Midazolam For Sedation Research Articles

Comparison of Nitrous Oxide-Oxygen as Inhalation Agent, Midazolam, Ketamine alone and in Combination as Oral Sedative Agents for In-office Paediatric Patients- A Randomised Control Trial

Introduction: In-office pharmacological sedation techniques are best applied to manage an extremely fearful preschooler, especially during primary dentition or a child’s early mixed dentition period. These should be used when non pharmacological behavioural management techniques fail either due to lack of communication or in children with special care needs. Aim: To compare the efficacy of oral administrations of midazolam, ketamine, combination of midazolam-ketamine (M+K) and nitrous oxide-oxygen (N2O) inhalational sedation in achieving favorable behavioural outcome compared by using the Houpt scale in the treatment of anxious and uncooperative paediatric patients. Materials and Methods: A randomised clinical trial was conducted in the Department of Paediatric and Preventive Dentistry, SGT University, Haryana, India between September 2018 to December 2019. The study included 100 anxious children (Venham’s picture scale) aged three to five years, who required procedures under local anaesthesia administration were divided into four groups using envelop method. Each group was given either oral midazolam (M) (0.3 mg/kg) or oral ketamine (K) (3 mg/kg) or oral combination of midazolam+ketamine (M+K) (0.3 mg/kg and 2 mg/kg) or inhalational nitrous oxide-oxygen (N2O). The behaviour response of the child was recorded using the Houpt scale. The oxygen saturation level and heart rate of each patient were also recorded before, after, and during the procedure. Adverse drug reactions post-treatment was also recorded. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), Chi-square test and Mann-Whitney U test was used for statistical analysis. Results: The study comprised of 100 anxious children (mean age was 4.1±0.5 years) requiring administration of local anaesthesia with intent to complete in-office treatment. Statistically, a significant difference was found among behaviour outcomes of four groups (p-value=0.047). Acceptable behaviour was seen best in K+M group (88%), followed by oral ketamine (K) (68%), N2O (59%), and oral midazolam (M) (52%). Adverse reactions were most commonly seen in the oral ketamine group. Conclusion: Oral M+K combination group is significantly better than oral ketamine (K), oral midazolam (M) or N2O inhalation sedation to achieve the required behaviour for dental treatment in three to five years old patients.

Awake fiberoptic orotracheal intubation: a protocol feasibility study.

ObjectiveTo assess the feasibility of an awake fiberoptic intubation (AFOI) protocol.MethodsWe enrolled 40 patients with simulated difficult intubation. The protocol consisted of conscious sedation (midazolam, 0.03 mg/kg and sufentanil, 0.1 µg/kg), regional anesthesia, and intubation. The time, first-attempt intubation success rate, hemodynamic parameters, blood oxygen saturation (SpO2), intubation amnesia rate, patient satisfaction, and relative complications were recorded.ResultsAFOI was completed in all patients. The average total AFOI time was 14.17 ± 1.47 minutes, and the time to placing the landmark-guided bilateral superior laryngeal nerve block was 1.24 ± 0.42 minutes. The first-attempt intubation success rate was 97.5%, and patient satisfaction was 90%. Blood pressure changed (<20%) briefly after administering conscious sedation. Heart rates did not change significantly, and SpO2 remained stable and ≥95%. Three patients had a sore throat, which resolved on postoperative day 1 without other complications. On postoperative day 1, 82.5% (33/40) of the patients had no recall of AFOI, and 17.5% (7/40) had only an indistinct memory.ConclusionsThe protocol was feasible with a high first-attempt intubation success rate and low complications rate. Hemodynamic parameters and respiration remained stable, with high patient satisfaction and effective amnesia.

