Comparison of sedation,amnesia, and patient comfort produced by intravenous and rectal diazepam

In a cross-over study, intravenous diazepam was compared with rectal diazepam for sedation in outpatient oral surgery. Fifty-four operations were performed on 27 patients. Recovery from sedation, experience during the postoperative course, amnesia, estimation of the sedative effect, and patient preference of method of sedation were studied. The recovery times of the sedation methods did not differ. Sedative effects after the first operation were estimated as good by 87% of patients given intravenous sedation and by 75% of those given rectal sedation. However, there was a significant relationship between the subjective experience of stronger sedative effect and preference of sedation method that favored the intravenous technique. The degree of amnesia was significantly higher during intravenous sedation, but a high degree of amnesia was not related to patients' preference for a sedation method. Neither sedation method produced any local side effects.     

Rectal sedation with diazepam or midazolam during extractions of traumatized primary incisors: a prospective, randomized, double-blind trial in Swedish children aged 1.5-3.5 years.

The aim of this study was to compare rectal sedation with diazepam and rectal sedation with midazolam with regard to sedative effect, treatment acceptance, and amnesia. Ninety children, 1.5-3.5 years of age, consecutively referred for extractions of traumatized primary incisors were randomly sedated with diazepam (0.7 mg/kg body weight) or midazolam (0.3 mg/kg body weight). The study design was randomized and double-blind. The level of sedation (state of mind) was assessed prior to and 10 and 60 min after administration of the drug by use of a behavioral scale (Wilton). The children's acceptance of procedures was assessed using another behavioral scale (Holst) during administration of the sedative, application of topical anesthesia, injection of a local anesthesia, and extraction. Amnesia was evaluated by the parents on the following day, with the child being asked standardized questions. Parental ratings of the child's and their own distress during and after treatment were made on a visual analog scale (VAS). No differences were found between the sedatives concerning level of sedation during treatment, acceptance of procedures, or amnesia. At discharge, 60 min after administration of the sedative, the children receiving diazepam were significantly more agitated (P=0.006). Parental rating on a VAS of the child's discomfort after treatment was significantly higher in the diazepam group (P=0.006). There was a tendency for children with poor acceptance of the rectal administration to display a more negative acceptance of the dental treatment. In conclusion, the present results, in combination with known pharmacological advantages, indicate that midazolam is preferable in outpatients when sedation is needed and amnesia is desirable.     

Rectal sedation with diazepam or midazolam during extractions of traumatized primary incisors: a prospective,randomized, double-blind trial in Swedish children aged 1.5-3.5 years

The aim of this study was to compare rectal sedation with diazepam and rectal sedation with midazolam with regard to sedative effect, treatment acceptance, and amnesia. Ninety children, 1.5-3.5 years of age, consecutively referred for extractions of traumatized primary incisors were randomly sedated with diazepam (0.7 mg/kg body weight) or midazolam (0.3 mg/kg body weight). The study design was randomized and double-blind. The level of sedation (state of mind) was assessed prior to and 10 and 60 min after administration of the drug by use of a behavioral scale (Wilton). The children's acceptance of procedures was assessed using another behavioral scale (Holst) during administration of the sedative, application of topical anesthesia, injection of a local anesthesia, and extraction. Amnesia was evaluated by the parents on the following day, with the child being asked standardized questions. Parental ratings of the child's and their own distress during and after treatment were made on a visual analog scale (VAS). No differences were found between the sedatives concerning level of sedation during treatment, acceptance of procedures, or amnesia. At discharge, 60 min after administration of the sedative, the children receiving diazepam were significantly more agitated (P = 0.006). Parental rating on a VAS of the child's discomfort after treatment was significantly higher in the diazepam group (P = 0.006). There was a tendency for children with poor acceptance of the rectal administration to display a more negative acceptance of the dental treatment. In conclusion, the present results, in combination with known pharmacological advantages, indicate that midazolam is preferable in outpatients when sedation is needed and amnesia is desirable.     

