midazolam

Pediatric dentists employ both pharmacological and non-pharmacological behavior control methods. Despite the use of behavioral control techniques, some young children cannot undergo treatment in the office, making sedation or general anesthesia necessary. Premedication drugs can be used before general anesthesia to reduce anxiety, control pain, induce amnesia, prevent nausea, and avert potential complications. The search for the ideal premedication for children is ongoing.

This study aims to compare the effects of pregabalin and midazolam (MID) in children undergoing dental treatment under general anesthesia.

This prospective, triple-blind study included 64 children aged 2 - 6 years who required dental treatment under general anesthesia. Participants who met the inclusion criteria were enrolled. One group of children received pregabalin syrup, while the other group received MID syrup. The comfort of the child during separation from the parents, ease of venous access, and degree of sedation upon entering the operating room were evaluated. Blood pressure, heart rate, and blood oxygen levels were measured at baseline and every 30 minutes thereafter. Additionally, the duration of the patient's stay in recovery until discharge was recorded and compared between the two groups. Statistical analyses were performed using chi-square, Mann-Whitney U, Fisher's exact test, and SPSS version 14 software.

No statistically significant differences were found between premedication with MID and pregabalin in terms of anxiety during venous access, parental separation anxiety, restlessness in recovery, duration of recovery stay, or changes in heart rate, blood pressure, and blood oxygen levels between the two groups. However, a statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups regarding the degree of sedation before entering the operating room.

Both pregabalin and MID were effective for premedication in terms of sedation and anxiety reduction, with no significant difference between the two drugs in these outcomes.

The use of opioids for pain relief after cesarean section (C/S) can result in adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. Therefore, it is important to consider non-opioid analgesics as an alternative. This study examined the effect of intravenous ketamine on analgesic requirement after spinal anesthesia in C/S.

This double-blind randomized clinical trial 80 pregnant women under spinal anesthesia during a planned C/S were recruited from trainig hospitals of Mashhad, Iran between February and August 2022. The participants were selected using convenience sampling and assigned to two intervention (40) and control (40) groups through random allocation. The intervention group received intravenous ketamine (0.5 mg/kg) and midazolam (0.02 mg/kg) immediately after umbilical cord clamping, while the control group received midazolam alone (0.02 mg/kg). Pain scores were recorded at the 0th, 6th, 12th, and 24th hours after elective C/S using the Visual Analog Score (VAS), along with the amount of requiremen to analgesics. Data analysis was performed by SPSS software (version 16) using Chi-square, T-test and repeated measure ANOVA test.

A significant difference in pain scores between the two groups at different hours and over time (P=0.009). The intervention group reported significantly lower levels of pain than the control group (P=0.002) and a significantly lower need for painkillers during the first hour (P=0.04).

Administration of intravenous ketamine in elective C/S with spinal anesthesia in the first hour has a significant effect on reducing pain. Therefore, it can be considered the drug of choice for alleviating pain.

Vital parameters must be monitored during sedation. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of ketamine-midazolam (KM) and ketamine-propofol (KP) combinations on the heart rate (HR) and oxygen saturation (SPO2) of non-cooperative children. The model parameters were estimated using the Bayesian approach. The data were collected in a double-masked crossover study with repeated measurements (CSWRM). Twenty-two non-cooperative children 3–6 years old were included, and the linear mixed model was adopted for data analysis. The Bayesian estimation of the parameters and their 95% credible interval were calculated in SAS 9.4. The mean heart rate of KM recipients compared to KP recipients was significantly different by 4.47 beats per minute (bpm). The mean HR in KP was lower than KM's, but oxygen saturation (SPO2) was not significantly different. Although the two drug combinations did not differ in SPO2, they differed in HR. As such, the KP combination is recommended.

Midazolam and ketamine, either alone or in combination, are safe and effective in intranasal application among dental sedation routes. 

This randomized clinical trial compares higher and lower-dose intranasal ketamine/midazolam cocktails in pediatric dentistry. 

