Loading…
Oral Dexmedetomidine Achieves Superior Effects in Mitigating Emergence Agitation and Demonstrates Comparable Sedative Effects to Oral Midazolam for Pediatric Premedication: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies
: Oral midazolam is the most commonly used sedative premedication agent in pediatric patients. While effective, oral midazolam cannot reduce the incidence of emergence agitation. Oral dexmedetomidine may be effective in providing satisfactory sedation and reduce the incidence of emergence agitation,...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of clinical medicine 2024-02, Vol.13 (4), p.1174 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c379t-c29acbaf5ebf23bfe922266b9898c6373c815d9f79330fde25b272bb362fff263 |
container_end_page | |
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 1174 |
container_title | Journal of clinical medicine |
container_volume | 13 |
creator | Jen, Chun-Kai Lu, Kuo-Ching Chen, Kuan-Wen Lu, Yun-Ru Huang, I-Tao Huang, Yu-Chen Huang, Chun-Jen |
description | : Oral midazolam is the most commonly used sedative premedication agent in pediatric patients. While effective, oral midazolam cannot reduce the incidence of emergence agitation. Oral dexmedetomidine may be effective in providing satisfactory sedation and reduce the incidence of emergence agitation, although the results of different randomized controlled trials are conflicting.
: This study enrolled randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining premedication with oral dexmedetomidine versus oral midazolam in pediatric patients undergoing general anesthesia. PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and the Web of Science database were searched from their inception until June 2023. The outcomes were the incidence of satisfactory preoperative sedation, satisfactory sedation during separation from parents, satisfactory sedation during anesthesia induction using an anesthesia mask, and the incidence of emergence agitation.
: A total of 9 RCTs comprising 885 patients were analyzed. Our data revealed comparable effects of dexmedetomidine and midazolam with respect to satisfactory preoperative sedation and a satisfactory incidence of sedation during parental separation and mask acceptance before anesthesia induction. Notably, our data revealed that the rate of emergence agitation was significantly lower in pediatric patients receiving dexmedetomidine (
= 162) than in those receiving midazolam (
= 159) (odds ratio = 0.16; 95% confidence interval: 0.06 to 0.44;
< 0.001;
= 35%).
: Data from this meta-analysis revealed comparable effects for premedication with oral dexmedetomidine or oral midazolam with respect to satisfactory sedation; furthermore, premedication with oral dexmedetomidine more effectively mitigated emergence agitation in pediatric patients receiving general anesthesia compared with oral midazolam. |
doi_str_mv | 10.3390/jcm13041174 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2932436273</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A784041114</galeid><sourcerecordid>A784041114</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c379t-c29acbaf5ebf23bfe922266b9898c6373c815d9f79330fde25b272bb362fff263</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptklFv0zAQxyMEYtPYE-_IEi9IqCOx0yTmrSodIK3atMJz5Njn4Cq2i-0Uuq-9L8C1G2Mg7AefT7_73519WfayyM8Y4_m7tbQFy8uiqMsn2THN63qSs4Y9fWQfZacxrnNcTVPSon6eHaGXN2VTHWe3l0EM5AP8tKAgeWuUcUBm8puBLUSyGjcQjA9koTXIFIlxZGmS6UUyricLC6EHJzGiNwl93hHhFOpZ72IKIqHG3NuNCKIbgKxAIbSFB7nkyaGApVHixg_CEo3JrkAZkYKR5CoAFmbkQfo9mZHVLiaweJXkGrYGfhzyLSGJycyJYRdNJF6Ta_RiMzegML1LwQ8Dmqs0KgPxRfZMiyHC6f15kn09X3yZf5pcXH78PJ9dTCSreZpIyoXshJ5CpynrNHBKaVV1vOGNrFjNZFNMFdc1ZyzXCui0ozXtOlZRrTWt2En25k53E_z3EWJqrYkShkE48GNsKWe0RLpmiL7-B137MWBDByrnFcXkf6heDNAapz0-sdyLtrO6KfdjUJRInf2Hwq3AGukdaIP-vwLe3gXI4GMMoNtNMFaEXVvk7X7K2kdThvSr-1LHDv_mgf09U-wXX5TQmA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2930962922</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Oral Dexmedetomidine Achieves Superior Effects in Mitigating Emergence Agitation and Demonstrates Comparable Sedative Effects to Oral Midazolam for Pediatric Premedication: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies</title><source>Open Access: PubMed Central</source><source>Publicly Available Content Database</source><creator>Jen, Chun-Kai ; Lu, Kuo-Ching ; Chen, Kuan-Wen ; Lu, Yun-Ru ; Huang, I-Tao ; Huang, Yu-Chen ; Huang, Chun-Jen</creator><creatorcontrib>Jen, Chun-Kai ; Lu, Kuo-Ching ; Chen, Kuan-Wen ; Lu, Yun-Ru ; Huang, I-Tao ; Huang, Yu-Chen ; Huang, Chun-Jen</creatorcontrib><description>: Oral midazolam is the most commonly used sedative premedication agent in pediatric patients. While effective, oral midazolam cannot reduce the incidence of emergence agitation. Oral dexmedetomidine may be effective in providing satisfactory sedation and reduce the incidence of emergence agitation, although the results of different randomized controlled trials are conflicting.