Propofol versus midazolam for sedation during radiofrequency ablation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

Background and AimStandardization of the sedation protocol during radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is needed. This randomized, single‐blind, investigator‐initiated trial compared clinical outcomes during and after RFA using propofol and midazolam, respectively, in patients with HCC.MethodsFew‐ and small‐nodule HCC patients (≤3 nodules and ≤3 cm) were randomly assigned to either propofol or midazolam. Patient satisfaction was assessed using a 100‐mm visual analog scale (VAS) (1 mm = not at all satisfied, 100 mm = completely satisfied). Sedation recovery rates 1, 2, 3, and 4 h after RFA were evaluated based on Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (MOAA/S) scores; full recovery was defined as a MOAA/S score of 5.ResultsBetween July 2013 and September 2017, 143 patients with HCC were enrolled, and 135 patients were randomly assigned to the treatment group. Compared with midazolam, propofol exhibited similar median procedural satisfaction (propofol: 73.1 mm, midazolam: 76.9 mm, P = 0.574). Recovery rates 1 and 2 h after RFA were higher in the propofol group than in the midazolam group. Meanwhile, recovery rates observed 3 and 4 h after RFA were similar in the two groups. The safety profiles during and after RFA were almost identical in the two groups.ConclusionPatient satisfaction was almost identical in patients receiving propofol and midazolam sedation during RFA. Propofol sedation resulted in reduced recovery time compared with midazolam sedation in patients with HCC. The safety profiles of both propofol and midazolam sedation during and after RFA were acceptable.

Comparative study between oral midazolam and oral ketamine as preanaesthetic medication in paediatric patients undergoing elective surgery: a randomized double blind study

Introduction: Prime objective of anaesthesiologist is to minimize adverse psychological and physiological effects of anaesthetic technique. Premedication causes sedation and reduction of anxiety during separation from parents. It also provides a calm and cooperative child for smooth induction of anesthesia. We evaluated the differences in quality of premedication with orally administered midazolam and ketamine in the paediatric population undergoing elective surgical procedures and tried to ascertain the minimum interval required between premedication and parental separation. Objective: This study was undertaken to compare the efficacy and safety of oral midazolam and oral ketamine as a preanaesthetic medication for paediatric patients undergoing elective surgery. Materials and Methods: In this prospective, randomized, double blind study a total of 60 children aged 1-6 years, belonging to ASA grade 1 and 2, scheduled for elective surgery were randomized into two groups of 30 each to receive either midazolam 0.5 mg/kg (Group A) or ketamine 5 mg/kg (Group B) orally. Parameters to be assessed were quality of sedation and anxiolysis, ease of parent-child separation and ease of venepuncture. Results: Overall success rate of midazolam for sedation and anxiolysis was higher than ketamine in all the time frames. Successful separation from parents was easy in 25 patients (83.33%) in group A and 13 patients (43.33%) in group B. Successful venepuncture was obtained in 93.33% and 90% of patients in group A and group B respectively. This higher rate of success during venepuncture was probably due to use of EMLA cream prior to venepuncture. Conclusion: We concluded that premedication with oral midazolam 0.5mg/kg provides better sedation and anxiolysis, easy parent child separation than oral ketamine 5mg/kg. Keywords: Midazolam, Ketamine, Preanaesthetic, Anxiolysis, Venepuncture.

A fast and simple method for the simultaneous analysis of midazolam, 1-hydroxymidazolam, 4-hydroxymidazolam and 1-hydroxymidazolam glucuronide in human serum, plasma and urine

For the quantification of the sedative and anesthetic drug midazolam and its main (active) metabolites 1-hydroxymidazolam, 4-hydroxymidazolam and 1-hydroxymidazolam glucuronide in human serum, human EDTA plasma, human heparin plasma and human urine a single accurate method by ultra-high performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS/MS) has been developed. Protein precipitation as sample preparation, without the need of a time-consuming deglucuronidation step for the quantification of 1-hydroxymidazolam glucuronide, resulted in a simple and rapid assay suitable for clinical practice with a total runtime of only 1.1 min. The four components and the isotope-labeled internal standards were separated on a C18 column and detection was performed with a triple-stage quadrupole mass spectrometer operating in positive ionization mode.The method was validated based on the “Guidance for Industry Bioanalytical Method Validation” (Food and Drug Administration, FDA) and the “Guideline on bioanalytical method validation” of the European Medicines Agency (EMA). Linearity was proven over the ranges of 5–1500 μg/L for midazolam, 1-hydroxymidazolam and 4-hydroxymidazolam and 25–5000 μg/L for 1-hydroxymidazolam glucuronide, using a sample volume of 100 μL. Matrix comparison indicated that the assay is also applicable to other human matrices like EDTA and heparin plasma and urine. Stability experiments showed good results for the stability of midazolam, 1-hydroxymidazolam and 1-hydroxymidazolam glucuronide in serum, EDTA and heparin plasma and urine stored for 7 days under different conditions. At room temperature, 4-hydroxymidazo-lam is stable for 7 days in EDTA plasma, but stable for only 3 days in serum and heparin plasma and less than 24 h in urine. All four compounds were found to be stable in serum, EDTA plasma, heparin plasma and urine for 7 days after sample preparation and for 3 freeze–thaw cycles. The assay has been applied in therapeutic drug monitoring of midazolam for (pediatric) intensive care patients.