This double-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted on 20 uncooperative children aged 3-6 years with a definitely negative Frankel scale. The participants were divided into two groups. Group A received 0.4 mg/kg midazolam and 4 mg/kg ketamine nasally 20 min before initiating dental treatment in the first session while receiving 0.5 mg/kg midazolam/ 3 mg/kg ketamine in the second session. Meanwhile, group B received the opposite drug sequence to assess any sequence effect. Dental treatment was initiated with local anesthesia administration. The sedation score was recorded using the Houpt scale. Vital signs were recorded at every 10-min intervals along with potential side effects. The data were analyzed using variance analysis and Wilcoxon and McNemar tests.

No significant differences were noted in vital signs between groups at recording intervals (anesthetic injecting [P=0.719], 10 min [P=0.317] and 20 min [P=0.480]). No reports were received on post-treatment nausea (P=0.289). 

There was no indication of a significant difference between groups tested with different drug doses, in support of lower ketamine dose as an effective yet safer approach to treat children. The parents were satisfied with their child’s calmness through both episodes of treatment.

Preoperative anxiety in children is a common problem that can affect the anesthesia and postoperative period. Numerous methods, mainly pharmacological ones, have been used for controlling preoperative stress. Acupressure is a simple, noninvasive, and cost-effective method that has been used as a perioperative medicine for controlling pain or preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting. The present study aimed to comparatively investigate the effect of acupressure and oral midazolam on preoperative anxiety control.

76 patients were randomly included in the study before surgery. Whereas in one group, 0.5 mg/kg oral midazolam was prescribed 15 minutes before the induction, in another group, acupressure of EXHN-3 point was applied for 15 minutes. In both groups, the patients’ separation anxiety level, Ramsay score, recovery length, and RN satisfaction factor were recorded and compared.

Children aged 1–7 years received either oral midazolam or acupressure. Although the children in the midazolam group had lower rates of preoperative anxiety and showed easier separation from their parents, the difference was not statistically significant P= (0.076). Ramsay sedation scale, was compared in the two groups. The overall difference was not statistically significant. The satisfaction of the PACU nurse was recorded using a 4-point scale. The two groups were statistically comparable in this regard (P=0.155). The only variable with a significant difference between the two groups was the mean recovery time, which was significantly shorter in acupressure group (P<0.001).

Acupressure can reduce preoperative anxiety in children; however, this effect is less than the effect of oral midazolam.

Hemodynamic disorders during anesthesia lead to complications. To reduce hemodynamic complications, this study was conducted to compare midazolam, etomidate, and propofol following anesthesia induction in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting surgery (CABG).

A double-blind, randomized clinical trial was conducted involving 90 patients with coronary artery disease. These patients were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups receiving propofol, etomidate, or midazolam. Hemodynamic variables, including systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial blood pressure (MABP), and heart rate (HR), were measured at baseline, before intubation, and 1 and 5 minutes after intubation.

Ninety patients with coronary artery disease (mean age: 60.83 y) were included in the study. Women and men comprised 74.4% and 25.6% of the study population. HR, SBP, DBP, and MABP exhibited significant decreases in all 3 groups after intubation. The etomidate group demonstrated the least change in SBP (P<0.001) and MABP (P<0.001), followed by the midazolam group. Concerning HR, the least change was observed in the midazolam group, followed by the propofol group (P=0.688). After intubation, blood pressure increased almost equally in the etomidate and midazolam groups compared with the levels during intubation. In contrast, the propofol group exhibited a downward trend in blood pressure during intubation, a significant difference across all 3 groups (P<0.001).

This study, conducted on candidates for CABG, demonstrated that anesthesia induction with etomidate and midazolam resulted in less variation in hemodynamic variables compared with propofol.

 Laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation lead to an increased sympathetic reflex response, which is associated with increased heart rate and blood pressure. This response can be detrimental in patients with myocardial ischemia. This study aimed to investigate the effects of etomidate in comparison to a combination of midazolam and sodium thiopental in reducing the sympathetic response to laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation.

 This double-blind, randomized clinical trial study was conducted on two groups of 39 candidates for elective surgery under general anesthesia. Anesthesia was induced by etomidate (E) 0.3 mg/kg in the first group and sodium thiopental 2.5 mg/kg and midazolam 0.075 mg/kg in the second group (TM); then, the patients were intubated. Laryngoscopy findings and cardiovascular response were evaluated during the study. Finally, the data were analyzed using SPSS version 23 (IBM SPSS, Armonk, NY, USA).

