Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow E-Letters: Submit a response to the article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fujii, Y.
Right arrow Articles by Toyooka, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fujii, Y.
Right arrow Articles by Toyooka, H.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

British Journal of Anaesthesia, 2001, Vol. 86, No. 6 879-881
© 2001 The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia

Midazolam versus propofol for reducing contractility of fatigued canine diaphragm

Y. Fujii and H. Toyooka

Department of Anaesthesiology, University of Tsukuba Institute of Clinical Medicine, 2-1-1 Amakubo, Tsukuba City, Ibaraki, Japan*Corresponding author

The effects of midazolam and propofol on the contractility of fatigued canine diaphragm were examined. Diaphragmatic fatigue was induced by intermittent supramaximal bilateral electrophrenic stimulation at a frequency of 20 Hz applied for 30 min. After fatigue had been induced, group I (n=10) received no study drug, group II (n=10) was given a propofol infusion (0.1 mg kg–1 loading dose plus 1.5 mg kg–1 h–1 maintenance dose) and group III (n=10) was given a midazolam infusion (0.1 mg kg–1 loading dose plus 0.1 mg kg–1 h–1 maintenance dose). Diaphragmatic contractility was assessed by measuring transdiaphragmatic pressure (Pdi). After the fatigue-inducing period in each group, Pdi at low-frequency (20 Hz) stimulation was lower than the baseline values (P<0.05), whereas no change in Pdi at high-frequency (100 Hz) stimulation was observed. In group II, Pdi at 20 Hz stimulation was lower than fatigued values (P<0.05); Pdi at 100 Hz stimulation did not change. In group III, Pdi at both stimulation frequencies was lower than fatigued values (P<0.05). Compared with group I, Pdi at 20 Hz stimulation was lower than fatigued values (P<0.05) during administration of the study drug in groups II and III. The decrease in Pdi was greater in group III than in group II (P<0.05). In conclusion, midazolam compared with propofol is associated with an inhibitory effect on contractility in the fatigued canine diaphragm.

Br J Anaesth 2001; 86: 879–81


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
X.-J. Zhang, G. Yu, X.-H. Wen, Z.-C. Lin, F.-Q. Yang, Z.-G. Zheng, R.-C. Chen, and N.-S. Zhong
Effect of propofol on twitch diaphragmatic pressure evoked by cervical magnetic stimulation in patients
Br. J. Anaesth., January 1, 2009; 102(1): 61 - 64.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
K. Nishina, K. Mikawa, S.-i. Kodama, T. Kagawa, T. Uesugi, and H. Obara
The Effects of Enflurane, Isoflurane, and Intravenous Anesthetics on Rat Diaphragmatic Function and Fatigability
Anesth. Analg., June 1, 2003; 96(6): 1674 - 1678.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.