4.5 Article

The Effects of Remifentanil and Fentanyl on Emergence Agitation in Pediatric Strabismus Surgery

期刊

CHILDREN-BASEL
卷 9, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/children9050606

关键词

emergence agitation; sevoflurane; remifentanil; fentanyl; anesthesia

资金

  1. Yeungnam University [220A380166]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The effects of remifentanil and fentanyl on the incidence of emergence agitation (EA) in pediatric patients undergoing strabismus surgery were investigated. The study found that there was no significant difference in the incidence of EA when fentanyl was administered during anesthetic induction and remifentanil was continuously infused during surgery in these pediatric patients.
Emergence agitation (EA) is one of the main concerns in the field of pediatric anesthesia using sevoflurane. We investigated the effects of remifentanil and fentanyl on the incidence of EA in pediatric patients undergoing strabismus surgery. Ninety children were randomly allocated into two groups and received either remifentanil (group R: intraoperatively remifentanil 0.2 mu g/kg/min) or fentanyl (group F: fentanyl 2 mu g/kg at anesthetic induction) intraoperatively. After surgery, EA incidence was assessed using a four-point agitation scale and Pediatric Anesthesia Emergence Delirium (PAED) scale in the post-anesthesia care unit. Face, leg, activity, cry, and consolability (FLACC) scores for postoperative pain were also assessed. The incidence of EA using the four-point agitation scale (scores >= 3) was similar in both groups (remifentanil group, 28.89% vs. fentanyl group, 24.44%). Similar results were obtained using the PAED scale (scores > 12), with an incidence of 33.33% in the remifentanil group and 26.67% in the fentanyl group. Differences in FLACC scores were not found to be statistically significant. A single bolus administration of fentanyl during anesthetic induction and continuous infusion of remifentanil during surgery had similar effects on the EA incidence in these pediatric patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据