Intranasal atomized dexmedetomidine for sedation during third molar extraction

Nooh, Nasser; Sheta, Saad A.; Abdullah, Walid Ahmed; Abdelhalim, Ashraf Arafat

doi:10.1016/j.ijom.2013.02.003

Cited by 44 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…compared IV and IN dexmedetomidine and found a significantly lower MAP and HR in the IV group. Nooh et al . compared IN dexmedetomidine with IN placebo and found no significant difference in pain level, but a significantly lower level of MAP and HR in the IN dexmedetomidine group.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy of Dexmedetomidine as a Sole Sedative Agent in Small Diagnostic and Therapeutic Procedures: A Systematic Review

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dexmedetomidine is an upcoming agent with sedative, anxiolytic, and analgesic properties. This review summarizes empirical evidence for the efficacy of dexmedetomidine as a sole sedative agent, and its effectiveness for small diagnostic and therapeutic procedure, in comparison with other frequently used sedatives. All randomized controlled trials on the effect of dexmedetomidine were reviewed. Pain level, patient satisfaction, operator satisfaction, procedure duration, recovery time, and hemodynamic and respiratory characteristics were examined. A total of 1993 patients (1,621 adults; 372 children) from 35 studies were included. In the adult studies, dexmedetomidine yielded significantly lower pain levels compared to the other sedatives (in 31.25% of the included studies) and significantly more patient satisfaction (68.2%). In studies on children, more favorable results concerning respiratory safety and the level of adequate sedation were found compared to the control sedatives. Implications for future studies are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy of Dexmedetomidine as a Sole Sedative Agent in Small Diagnostic and Therapeutic Procedures: A Systematic Review

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Alternatively, intranasal administration of dexmedetomidine avoids high peak plasma levels but still results in adequate plasma levels after uptake, as shown by Iirola et al [23]. Moreover, the usefulness of intranasal administration for procedural sedation has been demonstrated by Zhang et al and Nooh et al [24,25]. …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dexmedetomidine versus Midazolam in Procedural Sedation. A Systematic Review of Efficacy and Safety

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesTo systematically review the literature comparing the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine and midazolam when used for procedural sedation.Materials and MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and COCHRANE for clinical trials comparing dexmedetomidine and midazolam for procedural sedation up to June 20, 2016. Inclusion criteria: clinical trial, human subjects, adult subjects (≥18 years), article written in English, German, French or Dutch, use of study medication for conscious sedation and at least one group receiving dexmedetomidine and one group receiving midazolam. Exclusion criteria: patients in intensive care, pediatric subjects and per protocol use of additional sedative medication other than rescue medication. Outcome measures for efficacy comparison were patient and clinician satisfaction scores and pain scores; outcome measures for safety comparison were hypotension, hypoxia, and circulatory and respiratory complications.ResultsWe identified 89 papers, of which 12 satisfied the inclusion and exclusion criteria; 883 patients were included in these studies. Dexmedetomidine was associated with higher patient and operator satisfaction than midazolam. Patients receiving dexmedetomidine experienced less pain and had lower analgesic requirements. Respiratory and hemodynamic safety were similar.ConclusionsDexmedetomidine is a promising alternative to midazolam for use in procedural sedation. Dexmedetomidine provides more comfort during the procedure for the patient and clinician. If carefully titrated, the safety profiles are similar.

show abstract

“…Recently, the optimal timing for the administration of 1 lgÁkg À1 intranasal dexmedetomidine for premedication in children was judged based on intravenous cannulation attempts at different time points after premedication. The median time for sedation onset was found to be 25 (25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30) min (10).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A limitation to this study was that we did not use a nasal spray or an atomizer instead of nasal drops. Although, nasal atomizer was available for us in another research (30), it was not available at the time of conduct of this study. That could have optimized drug absorption, hastened onset, and thus more efficient sedation (31,32).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intranasal dexmedetomidine vs midazolam for premedication in children undergoing complete dental rehabilitation: a double‐blinded randomized controlled trial

Sheta

AlSarheed

Abdelhalim

2013

Pediatric Anesthesia

146

163

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Intranasal atomized dexmedetomidine for sedation during third molar extraction

Cited by 44 publications

References 21 publications

Efficacy of Dexmedetomidine as a Sole Sedative Agent in Small Diagnostic and Therapeutic Procedures: A Systematic Review

Efficacy of Dexmedetomidine as a Sole Sedative Agent in Small Diagnostic and Therapeutic Procedures: A Systematic Review

Dexmedetomidine versus Midazolam in Procedural Sedation. A Systematic Review of Efficacy and Safety

Intranasal dexmedetomidine vs midazolam for premedication in children undergoing complete dental rehabilitation: a double‐blinded randomized controlled trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About