Balancing efficacy and safety in the use of oral sedation in dental outpatients

BACKGROUND: Concerns about the safety of pediatric oral sedation and the incremental use of triazolam in adults prompted a workshop cosponsored by several professional organizations. OVERVIEW: There is a strong need and demand for adult and pediatric sedation services. Using oral medication to achieve anxiolysis in adults appears to have a wide margin of safety. Mortality and serious morbidity, however, have been reported with oral conscious sedation, especially in young children. Most serious adverse events are related to potentially avoidable respiratory complications. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical trials are needed to evaluate oral sedative drugs and combinations, as well as to develop discharge criteria with objective quantifiable measures of home readiness. Courses devoted to airway management should be developed for dentists who provide conscious sedation services. State regulation of enteral administration of sedatives to achieve conscious sedation is needed to ensure safety. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Safety in outpatient sedation is of paramount concern, with enteral administration of benzodiazepines appearing safe but poorly documented in the office setting. Conscious sedation by the enteral route, including incremental triazolam, necessitates careful patient evaluation, monitoring, documentation, facilities, equipment and personnel as described in American Dental Association and American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry guidelines.     

Comparison of three conscious sedation regimens for pediatric dental patients

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical success of three conscious sedation regimens for pediatric dental patients. A clinical trial was performed wherein dental treatment was administered to pediatric patients ASA I and II under conscious sedation.. Fifty-four children were divided into three groups of 18 patients each, randomly assigned Group A received hydroxyzine (2 mg/kg 2 h before treatment and a subsequent dose of 1 mg/kg 20 min before treatment) orally; group B received 0.50 mg/kg midazolam mixed with 1.5 mg/kg hydroxyzine 20 min before treatment orally; group C received chloral hydrate, 50 mg/kg mixed with 1.5 mg/kg hydroxyzine 20 min before treatment orally. The Ohio State Behavioral Rating Scale (OSBRS) showed statistically significant differences between groups B and C with respect to group A. The regimens of midazolam or chloral hydrate mixed with hydroxyzine represent excellent choices for conscious sedation regimens for pediatric dental patients.     

Evaluation by thoracic impedance cardiography of diazepam, placebo, and two drug combinations for intravenous sedation of dental outpatients

The cardiovascular and respiratory effects of three common intravenous premedicants were examined noninvasively in a population of 20 dental outpatients scheduled for surgical removal of third-molars. Two third molars from one side of the mouth were removed at each appointment. Group 1 received a diazepam titration (mean dose = 25.6 mgs) at one appointment and placebo at the other appointment. Group 2 received a combination of diazepam (12.5 mg), fentanyl (0.1 mg), and methohexital (mean dose = 18.0 mg) at one appointment and the combination of diazepam (15.0 mg) and methohexital (mean dose = 27.0 mg) at the other appointment. Noninvasive measurement of cardiac output revealed little change during intravenous drug administration, but a significant increase was seen in all groups following local anesthesia and during surgery. Heart rate was elevated and stroke volume decreased during administration of the two-drug combinations. Oxygen saturation was greatly decreased following the combination of diazepam, fentanyl, and methohexital. These findings indicate that the combination of diazepam, fentanyl, and methohexital results in decreased oxygen saturation, a transient decrease in stroke volume, and an elevated heart rate when used as an intravenous premedicant for dental outpatients.     

Enteral sedation: safety, efficacy, and controversy

This article reviews the safety and efficacy of enteral sedation use by dentists to provide an evidence-based perspective on the current controversy associated with the use and training requirements for enteral sedation in dental outpatients. Despite the many benefits to patients and dental practitioners, the administration of anxiolytic agents by the oral, sublingual, or rectal route (collectively referred to as enteral sedation) is controversial and has engendered efforts to limit its use and increase training requirements to levels similar to those for parenteral sedation. Factors contributing to this controversy include the off-label use of sedative-hypnotics for outpatient sedation, idiosyncratic reactions to triazolam, and incremental dosing. Evidence supports the continued need and demand for anesthesia and sedation services to ensure access to care for highly anxious and phobic patients, the very young, and special-needs patients. The published evidence and vast clinical experience for oral sedation with benzodiazepines also supports the safety of administering benzodiazepines for anxiety relief with little evidence of deleterious effects when administered incrementally to patients undergoing a dental procedure or at doses greater than those used for hypnosis. Enteral sedation with benzodiazepines remains a time-tested, safe, and widely used modality that needs to be maintained as part of general practice to ensure adequate access to dental care for the many patients for whom fear of dentistry remains a significant barrier to oral health care.     

