Intranasal Fentanyl Combined with Oral Midazolam for Pediatric Dental Sedation: A Controlled Randomized Blinded Crossover Clinical Trial

被引:0
|
作者
Alhaidari, Roaa, I [1 ]
AlSarheed, Maha [1 ]
Sheta, Saad A. [2 ]
Aldhubaiban, Mohammed [1 ]
机构
[1] King Saud Univ, Coll Dent, Dept Pediat Dent & Orthodont, Div Pediat Dent, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
[2] King Saud Univ, Coll Dent, Dept Oral Maxillofacial Surg, Div Anesthesiol, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
关键词
PEDIATRICS; MODERATE SEDATION; MIDAZOLAM; FENTANYL; CHILDREN; GUIDELINES; ANESTHESIA;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of intranasal fentanyl combined with oral midazolam to oral mida-zolam alone in pediatric dental patients. Methods: Thirty-two uncooperative healthy children aged three to six years old, who met the inclusion criteria, were randomly assigned to receive oral midazolam (0.7 mg/kg) with either intranasal fentanyl (one mu g/kg) or intranasal placebo (saline). A controlled, randomized, double-blinded, crossover clinical trial design was followed so that each child received both regimens. Data collected included the onset of sedation, working time, sedation and behavior assessment, and occurrence of side effects. Results: The onset of sedation time was not statistically different between the two groups (P=0.62), while the median working time of the midazolam/fentanyl sedation was sig-nificantly longer than the midazolam sedation (P<0.001). Sedation scores were significantly better with the midazolam/fentanyl sedation regimen at separation from parents (P=0.032), local anesthesia administration (P=0.018), rubber dam application (P=0.035), after five minutes of dental treatment (P=0.035), after 10 minutes (P=0.039), after 15 minutes (P=0.012), and after 20 minutes (P=0.038). Behavior scores were significantly better with the midazolam/fentanyl sedation only at local anesthesia administration (P=0.021), rubber dam placement (P=0.004), and after five minutes of dental treatment (P=0.049). Minor side effects occurred in 12.5 percent of sedation procedures and were not significantly associated with either of the two groups (P=0.70). Conclusion: The combination of oral midazolam with intranasal fentanyl sedation, when compared to oral midazolamas a single agent, significantly improved sedation and behavior during local anesthesia and operative dentistry for healthy three -to six-year-old children in addition to prolonged sedation working time.
引用
收藏
页码:255 / 260
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Combined oral midazolamketamine better than midazolam alone for sedation of young children: a randomized controlled trial
    Moreira, Thiago Anderson
    Costa, Paulo Sucasas
    Costa, Luciane Rezende
    Jesus-Franca, Cristiana Marinho
    Antunes, Denise Espindola
    Oliveira Gomes, Hugo Sergio
    Neto, Onofre Alves
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PAEDIATRIC DENTISTRY, 2013, 23 (03) : 207 - 215
  • [32] Efficacy and Safety of Midazolam for Sedation in Pediatric Dentistry: A Controlled Clinical Trial
    Azevedo, Isabelita Duarte
    Fernandes Ferreira, Maria Angela
    Serejo da Costa, Anna Paula
    Bosco, Vera Lucia
    Moritz, Rachel Duarte
    [J]. JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY FOR CHILDREN, 2013, 80 (03): : 133 - 138
  • [33] Sedation During EGD in Cirrhotic Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Propofol and Fentanyl Versus Midazolam and Fentanyl
    Correia, Lucianna M.
    Queiroz, Danielle
    Lenz, Luciano
    Tafarel, Jean
    Gomes, Gustavo F.
    Martins, Fernanda P.
    Nakao, Frank S.
    Rodrigues, Rodrigo A.
    Rohr, Maria Rachel S.
    Ferrari, Angelo P.
    Libera, Ermelindo D.
    [J]. GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2009, 69 (05) : AB211 - AB211
  • [34] Intranasal dexmedetomidine vs midazolam for premedication in children undergoing complete dental rehabilitation: a double-blinded randomized controlled trial
    Sheta, Saad A.
    Al-Sarheed, Maha A.
    Abdelhalim, Ashraf A.
    [J]. PEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA, 2014, 24 (02) : 181 - 189
  • [35] Etomidate versus midazolam for procedural sedation in pediatric outpatients: A randomized controlled trial
    Di Liddo, Lydia
    D'Angelo, Antonio
    Nguyen, Bao
    Bailey, Benoit
    Amre, Devendra
    Stanciu, Constantin
    [J]. ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2006, 48 (04) : 433 - 440
  • [36] The effectiveness of topical lidocaine in relieving pain related to intranasal midazolam sedation: a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial
    Khalil, Walaa
    Raslan, Nabih
    [J]. QUINTESSENCE INTERNATIONAL, 2020, 51 (02): : 162 - 167
  • [37] Balanced Propofol Sedation Versus Fentanyl and Midazolam Titrated to Moderate Sedation for EGD: A Prospective, Randomized Clinical Trial
    Levitzky, Benjamin
    Lopez, Rocio
    Dumot, John A.
    Vargo, John J.
    [J]. GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2009, 69 (05) : AB103 - AB103
  • [38] A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Oral, Aerosolized Intranasal, and Aerosolized Buccal Midazolam
    Klein, Eileen J.
    Brown, Julie C.
    Kobayashi, Ana
    Osincup, Daniel
    Seidel, Kristy
    [J]. ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2011, 58 (04) : 323 - 329
  • [39] A double-blind randomized comparison of midazolam alone and midazolam combined with ketamine for sedation of pediatric dental patients
    Roelofse, JA
    Joubert, JJD
    Roelofse, PGR
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 1996, 54 (07) : 838 - 844
  • [40] Remifentanil/midazolam versus fentanyl/midazolam for analgesia and sedation of mechanically ventilated neonates and young infants: a randomized controlled trial
    Welzing, Lars
    Oberthuer, Andre
    Junghaenel, Shino
    Harnischmacher, Urs
    Stuetzer, Hartmut
    Roth, Bernhard
    [J]. INTENSIVE CARE MEDICINE, 2012, 38 (06) : 1017 - 1024