Safety and efficacy of remimazolam in high risk colonoscopy: A randomized trial

BackgroundProcedural sedation of ASA III/IV patients has increased risk. Remimazolam (an ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine) has proven safe and efficient for outpatient colonoscopy sedation. MethodsA double-blind, randomized, multi-center, parallel group trial was performed, comparing remimazolam to placebo with an additional open-label arm for midazolam in procedural sedation of 79 ASA III/IV patients undergoing colonoscopy. This was the third of 3 Phase III trials for remimazolam in the procedural sedation program. The primary end point was the safety of remimazolam. ResultsOf 79 patients randomized at 3 US sites, 77 underwent sedation and colonoscopy (31 received remimazolam, 16 placebo and 30 midazolam). Incidence and frequency of treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were comparable in all three treatment arms, and independent of ASA status. One TEAE leading to discontinuation and one serious TEAE were reported; both in the open label midazolam arm. The efficacy endpoint was achieved for remimazolam, placebo, and midazolam in 87.1%, 0%, and 13.3% of patients (p<0.00001 for remimazolam versus placebo and versus midazolam, respectively). ConclusionsRemimazolam is safe and efficient in procedural sedation of high risk ASA patients undergoing colonoscopy, showing a safety profile comparable to that in low risk ASA.

Airway Pressure and Respiratory Mechanics Variability with Different Body Positions in Mechanically Ventilated Critical Care Patients: A Prospective Comparative Clinical Study

Aim: This prospective comparative study aimed to investigate the effect of various body positions on changes of respiratory parameters mostly; the TV, oxygen saturation, airway pressure, and endotracheal tube cuff pressure in mechanically ventilated critical care patients. Background: Many patients who are admitted to the critical care unit require intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation for many reasons such as major trauma, medical causes, or post-operative major surgeries. Changing a patient’s position in the critical care unit is very important for the following benefits; to break through the routine monotonic delivery of mechanical ventilation, to favor the clearance of respiratory secretions, the prevention of pressure sores and ventilator acquired pneumonia, and finally the improvement in lung volume and oxygenation. Methods: A prospective, comparative study was carried out on 210 patients of both gender, aged between 21-70 years old admitted to ICU due to many reasons. After stabilization of patient condition and connection of monitors’ cables, supine position or semi setting position was chosen and this was documented in the patient’s chart. All patients were sedated to prevent them from breathing against the machine which causes the ETT cuff pressure and mean airway pressure to rise. Fentanyl sedation drug (Loading dose: 1–2 mic/kg/hour infused gradually. Maintenance dose: 1-4 mic/kg/hour) using continuous intravenous infusion typically in combination with Midazolam sedation (0.05-0.2 mg/kg/hour). The following parameters were recorded; tidal volume, mean airway pressure, PO2 /FIO2 , and ETT cuff pressure. Results: Our results show that about (58.1%) were male and (41.9%) were female. Concerning age, their mean was between (40.6 ± 8.9) years. Regarding diagnosis (50.5%) of patients were admitted with major trauma, (31.9%) due to medical causes, and (17.6%) admitted due to major chest and abdominal surgeries. The patient’s mean heart rate was (93.6 ± 7.5) b/m and the Mean Arterial Pressure was (67.7 ± 0.6)°C. Tables the Description, SOP2, Mean airway, and ETT cuff pressure of each body position in the study with the highest SPO2 98% and cuff pressure 19.2+41 in the prone position. The position checklist is illustrated in Table and Figure. The highest TV (520 ml) and PO2 /FIO2 ratio (410) were in prone poison and the lowest was in Lower Fowler position (460 ml and 320) respectively. Regarding outcome and ICU stay which were the best in both semi setting and prone position. Conclusion: Supine position (lying flat) or lateral position do not seem beneficial for critically ill patients in terms of respiratory mechanics. The semi-sitting position (with thorax angulation=30° from the horizontal plane) is associated with improvement of PO2/FIO2 , oxygenation, and tidal volume, and the effects of prone position on respiratory mechanics are very beneficial and this reflected on patient outcome and short ICU length of stay.