Retrograde amnesia after intravenous sedation and general anaesthesia in a dental hospital

Midazolam, a benzodiazepine, is commonly used for intravenous sedation for dental procedures and, together with other benzodiazepines, can cause anterograde amnesia. Retrograde amnesia, however, is rare. It is defined as a loss of access to memory of events that occurred, or information that was learned, before the injury or event that caused the amnesia. We know of no reports of this occurring after the intravenous use of midazolam alone and few after general anaesthesia. We present two cases of retrograde amnesia: one after intravenous sedation and one after general anaesthesia.     

A comparison of two oral ketamine-diazepam regimens for the sedation of anxious pediatric dental patients.

PURPOSE: This study compared 2 oral ketamine-diazepam regimens (8 mg/kg and 10 mg/kg of ketamine in combination with 0.1 mg/kg diazepam) in preschool age children with respect to physiological, behavioral and amnestic parameters. METHODS: Twenty-five children completed the double-blind, crossover design. Physiologic, behavioral and amnestic effects were evaluated. RESULTS: ANOVA demonstrated significant changes in systolic blood pressures and heart rates in both the 8 mg/kg group and 10 mg/kg group (P < 0.05), as well as significant changes in diastolic blood pressures in the 10 mg/kg group (P < 0.05). However, these changes were not clinically significant. Success rates were 28% for the 8 mg/kg dosage and 44% for the 10 mg/kg dosage. There was a cumulative vomiting rate of 50% and a psychic phenomena rate of 10%. There were no statistically significant differences between the two dosages with regard to success rates, postoperative vomiting, or psychic phenomena using McNemar's test. CONCLUSIONS: There is no advantage of 10 mg/kg dose of ketamine over the 8 mg/kg dose. Ketamine did not demonstrate amnestic effects in this study. There were statistically but no clinically significant changes in physiological parameters in either group. This study does not support the use of either 8 mg/kg or 10 mg/kg oral ketamine for the sedation of uncooperative children.     

The use of temazepam elixir in surgical dental sedation: a comparison with intravenous midazolam.

Out-patients attending for removal of at least one lower third molar were randomly allocated to treatment with temazepam elixir (n = 7) or intravenous midazolam (n = 8), as well as local analgesia. Patients were tested prior to drug administration and at the end of surgery. Both drugs increased heart rate and midazolam also decreased diastolic blood pressure. The two drugs caused significant, equal increases in ratings of sedation, but the reduction of anxiety was significant only for midazolam. There was significant amnesia for material presented after drug administration, as well as for dental events and this was significantly greater for midazolam. The effects of these drugs in dental patients were compared with those in normal volunteers treated in an identical manner, but without oral surgery. The drugs had similar significant cardiovascular and amnesic effects in the volunteers and the same effects on mood ratings, even though volunteers and patients differed in their pretreatment levels of anxiety and discontent. The dentist's ratings of the sedation and operating conditions were excellent in both cases. Thus temazepam elixir provided a useful sedative for oral surgery, avoiding the complications of intravenous administration. However, for equivalent levels of sedation, midazolam had greater anxiolytic and amnesic effects than temazepam.     