Prolonged recovery after intravenous diazepam

Prolonged recovery from intravenous diazepam after the day of administration has been examined in 2,468 consecutive patients who underwent oral surgery and general dentistry. Patients ranged in age from 2 to 94 years and received a mean diazepam dose of 19 mg, either by itself or with small amounts of methohexital sodium. Recovery was assessed by use of a questionnaire, and the answers were related to sexual gender, age, weight, dosage, procedure, duration, level of apprehension, and results of the sedation.     

Efficacy of oral midazolam prior to intravenous sedation for the removal of third molars.

The combination of oral and intravenous sedation has not been well investigated and this study examined the combination's effect on amnesia, anxiety, cardiovascular stability and recovery in a double blind, cross-over, placebo controlled trial. Patients were given 7.5 mg oral midazolam or placebo 1 h prior to intravenous midazolam and surgery. This investigation demonstrated significant anxiolysis, amnesia and patient preference for oral midazolam compared to placebo. There was no significant effect on cardiovascular stability, the intravenous dose of midazolam used or post-operative recovery. Low dose oral midazolam prior to intravenous sedation may be beneficial in very anxious patients, particularly if surgery is delayed.     

Dexmedetomidine versus midazolam in outpatient third molar surgery.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the use of dexmedetomidine with the use of midazolam during intravenous conscious sedation in third molar surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty healthy patients with symmetrically impacted mandibular third molars were included in this double-blind, crossover, randomized study. Either dexmedetomidine (group D) (4 microg.kg(-1).h(-1)) or midazolam (group M) (0.4 mg.kg(-1).h(-1)) was administered intravenously for 15 minutes before the first operation. At the second operation, the other agent was applied. Cardiorespiratory data were collected. The intraoperative sedation level, patient cooperation, and postoperative performance were scored and any pain reaction during the local anesthetic injection was recorded. Visual analog scales were additionally used for the subjective assessment of pain and patient satisfaction. Amnesia was evaluated by the patients' ability to recall the objects shown during the operations and the local anesthetic injection. Patients' preferences were recorded during the interview at the end of the second operations. RESULTS: The mean heart rate and blood pressure measurements were significantly lower in group D. There was no significant difference in the respiratory findings. A significantly higher number of patients showed pain reactions in group M. Sedation level, postoperative performance, and VAS pain scores were not statistically significant, whereas the differences in cooperation score and VAS for patient satisfaction were significant. Adequate amnesia was obtained in group M, however, no amnesia was demonstrated in group D. Sixty-five percent of the patients indicated a preference for dexmedetomidine sedation. CONCLUSION: Dexmedetomidine may be a remarkable alternative to midazolam for intravenous sedation because it seems to be a reliable and safe method, with additional analgesic effect providing a satisfactory sedation level without any serious side effects during impacted third molar surgery.     

Monitored anesthesia care for dental implant surgery: analysis of effectiveness and complications

The optimal method of providing safe and effective sedation for outpatients undergoing lengthy dental operations is unclear. We provided monitored anesthesia care (conscious sedation) for 102 consecutive dental implant procedures, using intravenous midazolam and fentanyl as primary pharmacologic agents. Midazolam was administered by multiple, intermittent injection or via continuous infusion. The dose of midazolam required for the induction of sedation ranged from 3.4 +/- 1.6 mg to 4.0 +/- 2.0 mg. Maintenance of adequate sedation required a mean midazolam administration rate of 4.0 +/- 2.1 mg/h to 5.1 +/- 2.1 mg/h, and a mean fentanyl administration rate of 54 +/- 29 mcg/h to 60 +/- 27 mcg/h. Continuous monitoring allowed for rapid detection and treatment of 40 separate hemodynamic and respiratory problems. There was no evidence of patient injury, and all patients returned home on the day of surgery. A post-operative telephone survey revealed that 65% of patients had complete amnesia for operative events, 96% were satisfied with monitored anesthesia care, and 94% would desire a similar anesthetic technique for future procedures.     

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.     