: This study enrolled randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining premedication with oral dexmedetomidine versus oral midazolam in pediatric patients undergoing general anesthesia. PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and the Web of Science database were searched from their inception until June 2023. The outcomes were the incidence of satisfactory preoperative sedation, satisfactory sedation during separation from parents, satisfactory sedation during anesthesia induction using an anesthesia mask, and the incidence of emergence agitation.
: A total of 9 RCTs comprising 885 patients were analyzed. Our data revealed comparable effects of dexmedetomidine and midazolam with respect to satisfactory preoperative sedation and a satisfactory incidence of sedation during parental separation and mask acceptance before anesthesia induction. Notably, our data revealed that the rate of emergence agitation was significantly lower in pediatric patients receiving dexmedetomidine (
= 162) than in those receiving midazolam (
= 159) (odds ratio = 0.16; 95% confidence interval: 0.06 to 0.44;
< 0.001;
= 35%).
: Data from this meta-analysis revealed comparable effects for premedication with oral dexmedetomidine or oral midazolam with respect to satisfactory sedation; furthermore, premedication with oral dexmedetomidine more effectively mitigated emergence agitation in pediatric patients receiving general anesthesia compared with oral midazolam.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2077-0383</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2077-0383</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/jcm13041174</identifier><identifier>PMID: 38398486</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Switzerland: MDPI AG</publisher><subject>Analgesics ; Anxiety ; Bias ; Children ; Complications and side effects ; Dexmedetomidine ; General anesthesia ; Health aspects ; Meta-analysis ; Midazolam ; Patient outcomes ; Patients ; Pediatrics ; Prevention ; Risk factors ; Surgery ; Systematic review</subject><ispartof>Journal of clinical medicine, 2024-02, Vol.13 (4), p.1174</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2024 MDPI AG</rights><rights>2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c379t-c29acbaf5ebf23bfe922266b9898c6373c815d9f79330fde25b272bb362fff263</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-1006-6762</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2930962922/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2930962922?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,25752,27923,27924,37011,37012,44589,74997</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38398486$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Jen, Chun-Kai</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lu, Kuo-Ching</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Kuan-Wen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lu, Yun-Ru</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huang, I-Tao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huang, Yu-Chen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huang, Chun-Jen</creatorcontrib><title>Oral Dexmedetomidine Achieves Superior Effects in Mitigating Emergence Agitation and Demonstrates Comparable Sedative Effects to Oral Midazolam for Pediatric Premedication: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies</title><title>Journal of clinical medicine</title><addtitle>J Clin Med</addtitle><description>: Oral midazolam is the most commonly used sedative premedication agent in pediatric patients. While effective, oral midazolam cannot reduce the incidence of emergence agitation. Oral dexmedetomidine may be effective in providing satisfactory sedation and reduce the incidence of emergence agitation, although the results of different randomized controlled trials are conflicting.
: This study enrolled randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining premedication with oral dexmedetomidine versus oral midazolam in pediatric patients undergoing general anesthesia. PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and the Web of Science database were searched from their inception until June 2023. The outcomes were the incidence of satisfactory preoperative sedation, satisfactory sedation during separation from parents, satisfactory sedation during anesthesia induction using an anesthesia mask, and the incidence of emergence agitation.
