Is intravenous conscious sedation for surgical orthodontics in children a viable alternative to general anaesthesia? – a case review

Can intravenous conscious sedation with midazolam be effective at facilitating surgical dentistry in adolescent orthodontic patients? A service evaluation

Background Surgical dentistry during orthodontic care often occurs in adolescence and may involve surgical removal or exposure of teeth. The invasive nature of treatment, combined with dental anxiety, means care can often be provided under general anaesthesia (GA). Best-practice guidelines however endorse conscious sedation as an alternative, where appropriate. Although a limited number of studies have shown safe and effective use of intravenous conscious sedation (IVCS) with midazolam in this cohort, robust evidence to support routine use is lacking. Aim To assess whether IVCS with midazolam can effectively facilitate surgical dentistry in adolescent orthodontic patients in primary care.Method A retrospective service evaluation was undertaken reviewing clinical records of adolescents (aged 12-15 years) undergoing surgical exposure and/or surgical removal of teeth under IVCS with midazolam.Results A total of 174 adolescents (mean age 14.2 years) attended for treatment between 2009 and 2015. Of these adolescents, 98.9% (N = 172) allowed cannulation, with all surgical dentistry completed during a single visit. Midazolam dose ranged from 2-7 mg with 79.1% of patients having good or excellent cooperation and three minor adverse events occurring.Conclusion This service evaluation shows IVCS with midazolam can effectively facilitate surgical orthodontics in carefully selected adolescents. There is however a distinct need to further explore potential for this technique to provide a viable alternative to GA.

Reported side effects of intravenous midazolam sedation when used in paediatric dentistry: a review

BACKGROUND

Intravenous (IV) midazolam may be of value as an alternative paediatric dental sedation technique, but there is some apprehension concerning its routine use due to a lack of evidence regarding its safety and side effects.

AIM

To review all available literature reporting the side effects of IV midazolam in children undergoing dental procedures.

DESIGN

Both randomised controlled trials (RCT) and non-randomised studies were reviewed. Reported side effects were categorised as either significant or minor, and the percentage prevalence of significant or minor side effects per episode of treatment was calculated.

RESULTS

Five RCTs were included, in which no significant side events were reported; however, minor side effects were recorded (n = 33, 19.5%), with paradoxical reaction being the most common (n = 11, 6.5%). Six non-randomised studies were included, in which no significant side effects were reported; however, minor side effects were reported (n = 118, 16.8%) with paradoxical reaction being the most common (n = 89, 12.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

Although no significant side effects were recorded, of the minor side effects reported paradoxical reaction was the most common. Due to inconsistency in side effect reporting, the authors suggest the application of a standardised adverse event reporting tool for future studies of sedation in paediatric dentistry.

Paediatric conscious sedation: views and experience of specialists in paediatric dentistry

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were three-fold: to investigate the level of conscious sedation training received prior to and during specialist training in paediatric dentistry; to establish the use of conscious sedation during and following specialisation; and to determine the attitudes of specialists in paediatric dentistry to conscious sedation.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

A self-administered postal questionnaire was sent to all specialists in paediatric dentistry registered with the General Dental Council in January 2008. Non-responders were contacted again after a four-week period.

RESULTS

A response rate of 60% was achieved. Of the 122 respondents, 67 (55%) had received sedation training as an undergraduate; 89 (75%) had been trained during specialisation. All respondents performed dental treatment under sedation as a trainee and the majority used nitrous oxide inhalation sedation (NOIS). Over 90% of respondents felt that NOIS should be available to all children, both in appropriate primary care settings and in hospitals. One hundred and twenty-one (99%) respondents thought that all trainees in paediatric dentistry should have sedation training.

CONCLUSIONS

The most popular form of sedation amongst specialists in paediatric dentistry was NOIS. However, some of the respondents felt that children should have access to other forms of sedation in both the primary care and hospital settings. Additional research on other forms of sedation is required to evaluate their effectiveness and safety.