Butorphanol/diazepam compared to meperidine/diazepam for sedation in oral maxillofacial surgery: a double-blind evaluation

Butorphanol and meperidine, each combined with titrated diazepam, 10 to 20 mg, were compared in a randomized, double-blind trial for their sedative-analgesic effects. The fifty patients underwent multiple dental extractions under local anesthesia and sedation in an outpatient clinic. Butorphanol was significantly superior to meperidine with respect to the diazepam dose required to achieve the target level of sedation, the total diazepam dose administered, the clinical level of sedation, the surgeon's overall evaluations of effectiveness and of sedation level, and several patient evaluation parameters measured at discharge from the recovery room and at follow-up interview. All study drugs were well tolerated. Butorphanol offers clinical advantages over meperidine when combined with diazepam for sedation analgesia in outpatient oral surgery.     

Evaluation of patient-controlled remifentanil application in third molar surgery.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of patient-controlled remifentanil application in combination with intravenous (IV) midazolam sedation during third molar surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty healthy patients with symmetrically placed impacted bilateral mandibular third molars were included in this prospective, placebo-controlled, double-blind, cross-over, randomized clinical study. A bolus dose of 0.05 mg/kg intravenous midazolam was applied to each patient. Remifentanil was administered (group MR) by patient controlled infusion (PCI) either in the first or the second operation. In the other operation, a placebo (group MP) was given in the same manner. Perioperative blood samples were obtained to determine the changes in the stress hormone (aldosterone, adrenocorticotropic hormone [ACTH], renin) levels. Vital signs and oxygen saturation were recorded. Ramsey's sedation scale and modified Steward's recovery scale was used for evaluation of consciousness. Pain, patient satisfaction, cooperation score, reaction to local anesthetic injection, and degree of amnesia were also assessed. RESULTS: Remifentanil significantly increased the level of sedation, patient cooperation, and satisfaction; decreased the oxygen saturation, heart rate, and pain. While renin levels were significantly different, ACTH and aldosteron levels did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. Aldosterone and ACTH levels significantly decreased, whereas the renin level significantly increased in both groups during the operations. Remifentanil did not significantly alter the recovery time. CONCLUSION: Patient-controlled remifentanil application in combination with IV midazolam sedation seems to be a safe and reliable method, which effectively eliminates pain and provides a satisfactory sedation level, without any serious side effect.     

A comparison of chloral hydrate and diazepam sedation in young children

The purpose of this study was to compare a high and low dose of diazepam with chloral hydrate in the sedation of young children. Thirty healthy children between the ages of 20 and 48 months, with a mean age of 33.5 months, participated in the study. All children exhibited negative behavior during a screening visit and required at least two restorative appointments with the use of sedation. A dose of either 0.3 mg/kg or 0.6 mg/kg of diazepam at one visit and 50 mg/kg of chloral hydrate at another visit was administered in a double-blind manner. All children were restrained in a Papoose Board with auxiliary head restraint and received 50% nitrous oxide/oxygen during treatment. The degree of sleep, body movement, crying, pulse rate, respiratory rate, and blood oxygen saturation were monitored before and during the operative procedures. Vital signs remained essentially unchanged during treatment, except for transitory elevations of the pulse during periods of stimulation. There were no statistically significant differences among the three drug regimens with regard to movement and crying. Significantly more patients who received chloral hydrate were asleep than when either dose of diazepam was given during the first 60 min of treatment. The only side effect found was vomiting in one patient with both chloral hydrate and diazepam. It is concluded that the sedative effects of chloral hydrate and diazepam are similar when young children are sedated for dental treatment. The use of diazepam might be more advantageous because chloral hydrate produces more sleep during the first hour of treatment.     

Oral clonidine pre-treatment and diazepam/meperidine sedation

Clonidine has recently been used as a pre-operative medication and sedative/anxiolytic drug. Its extended duration of action makes it suitable for longer procedures. In this randomized, crossover, placebo-controlled clinical trial, we characterized the effects of oral clonidine pre-treatment on intravenous diazepam/meperidine sedation using the bi-spectral index (BIS) in 13 participants. Clonidine significantly increased the numbers of BIS-depressed readings and percent memory loss during sedation, while reducing total diazepam and post-operative analgesic dosages by 44% and 55%, respectively. Systolic, diastolic, and mean arterial blood pressures, as well as pulse rates, were reduced. Respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, end-tidal CO(2), and recovery from sedation were unchanged. Participants, surgeons, and sedationists preferred clonidine over the placebo. Clonidine pre-treatment increased and prolonged sedation and amnesia and stabilized vital signs while significantly decreasing diazepam and post-operative analgesic usage. These results suggest that pre-operative clonidine administration could be a useful supplement to intravenous sedation for dental procedures of long duration.     

