A randomized comparison of midazolam and diazepam for sedation in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy

V. C. Magni; R. A. Frost; Joseph Leung; P. B. Cotton

doi:10.1093/bja/55.11.1095

A randomized comparison of midazolam and diazepam for sedation in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy

V. C. Magni, R. A. Frost, Joseph Leung, P. B. Cotton

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

52 Scopus citations

Abstract

One hundred and eighty-five patients were allocated at random to receive pethidine with diazepam (in an emulsion), or pethidine with midazolam i.v. as sedation for upper gastrointestinal endpscopy. Sedation and conditions for examination were comparablè and satisfactory in both groups. Midazolam produced more amnmia (P= <0.001), and scored higher in patients' opinion (P= <0.001); it was associated with a slightly greater frequency of venous sequelae, but the difference in thrombophlebitis was not statistically significant. Recovery of sensory - motor performance, as assessed by Trieger test, was still incomplete 2 h after endoscopy with, both drug regimens.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	1095-1101
Number of pages	7
Journal	British Journal of Anaesthesia
Volume	55
Issue number	11
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/55.11.1095
State	Published - Nov 1983
Externally published	Yes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty
Applied Mathematics
Mathematics(all)
Statistics and Probability
Agricultural and Biological Sciences (miscellaneous)
Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Access to Document

10.1093/bja/55.11.1095

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'A randomized comparison of midazolam and diazepam for sedation in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this

@article{d5341c31c33e4dd28976b927c0c04bcb,

title = "A randomized comparison of midazolam and diazepam for sedation in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy",

abstract = "One hundred and eighty-five patients were allocated at random to receive pethidine with diazepam (in an emulsion), or pethidine with midazolam i.v. as sedation for upper gastrointestinal endpscopy. Sedation and conditions for examination were comparabl{\`e} and satisfactory in both groups. Midazolam produced more amnmia (P= <0.001), and scored higher in patients' opinion (P= <0.001); it was associated with a slightly greater frequency of venous sequelae, but the difference in thrombophlebitis was not statistically significant. Recovery of sensory - motor performance, as assessed by Trieger test, was still incomplete 2 h after endoscopy with, both drug regimens.",

author = "Magni, {V. C.} and Frost, {R. A.} and Joseph Leung and Cotton, {P. B.}",

year = "1983",

month = nov,

doi = "10.1093/bja/55.11.1095",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "55",

pages = "1095--1101",

journal = "British Journal of Anaesthesia",

issn = "0007-0912",

publisher = "Oxford University Press",

number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A randomized comparison of midazolam and diazepam for sedation in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy

AU - Magni, V. C.

AU - Frost, R. A.

AU - Leung, Joseph

AU - Cotton, P. B.

PY - 1983/11

Y1 - 1983/11

N2 - One hundred and eighty-five patients were allocated at random to receive pethidine with diazepam (in an emulsion), or pethidine with midazolam i.v. as sedation for upper gastrointestinal endpscopy. Sedation and conditions for examination were comparablè and satisfactory in both groups. Midazolam produced more amnmia (P= <0.001), and scored higher in patients' opinion (P= <0.001); it was associated with a slightly greater frequency of venous sequelae, but the difference in thrombophlebitis was not statistically significant. Recovery of sensory - motor performance, as assessed by Trieger test, was still incomplete 2 h after endoscopy with, both drug regimens.

AB - One hundred and eighty-five patients were allocated at random to receive pethidine with diazepam (in an emulsion), or pethidine with midazolam i.v. as sedation for upper gastrointestinal endpscopy. Sedation and conditions for examination were comparablè and satisfactory in both groups. Midazolam produced more amnmia (P= <0.001), and scored higher in patients' opinion (P= <0.001); it was associated with a slightly greater frequency of venous sequelae, but the difference in thrombophlebitis was not statistically significant. Recovery of sensory - motor performance, as assessed by Trieger test, was still incomplete 2 h after endoscopy with, both drug regimens.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0021062937&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0021062937&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/bja/55.11.1095

DO - 10.1093/bja/55.11.1095

M3 - Article

C2 - 6139120

AN - SCOPUS:0021062937

VL - 55

SP - 1095

EP - 1101

JO - British Journal of Anaesthesia

JF - British Journal of Anaesthesia

SN - 0007-0912

IS - 11

ER -

A randomized comparison of midazolam and diazepam for sedation in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy

Abstract

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Cite this