Efficacy of intranasal dexmedetomidine versus oral midazolam for premedication in pediatric patients: a meta-analysis
10.3760/cma.j.issn.0254-1416.2020.02.017
- VernacularTitle:右美托咪定滴鼻与咪达唑仑口服用于小儿术前用药效果的比较：meta分析
- Author:
Yan LONG
1
;
Chengcheng ZHANG
;
Cheng TAN
;
Jian ZHANG
;
Zhiping WANG
Author Information
1. 无锡市人民医院麻醉科 214000
- From:
Chinese Journal of Anesthesiology
2020;40(2):195-198
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To systematically review and compare the efficacy of intranasal dexmedetomidine versus oral midazolam for premedication in the pediatric patients.Methods:PubMed, EMbase and Cochrane library were searched for all randomized controlled trials involving the efficacy of intranasal dexmedetomidine versus oral midazolam for premedication in the pediatric patients from inception to August 2019, with an English language restriction.Evaluation indexes included efficacy of preoperative sedation, acceptance of face mask for anesthesia, postoperative requirement for rescue analgesia, incidence of agitation during emergence and postoperative recovery time.The quality of the included trials was assessed according to the relevant criteria recommended in Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.1.Meta-analysis was conducted using the Cochrane Collaboration′s Review Manager 5.3 software.Results:Ten randomized controlled trials involving 720 pediatric patients were included.Compared with oral midazolam group, the efficacy of preoperative sedation was better, the requirement for postoperative rescue analgesia was decreased ( P<0.01), and no significant differences were found in acceptance of face mask for anesthesia, incidence of agitation during emergence, and postoperative recovery time in intranasal dexmedetomidine group ( P>0.05). Conclusion:Intranasal dexmedetomidine provides better efficacy than oral midazolam when used for premedication in the pediatric patients.