The actual dose delivery from a diazepam enema differs depending on the patients position during administration

In a randomized single-blind cross-over study on 14 volunteers the relation between dose, effect and serum concentration was studied when diazepam in solution was administered in a dose of 0.5 mg/kg bodyweight rectally with the volunteer placed either laterally or prone. When lying prone the delivered diazepam dose was on average 24% higher compared to in the lateral position. The difference in delivered dose affected sedation as well as serum concentration but did not prolong recovery time. At the time of clinical recovery, the serum concentration was still at a very high level. Oxygen (p02) and carbon dioxide (pCO2) tensions were monitored transcutaneously in 9 subjects and were unaffected by the sedative level. The study suggests that when diazepam enemas similar to the ones used here, they should be administered with the patient in a prone position.     

Preanesthetic medication with rectal midazolam in children undergoing dental extractions

Three different dosages (0.25, 0.35, and 0.45 mg/kg) of rectally administered midazolam were compared with each other and with placebo for preanesthetic medication in children undergoing dental extractions. Eighty patients between the ages of 2 and 10 years were randomly allocated into four groups in this double-blind study. The results from this trial show that 30 minutes after rectal administration of all doses of midazolam, good anxiolysis, sedation, and cooperation were obtained in most patients. A high prevalence (23%) of disinhibition reactions was observed, particularly in the 0.45 mg/kg group. For this reason, 0.25 or 0.35 mg/kg appears to be the dose of choice when rectal midazolam is used for premedication in children.     

Comparison of two different dosages of hydroxyzine for sedation in the paediatric dental patient

AIM: This study compared the effect of two different dosages of hydroxyzine supported by 50% nitrous oxide inhalation sedation in child patients. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Thirty uncooperative healthy children with an age range of 31-120 months were included in this study. Patients were randomly assigned into two groups. The patients in group 1 were given 20 mg of hydroxyzine (Atarax) 24 h preoperatively and on the operation day, 3.7 mg/kg hydroxyzine was administered orally. The patients in group 2 received 3.7 mg/kg hydroxyzine orally only on the operation day. All patients also received 50% nitrous oxide inhalation sedation. The child's behaviour was evaluated every 5 min by using Houpt Sedation Rating Scale. The oxygen saturation and heart rates were also followed. RESULTS: The mean age of the children in the study was 61.9 months (SD 11.9) for group 1 and 53.7 months (SD 12.8) for group 2. Evaluation of the results showed that there were no significant differences (P < 0.05) between behavioural attitudes and sedation degree of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: Twenty milligrams of hydroxyzine administered 24 h preoperatively has no significant benefit on sedation of the child.     

A comparative study of intravenous diazepam and midazolam for oral surgery

Intravenous diazepam was compared with intravenous midazolam for conscious sedation in a single-blind study of 50 Hong Kong Chinese patients acting as their own controls. Verrill's sign was used as the end-point of sedation, and bilateral, similarly impacted lower third molars served as the surgical model. The drugs produced comparable levels of sedation, stable vital signs, and good operating conditions in all patients. Midazolam had numerous advantages over diazepam: more rapid onset of sedation, less pain during injection, profound anterograde amnesia, and fewer postoperative complications. The incidence of thrombophlebitis was low with both drugs and appears to be so in Chinese in general. A significant majority of the patients preferred sedation to other techniques and midazolam to diazepam.     

