Oral midazolam vs. intranasal dexmedetomidine plus oral midazolam for sedation of pediatric outpatients: a double-blinded randomized controlled trial

被引:3
|
作者
Nie, Juan [1 ,2 ]
Chen, Chanchan [1 ]
Xie, Jing [1 ]
Ding, Guicong [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] China Med Univ, Shenzhen Childrens Hosp, Shenzhen 518026, Peoples R China
[2] Sichuan Hosp Stomatol, Dept Pediat Dent, Chengdu 61000, Peoples R China
[3] China Med Univ, Shenzhen Childrens Hosp, Dept Stomatol, Yitian Rd 7019, Shenzhen 518000, Peoples R China
关键词
Dental anxiety; Midazolam; Dexmedetomidine; Sedation; Pediatric dentistry; PROCEDURAL SEDATION; PREMEDICATION; CHILDREN; FEAR;
D O I
10.1186/s12871-023-02289-5
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
BackgroundModerate to deep sedation is required for dental treatment of children with dental anxiety. Midazolam is the most commonly used sedative, whereas intranasal dexmedetomidine is increasingly used in pediatric sedation.ObjectiveThe aim of this trial was to compare the sedative efficacy of oral midazolam alone with that of intranasal dexmedetomidine plus oral midazolam during dental treatment of children with dental anxiety.DesignIn total, 83 children (aged 3-12 years) scheduled to undergo dental sedation were randomized to receive oral midazolam (0.5 mg/kg) and intranasal placebo, or oral midazolam (0.5 mg/kg) plus intranasal dexmedetomidine (2 mu g/kg). The primary outcome was the rate of successful sedation for dental treatment. Secondary outcomes were the onset time and adverse events during and after treatment. Data analyses involved descriptive statistics and nonparametric tests.ResultsThe rate of successful sedation was significantly higher in combination group (P = 0.007), although the sedation onset time was significantly longer in combination group (17.5 +/- 2.4 min) than in monotherapy group (15.7 +/- 1.8) (P = 0.003). No children required medical intervention or oxygen therapy for hemodynamic disturbances, and the incidences of adverse events had no significant difference between groups (P = 0.660).ConclusionCombined treatment with oral midazolam (0.5 mg/kg) and intranasal dexmedetomidine (2 mu g/kg) is more significantly effective for managing the behavior of non-cooperative children during dental treatment, compared to oral midazolam (0.5 mg/kg) alone. (Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2100042300)Trial registrationChiCTR2100042300, Clinical trial first registration date: 17/01/2021.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Comparison of oral midazolam with intranasal dexmedetomidine premedication for children undergoing CT imaging: a randomized, double-blind, and controlled study
    Ghai, Babita
    Jain, Kajal
    Saxena, Akshay Kumar
    Bhatia, Nidhi
    Sodhi, Kushaljit Singh
    PEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA, 2017, 27 (01) : 37 - 44
  • [42] Intranasal midazolam alone versus midazolam/ketamine combination for preoperative sedation in pediatric patients undergoing ophthalmic procedures: a randomized controlled trial
    Osama, Noha A.
    Mahmoud, Sara R.
    Salem, Abeer S.
    Tawfik, Dalia S.
    AIN SHAMS JOURNAL OF ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2022, 14 (01)
  • [43] Intranasal midazolam alone versus midazolam/ketamine combination for preoperative sedation in pediatric patients undergoing ophthalmic procedures: a randomized controlled trial
    Noha A. Osama
    Sara R. Mahmoud
    Abeer S. Salem
    Dalia S. Tawfik
    Ain-Shams Journal of Anesthesiology, 14
  • [44] A randomized controlled double blind trial of patient-controlled sedation for colonoscopy with propofol/remifentanil vs. midazolam/fentanyl
    Mandel, Jeff E.
    Tanner, Jonathan
    Lichtenstein, Gary R.
    Metz, David C.
    Katzka, David A.
    Ginsberg, Gregory
    Kochman, Michael L.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2006, 101 (09): : S520 - S521
  • [45] Combined sedation in pediatric magnetic resonance imaging: determination of median effective dose of intranasal dexmedetomidine combined with oral midazolam
    Xie, Hao
    Zhao, Jialian
    Tu, Haiya
    Wang, Wenyang
    Hu, Yaoqin
    BMC ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2024, 24 (01)
  • [46] Double-blind Randomized Controlled Trial of Intranasal Dexmedetomidine Versus Intranasal Midazolam as Anxiolysis Prior to Pediatric Laceration Repair in the Emergency Department
    Neville, Desiree N. W.
    Hayes, Katharina R.
    Ivan, Yaron
    McDowell, Erin R.
    Pitetti, Raymond D.
    ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2016, 23 (08) : 910 - 917
  • [47] Procedural sedation in children for fractionated radiation treatment: Intranasal dexmedetomidine versus oral midazolam and ketamine
    Das, Rekha
    Das, Rajat
    Jena, Manoranjan
    Janka, Janaki
    Mishra, Sunita
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2022, 66 (10) : 687 - 693
  • [48] Combined sedation in pediatric magnetic resonance imaging: determination of median effective dose of intranasal dexmedetomidine combined with oral midazolam
    Hao Xie
    Jialian Zhao
    Haiya Tu
    Wenyang Wang
    Yaoqin Hu
    BMC Anesthesiology, 24
  • [49] Perioperative effects of oral midazolam premedication in children undergoing skin laser treatment. A double-blinded randomized placebo-controlled trial
    Shoroghi, Mehrdad
    Arbabi, Shahriyar
    Farahbakhsh, Farshid
    Sheikhvatan, Mehrdad
    Abbasi, Ali
    ACTA CIRURGICA BRASILEIRA, 2011, 26 (04) : 303 - 309
  • [50] Third time's a charm: Oral midazolam vs intranasal dexmedetomidine for preoperative anxiolysis in an autistic pediatric patient
    Stuker, E. Wesley
    Eskander, Jonathan P.
    Gennuso, Sonja A.
    PEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA, 2018, 28 (04) : 370 - 371