These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Dexmedetomidine versus other sedatives for non-painful pediatric examinations: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
    Author: Lin Y, Zhang R, Shen W, Chen Q, Zhu Y, Li J, Chi W, Gan X.
    Journal: J Clin Anesth; 2020 Jun; 62():109736. PubMed ID: 32018129.
    Abstract:
    STUDY OBJECTIVE: Procedural sedation for non-painful pediatric examinations outside the operating room remains a challenge, this study was designed to compare the safety and effectiveness of sedation provided by dexmedetomidine versus other sedatives including chloral hydrate, midazolam, and pentobarbital for pediatric patients to complete diagnostic examinations. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs. SETTING: Pediatric procedural sedation. INTERVENTIONS: Comparison of sedation by dexmedetomidine and chloral hydrate, or pentobarbital, or midazolam for pediatric non-painful sedation. PATIENTS: The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register for randomized clinical trials were searched and limited the studies to those published in English through July 30, 2018. MEASUREMENTS: Prospective randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing dexmedetomidine to chloral hydrate, pentobarbital, and midazolam for pediatric procedural examinations outside the operating room were included in the meta-analysis. Search terms included dexmedetomidine, precede, adrenergic alpha-2 receptor agonists, adrenergic alpha 2 agonists, adrenergic alpha-agonists, adrenergic alpha 2 receptor agonists, chloral hydrate, pentobarbital, midazolam, AND sedation. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 1486 studies were screened and nine RCTs were identified; 1076 patients were analyzed. Sedation with dexmedetomidine provided statistically higher incidences in completing examinations with fewer episodes of desaturation than the other sedatives did (OR 2.90, 95% CI: 1.39-6.07, P = 0.005, I2 = 77%; OR 0.29, 95% CI: 0.15-0.57, P = 0.0004, I2 = 0%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The meta-analysis shows that sedation by dexmedetomidine has lower incidence of respiratory depression and provides higher success rates in completing examinations than other traditional sedatives without compromising safety, indicating a prospective clinical use for procedural sedation.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]