 There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of age (P = 0.82), weight (P = 0.42), height (P = 0.201), body mass index (P = 0.78), gender (P = 0.65), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status (P = 0.36), and laryngoscopy view grading (P = 0.83). The average laryngoscopy time in the E group was less than the TM group (P = 0.019). In the TM group, at 10 minutes after intubation, mean diastolic blood pressure (P = 0.029) and mean arterial blood pressure (P = 0.023) were significantly lower; however, at other times, there was no significant difference between the two groups (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of adverse responses to laryngoscopy and intubation (P = 0.19).

 The results of the present study showed that etomidate (E) and a combination of midazolam-sodium thiopental (TM) acted similarly in attenuating the cardiovascular response to laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation, and it seems that TM can be used instead of E if needed.

Behavioral problems in children contribute significantly to non-compliance and lack of cooperation with dentists.This study aimed to assess the impact of parenting styles on the success of conscious sedation with midazolam in uncooperative children aged 4 to 6 years.  

This short-term longitudinal study included ninety-six children aged 4-6 years who were classified as uncooperative according to the Frankl Behavior Rating Scale (Frankl I, II), requiring pulp treatment and Stainless-Steel Crown (SSC) restoration. Midazolam was orally administered at 0.25 mg/kg. Parents completed the Parental Stress Dental Questionnaire (PSDQ), Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ), and Children's Fear Survey Schedule-Dental Subscale (CFSS-DS). Treatment began at least thirty minutes post-drug administration. Vital signs were monitored using a pulse oximeter. Sedation effectiveness was assessed with the Houpt scale at local anesthesia injection (T0), cavity preparation (T1), restoration (T2), and treatment conclusion (T3). Statistical analysis used Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests (P < 0.05).  

Most parents (69, 71.9%) had an authoritative parenting style, while 10 (10.4%) were authoritarian, and 17 (17.7%) were permissive. Authoritative parenting is associated significantly with sedation success (P = 0.001) and reduced dental fear (P = 0.008). Conversely, authoritarian (P = 0.031) and permissive (P = 0.001) parenting styles are associated with sedation failure. Authoritarian parenting is associated positively with increased dental fear (P = 0.001). No significant association was found between permissive parenting style and dental fear (P > 0.05). No significant association existed between behavioral problems and parenting styles (P > 0.05). There was no significant association observed between permissive parenting style and dental fear (P = 0.279). Similarly, no significant associations were found between behavioral problems and specific parenting styles: authoritative (P = 0.625), authoritarian (P = 0.050), and permissive (P = 0.522).  

Understanding parenting styles aids in predicting conscious sedation success with midazolam and assisting in managing uncooperative children during dental procedures.

Caesarean section (CS) is a common procedure, and spinal anesthesia is a safe method for inducing anesthesia during this procedure. The disadvantages of this technique are intraoperative pain sensation, the patient’s fear of injection, and remembering surgery.

The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of intravenous midazolam with intravenous dexmedetomidine on sedation and duration of spinal anesthesia during CS.

In this study, 70 parturients with ASA II were randomly divided into two groups of 35. All parturients underwent spinal anesthesia. One of the groups (i.e., group D) received intravenous dexmedetomidine, and for the other group (i.e., group M), midazolam was injected intravenously. The parturients were compared in terms of the pain score measured by visual pain scoring (VAS), duration of anesthesia, sedation, and hemodynamic stability.

The mean pain score in groupMwas significantly higher than in group D (P < 0.001). The time to the first rescue analgesia was significantly higher in group D than in groupM(P < 0.001). Also, the dose of the analgesic used in the postoperative period was significantly lower in group D (P < 0.001). No significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of sedation and hemodynamic status.

The use of dexmedetomidine in comparison with midazolam resulted in longer bupivacaine-induced spinal anesthesia and duration of analgesia during and after CS, suggesting this method as an appropriate strategy for establishing an appropriate level of intraoperative sedation in parturients undergoing CS. Neither dexmedetomidine nor midazolam caused significant hemodynamic changes.

Post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) is a common side effect after spinal anesthesia.

This study aimed to compare the sedative dose of propofol and midazolam in reducing headaches after spinal anesthesia.

