Dexmedetomidine versus other sedatives for non-painful pediatric examinations: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials - 20/03/20
Abstract |
Study objective |
Procedural sedation for non-painful pediatric examinations outside the operating room remains a challenge, this study was designed to compare the safety and effectiveness of sedation provided by dexmedetomidine versus other sedatives including chloral hydrate, midazolam, and pentobarbital for pediatric patients to complete diagnostic examinations.
Design |
Systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs.
Setting |
Pediatric procedural sedation.
Interventions |
Comparison of sedation by dexmedetomidine and chloral hydrate, or pentobarbital, or midazolam for pediatric non-painful sedation.
Patients |
The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register for randomized clinical trials were searched and limited the studies to those published in English through July 30, 2018.
Measurements |
Prospective randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing dexmedetomidine to chloral hydrate, pentobarbital, and midazolam for pediatric procedural examinations outside the operating room were included in the meta-analysis. Search terms included dexmedetomidine, precede, adrenergic alpha-2 receptor agonists, adrenergic alpha 2 agonists, adrenergic alpha-agonists, adrenergic alpha 2 receptor agonists, chloral hydrate, pentobarbital, midazolam, AND sedation.
Main results |
A total of 1486 studies were screened and nine RCTs were identified; 1076 patients were analyzed. Sedation with dexmedetomidine provided statistically higher incidences in completing examinations with fewer episodes of desaturation than the other sedatives did (OR 2.90, 95% CI: 1.39–6.07, P = 0.005, I2 = 77%; OR 0.29, 95% CI: 0.15–0.57, P = 0.0004, I2 = 0%, respectively).
Conclusions |
The meta-analysis shows that sedation by dexmedetomidine has lower incidence of respiratory depression and provides higher success rates in completing examinations than other traditional sedatives without compromising safety, indicating a prospective clinical use for procedural sedation.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Highlights |
• | Dexmedetomidine provides higher success rate in procedural sedation than chloral hydrate, pentobarbital and midazolam. |
• | Dexmedetomidine in non-painful pediatric procedural sedation would not increase the respiratory adverse events. |
• | Dexmedetomidine would be an optimal sedative for non-painful pediatric examinations. |
Keywords : Procedural sedation, Dexmedetomidine, Chloral hydrate, Midazolam, Pentobarbital, Adverse events
Plan
Vol 62
Article 109736- juin 2020 Retour au numéro
Article précédent
- Rapid in-person cognitive screening in the preoperative setting: Test considerations and recommendations from the Society for Perioperative Assessment and Quality Improvement (SPAQI)
- Franchesca Arias, Margaret Wiggins, Richard D. Urman, Rebecca Armstrong, Kurt Pfeifer, Angela M. Bader, David J. Libon, Anita Chopra, Catherine C. Price
- Corrigendum to “The effect of obstructive sleep apnea on readmissions and atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery” [J. Clin. Anesth. 56 (2019) 17–23]
- T. Robert Feng, Robert S. White, Xiaoyue Ma, Gulce Askin, Kane O. Pryor
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?