: A total of 9 RCTs comprising 885 patients were analyzed. Our data revealed comparable effects of dexmedetomidine and midazolam with respect to satisfactory preoperative sedation and a satisfactory incidence of sedation during parental separation and mask acceptance before anesthesia induction. Notably, our data revealed that the rate of emergence agitation was significantly lower in pediatric patients receiving dexmedetomidine (
= 162) than in those receiving midazolam (
= 159) (odds ratio = 0.16; 95% confidence interval: 0.06 to 0.44;
< 0.001;
= 35%).
: Data from this meta-analysis revealed comparable effects for premedication with oral dexmedetomidine or oral midazolam with respect to satisfactory sedation; furthermore, premedication with oral dexmedetomidine more effectively mitigated emergence agitation in pediatric patients receiving general anesthesia compared with oral midazolam.</description><subject>Analgesics</subject><subject>Anxiety</subject><subject>Bias</subject><subject>Children</subject><subject>Complications and side effects</subject><subject>Dexmedetomidine</subject><subject>General anesthesia</subject><subject>Health aspects</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Midazolam</subject><subject>Patient outcomes</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Pediatrics</subject><subject>Prevention</subject><subject>Risk factors</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><issn>2077-0383</issn><issn>2077-0383</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><recordid>eNptklFv0zAQxyMEYtPYE-_IEi9IqCOx0yTmrSodIK3atMJz5Njn4Cq2i-0Uuq-9L8C1G2Mg7AefT7_73519WfayyM8Y4_m7tbQFy8uiqMsn2THN63qSs4Y9fWQfZacxrnNcTVPSon6eHaGXN2VTHWe3l0EM5AP8tKAgeWuUcUBm8puBLUSyGjcQjA9koTXIFIlxZGmS6UUyricLC6EHJzGiNwl93hHhFOpZ72IKIqHG3NuNCKIbgKxAIbSFB7nkyaGApVHixg_CEo3JrkAZkYKR5CoAFmbkQfo9mZHVLiaweJXkGrYGfhzyLSGJycyJYRdNJF6Ta_RiMzegML1LwQ8Dmqs0KgPxRfZMiyHC6f15kn09X3yZf5pcXH78PJ9dTCSreZpIyoXshJ5CpynrNHBKaVV1vOGNrFjNZFNMFdc1ZyzXCui0ozXtOlZRrTWt2En25k53E_z3EWJqrYkShkE48GNsKWe0RLpmiL7-B137MWBDByrnFcXkf6heDNAapz0-sdyLtrO6KfdjUJRInf2Hwq3AGukdaIP-vwLe3gXI4GMMoNtNMFaEXVvk7X7K2kdThvSr-1LHDv_mgf09U-wXX5TQmA</recordid><startdate>20240201</startdate><enddate>20240201</enddate><creator>Jen, Chun-Kai</creator><creator>Lu, Kuo-Ching</creator><creator>Chen, Kuan-Wen</creator><creator>Lu, Yun-Ru</creator><creator>Huang, I-Tao</creator><creator>Huang, Yu-Chen</creator><creator>Huang, Chun-Jen</creator><general>MDPI AG</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1006-6762</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20240201</creationdate><title>Oral Dexmedetomidine Achieves Superior Effects in Mitigating Emergence Agitation and Demonstrates Comparable Sedative Effects to Oral Midazolam for Pediatric Premedication: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies</title><author>Jen, Chun-Kai ; Lu, Kuo-Ching ; Chen, Kuan-Wen ; Lu, Yun-Ru ; Huang, I-Tao ; Huang, Yu-Chen ; Huang, Chun-Jen</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c379t-c29acbaf5ebf23bfe922266b9898c6373c815d9f79330fde25b272bb362fff263</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Analgesics</topic><topic>Anxiety</topic><topic>Bias</topic><topic>Children</topic><topic>Complications and side effects</topic><topic>Dexmedetomidine</topic><topic>General anesthesia</topic><topic>Health aspects</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Midazolam</topic><topic>Patient outcomes</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Pediatrics</topic><topic>Prevention</topic><topic>Risk factors</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Jen, Chun-Kai</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lu, Kuo-Ching</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Kuan-Wen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lu, Yun-Ru</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huang, I-Tao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huang, Yu-Chen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huang, Chun-Jen</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of clinical medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Jen, Chun-Kai</au><au>Lu, Kuo-Ching</au><au>Chen, Kuan-Wen</au><au>Lu, Yun-Ru</au><au>Huang, I-Tao</au><au>Huang, Yu-Chen</au><au>Huang, Chun-Jen</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Oral Dexmedetomidine Achieves Superior Effects in Mitigating Emergence Agitation and Demonstrates Comparable Sedative Effects to Oral Midazolam for Pediatric Premedication: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies</atitle><jtitle>Journal of clinical medicine</jtitle><addtitle>J Clin Med</addtitle><date>2024-02-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>13</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>1174</spage><pages>1174-</pages><issn>2077-0383</issn><eissn>2077-0383</eissn><abstract>: Oral midazolam is the most commonly used sedative premedication agent in pediatric patients. While effective, oral midazolam cannot reduce the incidence of emergence agitation. Oral dexmedetomidine may be effective in providing satisfactory sedation and reduce the incidence of emergence agitation, although the results of different randomized controlled trials are conflicting.