Dexmedetomidine versus midazolam for sedation during endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration: A randomised controlled trial.

Desaturation is a common complication of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA). Dexmedetomidine (DEX), a commonly used sedative in intensive care, is associated with less respiratory depression compared with other sedatives. We compared DEX with midazolam (MDZ) when used as a sedative during EBUS-TBNA. A randomised, parallel, double-blinded trial. A university-affiliated teaching hospital between June 2014 and July 2015. A total of 102 patients who underwent EBUS-TBNA were randomly allocated to two groups (48 DEX group, 54 MDZ group). DEX group received 0.25 to 0.75 μg kg-1 h-1 (start with 0.5 μg kg-1 h-1, modulated in three steps from 0.25 to 0.75 μg kg-1 h-1) of DEX after a loading dose of 0.25 μg kg-1 h-1 for 10 min to maintain a Ramsay Sedation Scale (RSS) of 3 to 5. If the patient was agitated, 1 mg of MDZ bolus was used as a rescue drug. Patients in the MDZ group initially received 0.05 mg kg-1 of MDZ as a bolus. For maintenance and rescue, 1 mg of MDZ bolus was used. The primary outcome was the presence of oxygen desaturation. Secondary outcomes were level of sedation (Ramsay Sedation Scale score), cough score, sedation and procedure satisfaction score. The baseline characteristics of the patients, duration of EBUS-TBNA procedures and the use of rescue MDZ were not different between the groups. There was no significant difference in desaturation events between the DEX and MDZ groups (56.3 and 68.5%, respectively; P = 0.20). The level of sedation and the sedation satisfaction scores were similar between the two groups. However, cough score was significantly lower in the DEX group (41.9 vs. 53.4; P = 0.02). The use of DEX during EBUS-TBNA was not superior to MDZ in terms of oxygen desaturation. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02157818.

Comfort and safety of bronchoscopy performed under sedation and local anesthesia in elderly patients.

Although sedation for bronchoscopy improves patient comfort, there is a risk of oversedation in elderly patients. Only a few studies have evaluated the efficacy and safety of sedation for bronchoscopy in elderly patients.This study retrospectively analyzed records of 210 patients who underwent transbronchial brushing and/or biopsy under midazolam sedation at National Hospital Organization Omuta National Hospital between June 2017 and October 2019. Patients were administered 1 mg midazolam following 10 mL 4% lidocaine inhalation. When sedation was insufficient, 0.5 mg midazolam was administered additionally. Diagnostic yield, incidence of complications, amount of oxygen supplementation, decreases in percutaneous oxygen saturation (SpO2), changes in blood pressure, and degree of comfort were analyzed.Patients were divided into the elderly (n = 102) and non-elderly (n = 108) groups. No significant differences were observed in diagnostic yield and procedure time between the 2 groups, and no severe adverse events were noted in the elderly group. The degree of comfort during bronchoscopy was significantly higher in the elderly group. In patients administered < 2 mg midazolam, the amount of oxygen supplementation and decreases in SpO2 were significantly smaller in the elderly group compared to the non-elderly group.The risk of adverse events related to midazolam sedation in bronchoscopy does not increase with age, and sedation improves comfort during flexible bronchoscopy in elderly patients. Moreover, a total dose of midazolam <2 mg is safe for elderly patients undergoing bronchoscopy.