In order to conduct this study, 80 candidates for spinal anesthesia were divided into two groups, A and B. Both groups received spinal anesthesia with marcaine. In group A, propofol was infused slowly at a dose of 30 g per minute, and in group B, 1 mg midazolam was injected intravenously. In the two groups, the incidence and intensity of headaches were measured using the VAS pain scale. Data were analyzed using Mann-Whitney and t-tests at a significance level of 0.05.

In this study, 65% (52) were male and 35% (28) were female. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of demographic information (P > 0.05). In the propofol group, the incidence and severity of headaches were significantly lower than in the midazolam group (P < 0.01).

This study’s results indicated that administering low-dose propofol as a sedative during spinal anesthesia may be more effective in reducing PDPH than midazolam.

Patients with hepatic cirrhosis are frequently screened for the complications of portal vein hypertension using upper endoscopy. The current study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of midazolam and propofol for sedation in patients with cirrhosis undergoing upper endoscopy.

This single-blind randomized clinical trial included 60 cirrhotic patients aged 18-80 years referred to Shahid Mohammadi hospital, Bandar Abbas, Iran from May 22, 2019, to May 21, 2020, for upper endoscopy. The age, gender, weight, and height of the patients were recorded, and they were randomized into two groups. Patients in the midazolam group (n = 30) received 0.05 mg/kg midazolam for induction which continued with a 1 μg/kg/min dose, and those in the propofol group received 1 mg/kg propofol which continued with a 25-75 μg/kg/min dose. Blood pressure, oxygen saturation (SpO2), respiratory rate (RR), and heart rate (HR) were measured before induction, immediately, 1, and 5 minutes after induction, and in the recovery unit. Finally, the time to reach the target sedation (Ramsay sedation scale ≥ 5), sedation duration, and recovery time were noted as well.

Patients in both groups were comparable regarding age, gender, weight, and height. There were no significant differences between groups regarding hemodynamic parameters at any given time point, except for RR 1 minute after induction, which was significantly higher in the propofol group (P = 0.012). Changes in HR from baseline to recovery were significant in both groups. Moreover, changes in SpO2 from baseline to recovery were only significant in the midazolam group (P < 0.001). The time to reach the target sedation and sedation duration were significantly lower in the propofol group (P < 0.001 and P = 0.003, respectively); however, there was no significant difference between groups with regard to the recovery time. Grade II encephalopathy (West Haven criteria) developed in one patient in the midazolam group.

Based on the results of the current study, although propofol was superior to midazolam for upper endoscopy in cirrhotic patients with respect to the time to reach the target sedation and sedation duration, the two drugs were rather comparable in terms of hemodynamic stability. However, hepatic encephalopathy with midazolam remains a major concern.

Fear and anxiety before entering the operating room are significant issues in pediatric anesthesia. Given that the venipuncture process is accompanied by separation anxiety, and the ease of use of intranasal premedication versus intravenous, rectal, or intramuscular methods, and considering the risk of aspiration during oral delivery in children, the purpose of this study was to compare and contrast the anti-anxiety and sedation effects of intranasal midazolam and intranasal ketamine as a premedication in pediatric hernia repair surgery.

This was a double-blind randomized clinical trial involving 36 participants aged 1 to 6 years who underwent hernia repair surgery in Bu Ali Hospital between 2020 and 2021. The child was transferred to the operating room after 30 minutes of evaluating the effects of the drug and recording the related data. In the operating room, data from an electrocardiogram device, arterial oxygen saturation level, and blood pressure were all checked. At 5 minute intervals, the patient's hemodynamics were checked and recorded. The time from the beginning to the end of anesthesia was recorded.

This study included 36 patients (18 in each group). The average age and weight of the patients were 37.71 ± 21.73 months (range = 1-72 months) and 14.60 ± 4.26 kg (range = 6.5-25 kg), respectively. Independent t-tests showed no significant difference between the two groups. Heart rate and blood pressure were measured in two groups (ketamine and Midazolam) but no significant difference was observed among the three stages (before premedication, before anesthesia, and after intubation) (P>0.05). The relationship between qualitative outcomes was analyzed using Chi-square test but no significant difference was observed.

the current study showed that there is no statistically significant difference between intranasal ketamine and midazolam in terms of effectiveness and side effects.

Patientsmayexperience anxiety, discomfort, and pain during endoscopy, which cannot be tolerated without sedative drugs.

