jom.2007.0043

Keywords:

children, oral midazolam, oral tramadol, intranasal sufentanil

Abstract

Background: This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral midazolam, tramadol drops, and intranasal sufentanil for premedication of pediatric patients.
Methods: Sixty children, three to 10 years of age, who were designated as American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I and who were undergoing adenotonsil- lectomy as inpatients were randomized to receive a dosage of 0.5 mg/kg (total of 4 mL) midazolam in cherry juice (n = 20, Group M), 3 mg/kg tramadol drops (n = 20, Group T), or 2 mg/kg intranasal sufentanil (n = 20, Group S). Clinical responses (sedation, anxiolysis, cooperation) and adverse effects (respiratory, hemodynamic, etc.) were recorded. Safety was assessed by continuous oxygen saturation monitoring and observation. Vital signs (blood pressure, pulse, oxygen saturation, respiratory rate) were recorded before drug administration (baseline) and then every 10 minutes until the induction of anesthesia.
Results: Mean blood pressure decreased significantly afterfive minutes of intranasal sufentanil administration relative to GroupsM (p < 0.01) and T (p < 0.05), whereas heart rate remained unchanged. Oxygen saturation and respiratory rate decreased significantly after 20 and 30 minutes of intranasal sufentanil administration relative to Groups Mand T(p < 0.05). Anxiety scores showed rates of 45percent in Group M, 5percent in Group T, and 40 percent in Group S. Anxiety scores in Groups M and S were better than those of Group T (p < 0.01). Cooperation scores for face-mask acceptance showed rates of 85 percent in Group M, 45percent in Group T, and 85percent in Group S (p < 0.01).
Conclusion: Intranasal sufentanil and oral midazolam are more appropriate premedication options than tramadol drops in children.

Author Biographies

Fatma Bayrak, MD

Director of Anesthesiology, Malatya Hospital, Malatya, Turkey.

Isil Gunday, MD

Professor, Department of Anesthesiology, Trakya University Medical Faculty, Edirne, Turkey.

Dilek Memis, MD

Associate Professor, Department of Anesthesiology, Trakya University Medical Faculty, Edirne, Turkey.

Alparslan Turan, MD

Associate Professor, Department of Anesthesiology, Trakya University Medical Faculty, Edirne, Turkey.

References

Meursing AEE: Psychological effects of anaesthesia in children. Curr Opin Anaesth. 1989; 2: 335-338.

Kain ZN, Mayes LC, Bell C, et al.: Premedication in the United States: A status report. Anesth Analg. 1997; 84(2): 427-432.

Kain ZN, Mayes LC, Wang S, et al.: Postoperative behavioral outcomes in children: Effects of sedative premedication. Anesthesiology. 1999; 90(3): 758-765.

Payne KA, Coetzee AR, Mattheyse FJ: Midazolam and amnesia in pediatric premedication. Acta Anaesthesiol Belg. 1991; 42(2): 101-105.

Weldon BC, Watcha MF, White PF: Oral midazolam in children: Effect of time and adjunctive therapy. Anesth Analg. 1992; 75(1): 51-55.

Feld LH, Negus JB, White PF: Oral midazolam preanesthetic medication in pediatric outpatients. Anesthesiology. 1990; 73(5): 831-834.

Schaffer J, Piepenbrock S, Kretz FJ, et al.: [Nalbuphine and tramadol for the control of postoperative pain in children]. Anaesthesist. 1986; 35(7): 408-413.

Leysen JE, Gommeren W, Niemegeers CJ: [3H]Sufentanil, a superior ligand for mu-opiate receptors: Binding properties and regional distribution in rat brain and spinal cord. Fur J Pharmacol. 1983; 87(2-3): 209-225.

Henderson JM, Brodsky DA, Fisher DM, et al.: Pre-induction of anesthesia in pediatric patients with nasally administered sufentanil. Anesthesiology. 1988; 68(5): 671-675.

Feld LH, Negus JB, White PF: Oral midazolam preanesthetic medication in pediatric outpatients. Anesthesiology. 1990; 73(5): 831-834.

Cote CJ, Cohen IT, Suresh S, et al.: A comparison of three doses of a commercially prepared oral midazolam syrup in children. Anesth Analg. 2002; 94(1): 37-43, table of contents.

Reed MD, Rodarte A, Blumer JL, et al.: The single-dose phar-macokinetics of midazolam and its primary metabolite in pediatric patients after oral and intravenous administration. J Clin Pharmacol. 2001; 41(12): 1359-1369.

Thummel KE, O’Shea D, Paine MF, et al.: Oral first-pass elimination of midazolam involves both gastrointestinal and hepatic CYP3A-mediated metabolism. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1996; 59(5): 491-502.

Stanley TH, Ashburn MA: Novel delivery systems: Oral trans-mucosal and intranasal transmucosal. J Pain Symptom Manage. 1992; 7(3): 163-171.

Helmers JH, Noorduin H, Van Peer A, et al.: Comparison of intravenous and intranasal sufentanil absorption and sedation. Can J Anaesth. 1989; 36(5): 494-497.

Dayer P, Desmeules J, Collart L: [Pharmacology of tramadol]. Drugs. 1997; 53 Suppl 2: 18-24.

Raffa RB, Friderichs E, Reimann W, et al.: Opioid and nonopioid components independently contribute to the mechanism of action of tramadol, an “atypical” opioid analgesic. J PharmacolFxp Ther. 1992; 260(1): 275-285.

Bamigbade TA, Langford RM: The clinical use of tramadol hydrochloride. Pain Reviews. 1998; 5(3): 155-182.

Payne KA, Roelofse JA: Tramadol drops in children: Analgesic efficacy, lack of respiratory effects, and normal recovery times. Anesth Prog. 1999; 46(3): 91-96.