Patient Satisfaction of Propofol Versus Midazolam and Fentanyl Sedation During Colonoscopy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Colonoscopy is essential for optimal management of inflammatory bowel disease. However, many patients opt out due to unpleasantness related to this procedure. We investigated if Nurse Administered Propofol Sedation (NAPS) would improve patient satisfaction and attitude towards future colonoscopies. Randomized clinical trial of deep sedation with NAPS (n = 63) versus moderate midazolam and fentanyl sedation (n = 67). To assess the primary end point of patient satisfaction at discharge, we developed a Satisfaction Questionnaire comprising 13 items each rated by a 5-point Likert scale and with higher scores reflecting more positive outcomes (13-65 points). Fifty-six patients (43%) with ulcerative colitis, 48 (37%) with Crohn's disease, and 26 (20%) with high suspicion of inflammatory bowel disease were included. Most (88%) had previously had a colonoscopy and pre-procedure expectations were similar between groups. Patients receiving deep sedation had significantly higher satisfaction score (mean 60.1, SD 3.4) than those receiving moderate sedation (51.2, 8.4; P < .001). This was driven especially by less pain, more amnesia, sedation more to their liking, and better experience with the current than previous sedations. Importantly, these patients significantly more often preferred the same sedation for a future colonoscopy and were also inclined to accept more frequent colonoscopies. Assistance from another colonoscopist and disruption of the procedure due to pain occurred significantly more frequent in the moderate sedation group. There were no safety signals associated with NAPS. Patients with inflammatory bowel disease favor deep propofol sedation over moderate midazolam and fentanyl sedation. Availability of NAPS may facilitate patient adherence to endoscopy-based monitoring programs. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01934088.

Safety of balanced propofol and midazolam in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for sedation in cirrhotic patients.

Sedation for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (UGIE) in patients with cirrhosis is theoretically associated with high incidence of adverse events due to low levels of binding proteins and decreased hepatic clearance of drugs. The objective of the study was to assess the safety of combined propofol and midazolam sedation in cirrhotic patients undergoing UGIE. A total of 500 patients undergoing UGIE were divided in to two groups in a prospective observational study from Jan 1st 2018 to June 30th 2018. Group (I) consisted of cirrhotic patients who underwent the procedure with sedation and Group (II) consisted of non-cirrhotic patients who opted for sedation. The main outcome measurements included vitals monitoring before, during and after procedure, total sedation dose, time to initial and deep sedation, recovery time and complications. There was no significant difference between sedation safety and rate of complications for the cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients except for the recovery period during initial 10 minutes. The Modified Aldrete score for the cirrhotic patients was 9.5±0.5 min as compared to 9.8±0.4 min for non-cirrhotic patients (p<0.001) at 10 minutes. Grade 2 hepatic encephalopathy was seen in 0.8% of the cirrhotic patients who required hospitalization for 24 hours. Also balanced sedation was acceptable by the patients and the endoscopists equally with statistically significant scores on endoscopist's assessment of co-operation and assessment of patient's satisfaction scores. Balanced propofol and midazolam sedation has a good index of safety for both cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients and is acceptable by the patients and endoscopists equally.

Comparison of Dexmedetomidine versus Midazolam in weaning from mechanical ventilation and length of stay in ICU.

