The use of midazolam versus propofol for short-term sedation following coronary artery bypass grafting

76Citations
Citations of this article
32Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Midazolam and propofol were compared in an open randomized study for postoperative sedation during 12 h of mechanical ventilation in 40 patients following coronary artery bypass grafting. After an intravenous loading dose of midazolam (50 μg · kg-1) or propofol (500 μg · kg-1), a titrated continuous infusion was administered of midazolam (mean dose 38.1 μg · kg-1 · h-1 (SEM 2.6)) or propofol (mean dose 909 μg · kg-1 · h-1 (SEM 100)) together with a narcotic analgesic infusion. During mechanical ventilation midazolam and propofol produced a similar quality of sedation, but recovery (midazolam 66 min (SEM 16); propofol 24 min (SEM 7)) and weaning from the ventilator (midazolam 243 min (SEM 44); propofol 154 min (SEM 33)) where faster with propofol. In the 2 groups administration of an intravenous loading dose caused a significant decrease in mean arterial pressure but hemodynamic tolerance during maintenance infusion was good. © 1990 Springer-Verlag.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Snellen, F., Lauwers, P., Derneyere, R., Byttebier, G., & Van Aken, H. (1990). The use of midazolam versus propofol for short-term sedation following coronary artery bypass grafting. Intensive Care Medicine, 16(5), 312–316. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01706356

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free