omparative Evaluation of the Intranasal Spray Formulation of Midazolam and Dexmedetomidine in Patients Undergoing Surgical Removal of Impacted Mandibular Third Molars: A Split Mouth Prospective Study

Effects of dexmedetomidine in non-operating room anesthesia in adults: a systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Dexmedetomidine (DEX) is an α2-adrenergic receptor agonist used for its sedative, analgesic, and anxiolytic effects. Non-Operating Room Anesthesia (NORA) is a modality of anesthesia that can be done under general anesthesia or procedural sedation or/and analgesia. In this particular setting, a level-2 sedation, such as the one provided by DEX, is beneficial. We aimed to study the effects and safety of DEX in the different NORA settings in the adult population.

METHODS

A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was conducted. Interventions using DEX only or DEX associated with other sedative agents, in adults (18 years old or more), were included. Procedures outside the NORA setting and/or without a control group without DEX were excluded. MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov, Scopus, LILACS, and SciELO were searched. The primary outcome was time until full recovery. Secondary outcomes included hemodynamic and respiratory complications and other adverse events, among others.

RESULTS

A total of 97 studies were included with a total of 6,706 participants. The meta-analysis demonstrated that DEX had a higher time until full recovery (95% CI = [0.34, 3.13] minutes, a higher incidence of hypotension (OR = 1.95 [1.25, 3.05], p = 0.003, I2 = 39%) and bradycardia (OR = 3.60 [2.29, 5.67], p < 0.00001, I2 = 0%), and a lower incidence of desaturation (OR = 0.40 [0.25, 0.66], p = 0.0003, I² = 60%).

CONCLUSION

DEX in NORA procedures in adults was associated with a lower incidence of amnesia and respiratory effects but had a long time to recovery and more hemodynamic complications.

Comparison of dexmedetomidine with midazolam for third molar surgery: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

The analgesic sedation of dexmedetomidine compared with midazolam for third molar surgery remains controversial. We conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the influence of dexmedetomidine versus midazolam for third molar surgery.

METHODS

We have searched PubMed, EMbase, Web of science, EBSCO, and Cochrane library databases through December 2022 for randomized controlled trials assessing the effect of dexmedetomidine versus midazolam for third molar surgery. This meta-analysis was performed using the random-effect model.

RESULTS

Four randomized controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with midazolam for third molar surgery, dexmedetomidine administration leads to comparable oxygen saturation (standard mean difference [SMD] = 0.25; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.24 to 0.74; P = .31), heart rate (SMD = -0.37; 95% CI = -1.18 to 0.44; P = .37), SBP (SMD = -0.24; 95% CI = -0.57 to 0.09; P = .16), DBP (SMD = -0.26; 95% CI = -0.60 to 0.07; P = .12), as well as nausea and vomiting (OR = 0.58; 95% CI = 0.05-6.61; P = .66).

CONCLUSIONS

Dexmedetomidine may obtain the comparable sedation efficacy with midazolam for third molar surgery.

Comparative Evaluation of Intranasal Dexmedetomidine Spray Versus Intranasal Normal Saline Spray in Patients Undergoing Transalveolar Extractions for Anxiety Reduction: A Randomized Control Study

Background

Dexmedetomidine has dose-dependent selectivity for alpha 2 adrenoceptors. It is a good sedative with analgesic characteristics and good haemodynamic stability. Intranasal sedation is a non-invasive medication delivery method that is both safe and well accepted by both children and adults. One of the most common procedures in maxillofacial surgery is transalveolar extraction. In minor oral surgery, a painless transalveolar extraction with little post-operative pain would be ideal.

Aim

To examine the effectiveness of intranasal dexmedetomidine spray against intranasal normal saline spray in patients undergoing transalveolar extractions for anxiety relief.

Method

We compared sedation effect by Ramsay sedation scale, analgesia by visual analogue scale, monitored BP and pulse rate for anxiety, and spo2 levels for any complication in this prospective double-blinded randomized control study for two groups, A group with intranasal dexmedetomidine spray and the B group of intranasal NS spray for placebo effect at 0 min, 15 min, 30 min, and 45 min until transalveolar extraction.

Result

As a result of the intranasal spray of dexmedetomidine, there were no related problems such as respiratory depression. There was a substantial difference in sedation and analgesia between group A and the placebo group, as well as a significant decrease in pulse rate and hypotension in the dexmedetomidine group to reduce anxiety.

Conclusion

Intranasal injection of atomized dexmedetomidine (1.5 mcg/kg) for patient sedation having transalveolar extractions or other minor surgical operations in oral and maxillofacial surgery is clinically effective, convenient, lowers anxiety, and safe.Clinical Trial Registration: No. CTRI/2021/07/035181.

Comparison of dexmedetomidine with midazolam for dental surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Dexmedetomidine and midazolam have become important approaches for the sedation of dental surgery. However, the comparison of these 2 drugs for the sedation of dental surgery has not been well established. We conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of dexmedetomidine versus midazolam for dental surgery.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials are searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the influence of dexmedetomidine versus midazolam on dental surgery are included. Two investigators independently have searched articles, extracted data, and assessed the quality of included studies. Meta-analysis is performed using the random-effect model.

RESULTS

Five RCTs and 420 patients are included in the meta-analysis. Compared with midazolam intervention for dental surgery, dexmedetomidine intervention has similar lowest SpO2, lowest heart rate and lowest systolic blood pressure, duration of surgery, and total volume of local anesthetic, but is associated with stable and reduced lowest diastolic blood pressure.

CONCLUSIONS

Similar benefits of dexmedetomidine and midazolam intervention are observed for the sedation of dental surgery in terms of SpO2, heart rate, systolic blood pressure, and the volume of local anesthetic, but dexmedetomidine may result in more stable diastolic blood pressure.