Objectives: To compare the role of dexmedetomidine versus midazolam as sedative in facilitating early mechanical ventilation weaning thereby decreasing ICU cost. Study Design: Randomized Controlled trial. Setting: Surgical ICU of Lahore General Hospital, Lahore. Period: December 2018 to July 2019. Material &amp; Methods: Total of 60 adult postoperative patients (30 in each group) who required mechanical ventilation in the surgical ICU for minimum 24 hours postoperatively after major pelvi-abdominal operations were included. Patients of group “A” and “B” received midazolam infusion 20-100 mcg/kg/hr &amp; dexmedetomidine infusion 0.2-0.7 μg/kg/hr respectively while being mechanically ventilated. The degree of sedation was measured by using the Richmond agitation sedation score (RASS) every 6 hourly. Extubation time (i.e. time from termination of drug to extubation) was recorded. The time of ICU length of stay was also recorded Results: Mean age of patients was 41.97 ±10.21 and 42.57±10.93 years in group-A and B, respectively. In group-A 18 patients (60%) and in group-B 16 patients (53.0%) were male while 12 patients (40%) in group-A and 14 patients (47.0%) were females. A significant decrease in extubation time was observed in Group-B when compared with the Group-A (p=0.046) along with odds ratio 0.938 while no significant relationship could be proved between length of stay at ICU between two groups. Stratification with regard to age, gender height, weight and type of surgery was carried out. Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine is more favourable than midazolam for sedation in intensive care patients by facilitating early exubation and decreasing the duration of invasive ventilation while no significant relationship could be proved in two groups between length of stay in intensive care unit.

CONSCIOUS SEDATION FOR MIDDLE EAR SURGERIES: COMPARISON BETWEEN PROPOFOLAND MIDAZOLAM WITH RESPECT TO HEMODYNAMIC EFFECTS

Background and aims: Middle ear surgeries can be done under local anesthetic infiltration and titrated dose of sedation. Use of supplemental intravenous sedative hypnotic drugs for these surgeries under local anesthesia can enhance patient comfort and increase acceptance of this technique. Our study was aimed to compare Propofol and Midazolam in equipotent doses for conscious sedation in middle ear surgeries Methods and material: After approval from the Institutional Ethics committee, 60 patients from ASA grade 1 and 2 scheduled for middle ear surgery (Tympanoplasty, mastoidectomy) under local anesthesia were randomly allocated into two groups to receive either Propofol (Group I) or Midazolam (Group II) for conscious sedation. Both the groups received premedication and sedation with 1.5 mcg /kg Fentanyl, Group 1 received Inj. Propofol bolus dose of 0.5-1 mg/Kg I.V, followed by infusion at the rate of 1.5-4.5 mg/kg/hour, to attain a sedation score of 3 and additional bolus doses were given as and when required to maintain a sedation score of 3. Group 2 received Inj. Midazolam bolus dose 0.03 to 0.05 mg/kg I.V followed by infusion at the rate of 0.03 to 0.06 mg/kg/hour to attain a sedation score of 3 and additional bolus doses as and when required to maintain a sedation score of 3. All the patients in both the groups received oxygen by nasal prongs at the flow rate of 4L/min from the start of sedation. Heart rate, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation was noted at basal level and at an interval of 2 minutes and later every 5 mins for 30 mins then every 15 mins till end of surgery. Result: The results were analyzed using student’s 't’ test and chi square test wherever appropriate. Results: Pulse rate at 30th minute of sedation was not significantly different from the basal value among both the groups. Mean systolic blood pressure (SBP) in Propofol group was 121.33mmHg and 117.27mmHg among Midazolam group at basal which was comparable and the difference was not significant. Mean diastolic blood pressure was 78.47mmHg in Propofol group and 78.07mmHg among Midazolam group at basal which was comparable and the difference was not significant. Mean respiratory rate (breaths/min) among Propofol and Midazolam group were 16.83 and 16.70 respectively at basal which was comparable and the difference was not significant. Mean arterial oxygen saturation (%) among Propofol and Midazolam group were and 98.0 and 98.07 respectively at basal which was comparable and the difference was not significant. Conclusions: After the start of sedation mean diastolic blood pressure did not show any significant change in both the groups throughout the procedure. After the start of sedation mean respiratory rate and arterial oxygen saturation did not show any significant change in both the groups. Both Propofol and Midazolam are equally safe with respect to hemodynamic effects when used in titrated doses.

Dexmedetomidine is superior to midazolam for sedation and cerebral protection in postoperative hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhage patients: a retrospective study.