: This study enrolled randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining premedication with oral dexmedetomidine versus oral midazolam in pediatric patients undergoing general anesthesia. PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and the Web of Science database were searched from their inception until June 2023. The outcomes were the incidence of satisfactory preoperative sedation, satisfactory sedation during separation from parents, satisfactory sedation during anesthesia induction using an anesthesia mask, and the incidence of emergence agitation.
: A total of 9 RCTs comprising 885 patients were analyzed. Our data revealed comparable effects of dexmedetomidine and midazolam with respect to satisfactory preoperative sedation and a satisfactory incidence of sedation during parental separation and mask acceptance before anesthesia induction. Notably, our data revealed that the rate of emergence agitation was significantly lower in pediatric patients receiving dexmedetomidine (
= 162) than in those receiving midazolam (
= 159) (odds ratio = 0.16; 95% confidence interval: 0.06 to 0.44;
< 0.001;
= 35%).
: Data from this meta-analysis revealed comparable effects for premedication with oral dexmedetomidine or oral midazolam with respect to satisfactory sedation; furthermore, premedication with oral dexmedetomidine more effectively mitigated emergence agitation in pediatric patients receiving general anesthesia compared with oral midazolam.</abstract><cop>Switzerland</cop><pub>MDPI AG</pub><pmid>38398486</pmid><doi>10.3390/jcm13041174</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1006-6762</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2077-0383 |
ispartof | Journal of clinical medicine, 2024-02, Vol.13 (4), p.1174 |
issn | 2077-0383 2077-0383 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2932436273 |
source | Open Access: PubMed Central; Publicly Available Content Database |
subjects | Analgesics Anxiety Bias Children Complications and side effects Dexmedetomidine General anesthesia Health aspects Meta-analysis Midazolam Patient outcomes Patients Pediatrics Prevention Risk factors Surgery Systematic review |
title | Oral Dexmedetomidine Achieves Superior Effects in Mitigating Emergence Agitation and Demonstrates Comparable Sedative Effects to Oral Midazolam for Pediatric Premedication: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-09T00%3A22%3A40IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Oral%20Dexmedetomidine%20Achieves%20Superior%20Effects%20in%20Mitigating%20Emergence%20Agitation%20and%20Demonstrates%20Comparable%20Sedative%20Effects%20to%20Oral%20Midazolam%20for%20Pediatric%20Premedication:%20A%20Systematic%20Review%20and%20Meta-Analysis%20of%20Randomized%20Controlled%20Studies&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20clinical%20medicine&rft.au=Jen,%20Chun-Kai&rft.date=2024-02-01&rft.volume=13&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=1174&rft.pages=1174-&rft.issn=2077-0383&rft.eissn=2077-0383&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/jcm13041174&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA784041114%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c379t-c29acbaf5ebf23bfe922266b9898c6373c815d9f79330fde25b272bb362fff263%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2930962922&rft_id=info:pmid/38398486&rft_galeid=A784041114&rfr_iscdi=true |