This study aimed to compare the sedative effects of dexmedetomidine and midazolam on patients undergoing endosonography outside the operating room.

This randomized, double-blind clinical trial was conducted on 126 patients aged 18 - 65 years old with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I - II undergoing elective endosonography. Patients were randomly divided into 2 groups. The dexmedetomidine group received dexmedetomidine (1 g/kg) for 25 minutes with propofol (0.5 mg/kg) and fentanyl (1 g/kg) at the start of the procedure. The midazolam group received midazolam (0.03 mg/kg) with propofol (0.5 mg/kg) and fentanyl (1 g/kg). Heart rate, mean arterial pressure (MAP), and oxygen saturation (SpO2) were recorded before and 5, 10, and 15 minutes after starting the procedure. The Ramsay Sedation Scale (RSS) and the need for an additional dose of propofol were recorded during the procedure. The Numeric Pain Rating scale (Ambesh score) scores were recorded at the beginning, immediately after, and 1 hour after the procedure. Nausea and vomiting were assessed using the Visual Analogue Scale in cooperation with the patient.

The dexmedetomidine group had significantly higher SpO2 and RSS scores during sedation than the midazolam group (P = 0.02). Overall, specialist satisfaction was higher in the dexmedetomidine group than in the midazolam group. There was no clinically significant difference in pain score and nausea and vomiting frequencies between the 2 groups.

Dexmedetomidine is more effective than midazolam for sedation during gastrointestinal endosonography.

Despite the high acceptability of the extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) procedure in the treatment of urinary stones at all ages, it is necessary to use a variety of analgesic drugs during the procedure, especially among children.

We aimed to evaluate the effect of dexmedetomidine-ketamine (DK) and midazolam-ketamine (MK) compounds in the sedation of children (2-6 years old) undergoing ESWL.

This randomized, double-blind clinical trial was performed on children aged 2 to 6 years with renal stones undergoing ESWL. The participants were randomly assigned to the DK and MK regimen groups (dexmedetomidine, 0.05 mcg/kg within 10 minutes infusion; midazolam, 0.05 mg/kg within 3 minutes infusion; ketamine, 0.5 mg/kg bolus injection). The patients were assessed with respect to sedation degree, post-procedure hemodynamic status, recovery time and awakening, and operator satisfaction.

Recovery time was significantly shorter in the DK group than in the MK group. Also, the DK regimen was more analgesic than the MK regimen; therefore, the need to repeat ketamine administration was less. There was no difference between the 2 methods in terms of cooperation at the time of separation of children from their parents, patient cooperation during the procedure, average verbal response time and average cooperation time after entering recovery, and operator satisfaction with the operation. No side effects were observed in the 2 groups.

Ketamine with dexmedetomidine is associated with greater analgesia and shorter recovery time; however, sedation time was longer (insignificant) in ketamine with midazolam than in ketamine with dexmedetomidine. Thus, ketamine with dexmedetomidine is more preferred.

Several supplementary approaches have been used to increase the patient’s comfort during phacoemulsification under topical anesthesia.

This study aimed to compare the effects of lidocaine/paracetamol (LP) and midazolam/fentanyl (MF) administration on pain intensity and hemodynamic changes in patients undergoing cataract surgery using phacoemulsification.

This study was designed and implemented as a pilot randomized double-blinded clinical trial. A total number of 80 patients with cataracts scheduled for phacoemulsification were randomly assigned to two groups (40 subjects in each group) to receive lidocaine at a dose of 1.5 mg/kg and then infused with 1 g of paracetamol in 100 cc of normal saline (LP group) or midazolam 0.2 mg/kg and fentanyl 1.5 µg/kg (MF group). Hemodynamic parameters and sedation scores were measured before, 5, and 15 minutes after surgery, and then during recovery. Furthermore, pain (VAS), patient-surgeon satisfaction, propofol, and opioid consumption were all assessed.

The sedation scores during recovery in the LP group were significantly lower (P= 0.04) than those in the MF group. Respiratory depression was also significantly lower (P<0.001) in the LP group compared to that infused by MF. According to other findings, no significant difference was observed between both study groups.

The use of lidocaine-paracetamol as a supplementary approach for patients undergoing cataract surgery under topical anesthesia can cause better sedation scores with lower respiratory depression compared to the use of midazolam-fentanyl.