Comparison of diazepam and flunitrazepam for sedation during local anaesthesia for bronchoscopy.
Diazepam and flunitrazepam were compared as amnesic and sedative adjuncts to local anaesthesia for diagnostic bronchoscopy in 92 patients. After local anaesthesia of the pharynx, larynx and trachea with lignocaine, atropine plus diazepam of flunitrazepam was injected i.v. The co-operation of the patients and the technical circumstances under which the bronchoscopy was performed were good in each group. None of the treatments significantly modified arterial pressure or heart rate. Two hours after the injection, flunitrazepam 0.01 mg kg-1 more frequently caused amnesia for pictures shown to the patients during the first 15 min after injection (failure to recall 42--75%, and for bronchoscopy 67%), than did diazepam 0.125 mg kg-1 (failure to recall 21--67%; bronchoscopy 38%). Double doses of the drugs caused amnesic actions similar to those of flunitrazepam 0.01 mg kg-1. When failure to recall was assessed on the following day, 29% and 5% of the patients remembered bronchoscopy after flunitrazepam 0.01 and 0.02 mg kg-1 respectively; after diazepam 0.125 and 0.25 mg kg-1 the corresponding percentages was 59% and 30% (P less than 0.05% v. fluintrazepam). The ability to stand and walk on a stright line was similar after the smaller doses of both drugs, but after the larger doses recovery was slower after flunitrazepam. Psychomotor performance was still distinctly impaired 2 h after the injection of the larger doses.
Comparison of diazepam and flunitrazepam for sedation during local anaesthesia for bronchoscopy. Diazepam and flunitrazepam were compared as amnesic and sedative adjuncts to local anaesthesia for diagnostic bronchoscopy in 92 patients. After local anaesthesia of the pharynx, larynx and trachea with lignocaine, atropine plus diazepam of flunitrazepam was injected i.v. The co-operation of the patients and the technical circumstances under which the bronchoscopy was performed were good in each group. None of the treatments significantly modified arterial pressure or heart rate. Two hours after the injection, flunitrazepam 0.01 mg kg-1 more frequently caused amnesia for pictures shown to the patients during the first 15 min after injection (failure to recall 42--75%, and for bronchoscopy 67%), than did diazepam 0.125 mg kg-1 (failure to recall 21--67%; bronchoscopy 38%). Double doses of the drugs caused amnesic actions similar to those of flunitrazepam 0.01 mg kg-1. When failure to recall was assessed on the following day, 29% and 5% of the patients remembered bronchoscopy after flunitrazepam 0.01 and 0.02 mg kg-1 respectively; after diazepam 0.125 and 0.25 mg kg-1 the corresponding percentages was 59% and 30% (P less than 0.05% v. fluintrazepam). The ability to stand and walk on a stright line was similar after the smaller doses of both drugs, but after the larger doses recovery was slower after flunitrazepam. Psychomotor performance was still distinctly impaired 2 h after the injection of the larger doses.