ObjectiveDexmedetomidine has a good sedative effect and does not affect the judgment of the patient's consciousness level. However, its effectiveness for sedation and cerebral protection after craniotomy in hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhage (HICH) patients is unknown.MethodsA retrospective study of 164 postoperative HICH patients who underwent sedation with dexmedetomidine or midazolam was conducted. The Ramsay sedation score, mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), pulse oxygen saturation (SpO2), and respiratory rate were measured at the indicated time points. Human soluble protein-100β (S-100β) and neuron-specific enolase (NSE) levels were also compared between the two groups.ResultsDexmedetomidine treatment showed a significantly better effect than midazolam on decreasing the frequency of apparent agitation. The MAP and HR, but not the SpO2, were significantly decreased and lower than those in midazolam group. Detection of plasma S-100β and NSE proteins revealed a significant decrease in the dexmedetomidine group compared with the midazolam group. The 6-month follow-up evaluation indicated a significantly better prognosis of postoperative HICH patients treated with dexmedetomidine than for those treated with midazolam.ConclusionsDexmedetomidine is effective for sedation in postoperative HICH patients and may be beneficial for their outcome.

Propofol vs midazolam sedation for elective endoscopy in patients with cirrhosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUNDPatients with cirrhosis frequently require sedation for elective endoscopic procedures. Several sedation protocols are available, but choosing an appropriate sedative in patients with cirrhosis is challenging.AIMTo conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare propofol and midazolam for sedation in patients with cirrhosis during elective endoscopic procedures in an attempt to understand the best approach.METHODSThis systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using the PRISMA guidelines. Electronic searches were performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Central Cochrane, LILACS databases. Only randomized control trials (RCTs) were included. The outcomes studied were procedure time, recovery time, discharge time, and adverse events (bradycardia, hypotension, and hypoxemia). The risk of bias assessment was performed using the Revised Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool for randomized trials (RoB-2). Quality of evidence was evaluated by GRADEpro. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager.RESULTSThe search yielded 3,576 records. Out of these, 8 RCTs with a total of 596 patients (302 in the propofol group and 294 in the midazolam group) were included for the final analysis. Procedure time was similar between midazolam and propofol groups (MD: 0.25, 95%CI: -0.64 to 1.13, P = 0.59). Recovery time (MD: -8.19, 95%CI: -10.59 to -5.79, P < 0.00001). and discharge time were significantly less in the propofol group (MD: -12.98, 95%CI: -18.46 to -7.50, P < 0.00001). Adverse events were similar in both groups (RD: 0.02, 95%CI: 0-0.04, P = 0.58). Moreover, no significant difference was found for bradycardia (RD: 0.03, 95%CI: -0.01 to 0.07, P = 0.16), hypotension (RD: 0.03, 95%CI: -0.01 to 0.07, P = 0.17), and hypoxemia (RD: 0.00, 95%CI: -0.04 to 0.04, P = 0.93). Five studies had low risk of bias, two demonstrated some concerns, and one presented high risk. The quality of the evidence was very low for procedure time, recovery time, and adverse events; while low for discharge time.CONCLUSIONThis systematic review and meta-analysis based on RCTs show that propofol has shorter recovery and patient discharge time as compared to midazolam with a similar rate of adverse events. These results suggest that propofol should be the preferred agent for sedation in patients with cirrhosis.

A Centrally Acting Antihypertensive, Clonidine, Sedates Patients Presenting With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Evoked by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus 2.

A Centrally Acting Antihypertensive, Clonidine, Sedates Patients Presenting With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Evoked by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus 2.

Risk Factors for Predicting Hypoxia in Adult Patients Undergoing Bronchoscopy under Sedation.

