Rk. Moscona et al., A COMPARISON OF SEDATION TECHNIQUES FOR OUTPATIENT RHINOPLASTY - MIDAZOLAM VERSUS MIDAZOLAM PLUS KETAMINE, Plastic and reconstructive surgery, 96(5), 1995, pp. 1066-1074
A total of 859 patients presenting for outpatient rhinoplasty were div
ided into two groups that received intravenous sedation of midazolam 0
.1 mg/kg either with or without ketamine 0.4 to 0.5 mg/kg immediately
prior to conduct of the local anesthetic injections and surgery. Addit
ional midazolam was given intraoperatively as needed. No patient recei
ved narcotic either as premedication or intraoperatively. Patients wer
e evaluated by the surgeon on their response to the injections and sur
gery, and patients were given a questionnaire 1 week postoperatively t
o examine their response to and recall of the procedure. Scoring by bo
th the surgeon and patients revealed that b the great majority of pati
ents in both groups had adequate ''sedation.'' Patients from both grou
ps related a high degree of satisfaction (>90 percent) with the techni
que of sedation. The differences between the two study groups achieved
statistical significance only on 4 of the 12 parameters investigated.
Those who had received only midazolam were less likely to Vocalize du
ring the surgery or to experience the procedure as being of undue dura
tion. Those who had also received ketamine had a lesser chance of reme
mbering the local anesthetic injections (11.1 versus 19.8 percent) and
a lesser likelihood of being dissatisfied with their surgical experie
nce (3.3 versus 7.4 percent) In conclusion, the use of an opioid-free
sedative technique of intravenous midazolam was highly successful in m
eeting the needs of both patients and surgeons. The addition of a sing
le preblock dose of intravenous ketamine to intravenous midazolam seda
tion for rhinoplasty does not improve intraoperative conditions for th
e surgeon in terms of patient behavior. Neither does it improve the pa
tients' experience of the surgery itself. It does, however, roughly ha
lve the number of patients remembering the local anesthetic injection
and those expressing dissatisfaction with the overall experience of rh
inoplasty surgery.