A preliminary study on oxygen saturation levels of patients during periodontal surgery with and without oral conscious sedation using diazepam

BACKGROUND: Stress and anxiety alter respiratory rate and thereby alter oxygen saturation in the blood. Management of psychological stress in the dental office may help maintain blood gas homeostasis. One method of stress management is through the use of preoperative oral sedation. METHODS: The study population consisted of 13 patients scheduled to receive two quadrants of periodontal surgery at two different appointments. A randomized split-mouth crossover design was used with one quadrant of surgery involving preoperative oral sedation (diazepam) and local anesthetic, and the second using local anesthetic only. Oxygen saturation was monitored by pulse oximetry, which recorded the number of times saturation dropped below 95% in a given time period. Data were recorded at 5 time periods: 1) baseline; 2) from time of anesthetic administration to 20 minutes into surgery; 3) 21 to 40 minutes; 4) 41 to 60 minutes; and 5) 61 to 80 minutes into the surgery. Data were analyzed by a two-factor repeated measures ANOVA. The two within-group factors were treatment group and time. RESULTS: Results indicated no significant interaction between time and treatment (P > .05). However, data for groups over time suggested a trend supporting an interaction. The eta2 value of 0.124 suggested a moderate effect favoring the diazepam treatment. No significant difference was noted for the main effect of treatment and time. However, the eta2 value of 0.24 for treatment effect (diazepam versus no diazepam) suggested a meaningful difference between groups. Similarly the eta2 value of 0.135 for time suggested a moderate effect over time within-subjects. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that diazepam given orally in adult dosages does not cause significant respiratory depression, and is generally safe for those healthy patients who may require slight to mild sedation during periodontal surgery.     

Propofol intravenous conscious sedation for anxious children in a specialist paediatric dentistry unit

Objectives. To report on both the use and dosage of propofol, as a new intravenous (IV) conscious sedative agent, for anxious children referred to a specialist paediatric dentistry service. Setting. Paediatric Dentistry Unit, Glasgow Dental Hospital and School. Sample. Thirty‐four children, 25 females and 9 males, mean age 12 years 10 months, with a mean weight of 54·6 kg (range 30–110 kg). Methods. Report from 34 patients receiving intravenous sedation for the first time in respect of weight dose and amount of treatment completed. Results. Thirty‐two children successfully accepted operative dental care on their first visit, they received a mean total dose of 146·25 mg of propofol (range 10 mg to 356 mg); in relation to body weight, the mean was 2·5 mg/kg (range 0·2–5·4 mg/kg). The treatment that they received included fissure sealants, amalgam and adhesive restorations, root canal therapy and single and multiple extractions. Their sedation and recovery were uneventful. Conclusions. Sub‐anaesthetic doses of propofol used for IV conscious sedation infusion facilitated operative dental treatment in anxious children.     

The effectiveness of flurazepam as night sedation prior to the removal of third molars

Anxiety prior to dental treatment is a well-recognized problem. Although oral sedation has been recommended the night before appointments to reduce this anxiety, there are no well-controlled studies to support this claim. The present double-blind cross-over study investigated the effect of 30 mg of flurazepam taken the night before the removal of impacted third molars. Preoperative anxiety, visuomotor performance and sleep patterns were investigated in 20 adult patients with similarly impacted third molars. While preoperative flurazepam led to a statistically significant improvement in sleep patterns, there was no reduction in pre-operative anxiety on the morning of surgery. In addition, the flurazepam-treated group demonstrated significantly impaired visuo-motor performance 60 min after intravenous sedation compared to this group where intravenous sedation was used only preceded by placebo. Patients had a significant preference for flurazepam over placebo as a night-time sedative.     

静脉泵入咪达唑仑清醒镇静技术控制牙科恐惧症的临床效果评价

目的评价静脉泵入咪达唑仑控制牙科恐惧症的临床效果。方法选择31例对牙科治疗极度恐惧但能与医师良好沟通的患者,将其两侧需行根管治疗的2颗患牙分别纳入试验组和对照组,对照组为常规牙科治疗,试验组加用咪达唑仑静脉泵入清醒镇静技术,控制患者治疗过程中的恐惧。评价两组患者的治疗依从性和行为治疗效果,并观察试验组患者生命体征的变化及副作用的发生率。结果试验组、对照组的Houpt行为治疗效果评分和Frankl治疗依从性评分均存在显著性差异（z=- 4.846,P=0.000;z=- 4.907,P=0.000）。试验组患者采用镇静措施后血压、心率均有轻度降低,并有轻度的呼吸抑制,但不影响治疗完成。结论单纯咪达唑仑静脉镇静对于能够良好沟通、主观愿意配合的极度牙科恐惧患者具有较好的疗效。