BackgroundFlexible bronchoscopy is one of the essential procedures for the diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary diseases. The purpose of this study was to identify the risk factors associated with the occurrence of hypoxia in adults undergoing flexible bronchoscopy under sedation.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed 2,520 patients who underwent flexible bronchoscopy under sedation at our tertiary care university hospital in South Korea January 1, 2013–December 31, 2014. Hypoxia was defined as more than 5%-point reduction in the baseline percutaneous oxygen saturation (SpO2) or SpO2 <90% for >1 minute during the procedure.ResultsThe mean age was 64.7±13.5, and 565 patients developed hypoxia during the procedure. The mean sedation duration and midazolam dose for sedation were 31.1 minutes and 3.9 mg, respectively. The bivariate analysis showed that older age, a low forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), use of endobronchial ultrasound, the duration of sedation, and the midazolam dose were associated with the occurrence of hypoxia during the procedure, while the multivariate analysis found that age >60 (odds ratio [OR], 1.32), a low FEV1 (OR, 0.99), and a longer duration of sedation (>40 minutes; OR, 1.33) were significant risk factors.ConclusionThe findings suggest that patients older than age 60 and those with a low FEV1 tend to develop hypoxia during the bronchoscopy under sedation. Also, longer duration of sedation (>40 minutes) was a significant risk factor for hypoxia.

Idiopathic nonhistaminergic acquired angioedema in a patient with coronavirus disease 2019

Idiopathic nonhistaminergic acquired angioedema in a patient with coronavirus disease 2019

Midazolam sedation in palliative medicine: retrospective study in a French center for cancer control

BackgroundFrench legislation about sedation in palliative medicine evolved in 2016 with the introduction of a right to deep and continuous sedation, maintained until death. The objective was to describe midazolam sedation at the COL (Centre Oscar Lambret [Oscar Lambret Center], French regional center for cancer control), in order to establish a current overview before the final legislative changes.MethodsDescriptive, retrospective and single-center study, concerning major patients in palliative care hospitalized from 01/01/2014 to 12/31/2015, who had been sedated by midazolam. The proven sedations (explicitly named) and the probable sedations were distinguished.ResultsA total of 54 sedations were identified (48 proven, 6 probable). Refractory symptoms accounted for 48.1% of indications, complications with immediate risk of death 46.3%, existential suffering 5.6%. Titration was performed in 44.4% of cases. Sedation was continuous until death for 98.1% of the cases. Probable sedation had a higher failure rate than proven sedation. Significant differences existed for the palliative care unit compared to other units regarding information to the patient, their consent, anticipation, mention by correspondence and carrying out titrations. When patients had already been treated with midazolam, the induction doses, initial maintenance doses, and doses at the time of death were significantly higher. For those receiving opioids, the maintenance dose at the time of death was higher. No comparison found a difference in overall survival.ConclusionsAfter a sufficient follow-up has enabled teams to familiarize with this new legislation, reflection on sedation should be conducted to adapt to final recommendations.

Propofol compared with bolus and titrated midazolam for sedation in outpatient colonoscopy: a prospective randomized double-blind study

The safest and most efficient method of sedation for outpatient colonoscopy remains unclear. This study aimed to compare the efficiency and safety of bolus administration of midazolam compared with titrated administration and propofol administration for patients undergoing outpatient colonoscopy. We randomly divided patients undergoing colonoscopy into the propofol group, bolus midazolam group, and titrated midazolam group. We compared total procedure time, induction time, recovery time, and discharge time among the 3 groups. We also compared patient satisfaction and the incidence of adverse events. In total, 267 patients (89 in each study group) were enrolled during the study period. Patients in the propofol group had a shorter total procedure time (39.5 vs 59.4 vs 58.1 minutes; P< .001), induction time (4.6 vs 6.3 vs 7.6 minutes; P< .001), recovery time (11.5 vs 29.5 vs 29.2 minutes; P< .001), and discharge time (20.6 vs 34.9 vs 34.7 minutes; P< .001) than patients in the bolus midazolam group and titrated midazolam group. Patients in the propofol group reported higher degrees of satisfaction than patients in the bolus or titrated midazolam plus meperidine groups (9.9 vs 9.6 vs 9.6 [P= .007] and 4.9 vs 4.7 vs 4.8 [P= .008], respectively). Adverse events were not significantly different between groups. In this randomized trial, propofol was superior to bolus or titrated midazolam in terms of endoscopy unit efficiency and patient satisfaction during outpatient colonoscopy. (Clinical trial registration number: KCT0002805.).