Plaque-removal efficacy of four types of dental floss

BACKGROUND: Effective plaque removal is essential for gingival health, and dental floss is used to augment plaque removal achieved with a toothbrush. METHODS: This randomized, controlled, examiner-masked, five-period crossover study examined plaque removal in 25 subjects following single use with an American Dental Association reference manual toothbrush alone and in combination with four floss products: three traditional (unwaxed, woven, and shred-resistant) and one powered flosser. Plaque was scored before and after brushing for 1 minute. The Rustogi modified Navy plaque index was used to focus scores on tooth areas contacted during the proper use of dental floss. RESULTS: Mean plaque reductions (baseline minus postbrushing) in floss contact areas were as follows: 0.181 with the toothbrush alone; 0.228, 0.217, and 0.210 for the toothbrush in combination with the three traditional flosses, unwaxed, woven, and shred-resistant, respectively; and 0.252 for the toothbrush plus powered flosser. No statistically significant differences were found between the three traditional floss treatments. All four floss treatments showed greater (P <0.05) mean plaque removal than the toothbrush alone. Mean plaque removal with the powered flosser combination was greater than for the woven combination and shred-resistant combination (both P < or =0.006) and fell just short of significance compared to the unwaxed combination (P = 0.051). CONCLUSIONS: All four floss products in combination with a manual toothbrush removed plaque significantly better than the toothbrush alone. Among floss types, there was evidence of superiority for the powered flosser, but there were no significant treatment differences between the three traditional floss products.     

Accumulated oropharyngeal water increases coughing during dental treatment with intravenous sedation

Summary  In dental procedures performed under intravenous sedation in patients with intellectual disabilities, procedures are sometimes interrupted by the cough reflex, which may be triggered by intraoral use of water and/or increased secretion stimulating the pharyngeal/laryngeal mucosa, or by those irritating the tracheal mucosa directly through anesthetics-induced impairment of the laryngeal closure reflex. We investigated relationships between frequency of coughing episodes and intraoral use of water, water remaining in the oropharyngeal space, and mean infusion rate of propofol during dental treatments performed under intravenous sedation with midazolam and propofol. Twenty-one intellectually disabled patients were enrolled. After induction, a 14 Fr. suction catheter was inserted nasally, which was fixed where oropharyngeal suction could be done most effectively. Patients were divided into three groups according to the amount of intraoral use of water, amount of oropharyngeal suction and mean infusion rate of propofol. The amount of oropharyngeal suction significantly correlated with intraoral use of water. Frequency of coughing episodes significantly correlated with amount of oropharyngeal suction per minute. However, coughing episodes correlated neither with intraoral use of water nor with infusion rate of propofol. These findings suggested that accumulation of water in the oropharynx increased vulnerability to the cough reflex in dental treatments performed under intravenous sedation.     

Double-blind comparison of nalbuphine and meperidine in combination with diazepam for intravenous conscious sedation in oral surgery outpatients

Nalbuphine and meperidine were compared as analgesic components of intravenous conscious sedation in a double-blind, prospective trial of 47 patients undergoing elective oral surgery. Subjects were evaluated for pain intensity, pain relief, anxiety, sedation, recall, and vital signs at systematic observation points intraoperatively and postoperatively. At the conclusion of surgery 83% of patients who had received nalbuphine and 86% of patients treated with meperidine indicated complete pain relief. One observed adverse reaction was attributed to meperidine and another to the sedative component diazepam. No statistically significant differences were observed between nalbuphine and meperidine treatments.     

A comparison of two meperidine/hydroxyzine sedation regimens for the uncooperative pediatric dental patient

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of submucosal-administered meperidine (SM) and oral-administered meperidine (OM). Both regimens were used in conjunction with oral hydroxyzine for the sedation of children for dental treatment. METHODS: Twenty preschool-age children, with previous histories of uncooperative behavior, were randomly assigned to first receive a sedation regimen of either SM (0.5 mg/ lb), or OM (1 mg/lb), both with oral hydroxyzine (0.5 mg/lb). A cross-over design was utilized so that each child received both regimens. Safety was monitored through vital signs and side effects. Efficacy was measured with Houpt and Frankl behavior ratings. RESULTS: Vital signs remained stable during both treatments. Differences noted were clinically insignificant. The major side effects reported during submucosal injection included pain (58%) and edema (26%). All blinded behavior ratings, in both sedation regimens, significantly improved from presedation Frankl ratings. No significant differences existed between treatments. Success was 63% in the SM group and 80% in the OM group. The percentages were not statistically significant (P=.219). CONCLUSIONS: Both methods of administration were found to be safe and effective for sedating uncooperative pediatric dental patients. Neither was significantly more effective or safer than the other.