-
Journal of Oral Science Jun 2021Remimazolam is a new ultrashort-acting benzodiazepine with fast onset, quick recovery, and few side effects, such as hypotension and respiratory depression. It is... (Review)
Review
Remimazolam is a new ultrashort-acting benzodiazepine with fast onset, quick recovery, and few side effects, such as hypotension and respiratory depression. It is expected to be safe and effective for a wide range of patients undergoing intravenous sedation for dental procedures. The aim of this literature review was to evaluate clinical and sedation outcomes for remimazolam, including method of administration, level of sedation at the dose required, and clinical adverse events. An electronic literature search of databases was conducted, and eight articles were selected for inclusion in this review. Onset time from drug administration to optimal sedation level was faster for remimazolam (around 1.5-6.4 min) than for midazolam. Recovery time was significantly shorter for remimazolam than for midazolam and propofol. A study comparing various doses of remimazolam with midazolam found no significant difference in safety. Comparison of a remimazolam group with a propofol group showed that incidences of hypotension (13.0% vs 42.9%, respectively) and respiratory depression (1.1% vs 6.9%, respectively) were significantly lower for remimazolam. Remimazolam appears to be an ideal sedative.
Topics: Benzodiazepines; Humans; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Midazolam
PubMed: 34092775
DOI: 10.2334/josnusd.21-0051 -
Korean Journal of Anesthesiology Aug 2022Intravenous anesthetic agents such as midazolam, propofol, and ketamine are routinely used to provide anesthesia and sedation. They have been shown to effectively induce... (Review)
Review
Intravenous anesthetic agents such as midazolam, propofol, and ketamine are routinely used to provide anesthesia and sedation. They have been shown to effectively induce and maintain amnesia, sedation, and hypnosis in various patient groups and clinical settings. However, all anesthetic agents have the potential to cause unwanted side effects such as hemodynamic instability, respiratory depression, or slow recovery due to prolonged post-procedural sedation. Remimazolam, a recently approved benzodiazepine for general anesthesia and procedural sedation in Korea, has been successfully used for these purposes. To date, inconclusive knowledge has been obtained regarding the use of remimazolam in different patient populations and under various surgical conditions. With respect to the specific pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of remimazolam, the use of remimazolam is expected to increase providing safe general anesthesia and sedation. This review aims to provide an overview of the basic and clinical pharmacology of remimazolam and to compare it with midazolam and propofol.
Topics: Anesthesia, General; Anesthetics, Intravenous; Benzodiazepines; Double-Blind Method; Humans; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Midazolam; Propofol
PubMed: 35585830
DOI: 10.4097/kja.22297 -
Dexmedetomidine versus Midazolam in Procedural Sedation. A Systematic Review of Efficacy and Safety.PloS One 2017To systematically review the literature comparing the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine and midazolam when used for procedural sedation. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
To systematically review the literature comparing the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine and midazolam when used for procedural sedation.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and COCHRANE for clinical trials comparing dexmedetomidine and midazolam for procedural sedation up to June 20, 2016. Inclusion criteria: clinical trial, human subjects, adult subjects (≥18 years), article written in English, German, French or Dutch, use of study medication for conscious sedation and at least one group receiving dexmedetomidine and one group receiving midazolam. Exclusion criteria: patients in intensive care, pediatric subjects and per protocol use of additional sedative medication other than rescue medication. Outcome measures for efficacy comparison were patient and clinician satisfaction scores and pain scores; outcome measures for safety comparison were hypotension, hypoxia, and circulatory and respiratory complications.
RESULTS
We identified 89 papers, of which 12 satisfied the inclusion and exclusion criteria; 883 patients were included in these studies. Dexmedetomidine was associated with higher patient and operator satisfaction than midazolam. Patients receiving dexmedetomidine experienced less pain and had lower analgesic requirements. Respiratory and hemodynamic safety were similar.
CONCLUSIONS
Dexmedetomidine is a promising alternative to midazolam for use in procedural sedation. Dexmedetomidine provides more comfort during the procedure for the patient and clinician. If carefully titrated, the safety profiles are similar.
Topics: Dexmedetomidine; Hemodynamics; Humans; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Midazolam; Respiration
PubMed: 28107373
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0169525 -
Physiological Research Sep 2020Midazolam is a short acting sedative with small number of adverse effects. Administered orally, it is currently the most common form of conscious sedation in children....
Midazolam is a short acting sedative with small number of adverse effects. Administered orally, it is currently the most common form of conscious sedation in children. The objective of this paper is to describe effect of midazolam administered to children during dental treatment on their vital signs, and to monitor changes in children's behavior. We described values of vital signs and behavior in 418 sedations conducted in 272 children between 1-12 years of age. To achieve the following results, we used data from 272 all first-time sedations. After administration of midazolam arterial blood pressure and blood oxygen saturation decreased by values which were not clinically significant. The heart rate increased, with values staying within the limits of physiological range. The speed of onset of midazolam's clinical effects depends on age and dose. The lower age and dose correlated with the higher behavior score. The effectiveness of midazolam treatment is 97.8 %. Unwillingness of child to receive midazolam is predictor for disruptive behavior during sedation. 1.8 % of all sedation cases showed paradoxical reactions. The administration of midazolam in dose of 0.5 mg per 1 kg of child's body weight is safe and could be recommended for dental treatment in pediatric dentistry.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Child; Child Behavior; Child, Preschool; Conscious Sedation; Dentistry; Female; Humans; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Infant; Male; Midazolam; Vital Signs
PubMed: 33094628
DOI: 10.33549/physiolres.934511 -
European Journal of Heart Failure Oct 2022Benzodiazepines have been used as safe anxiolytic drugs for decades and some authors have suggested they could be an alternative for morphine for treating acute... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
AIMS
Benzodiazepines have been used as safe anxiolytic drugs for decades and some authors have suggested they could be an alternative for morphine for treating acute cardiogenic pulmonary oedema (ACPE). We compared the efficacy and safety of midazolam and morphine in patients with ACPE.
METHODS AND RESULTS
A randomized, multicentre, open-label, blinded endpoint clinical trial was performed in seven Spanish emergency departments (EDs). Patients >18 years old clinically diagnosed with ACPE and with dyspnoea and anxiety were randomized (1:1) at ED arrival to receive either intravenous midazolam or morphine. Efficacy was assessed by in-hospital all-cause mortality (primary endpoint). Safety was assessed through serious adverse event (SAE) reporting, and the composite endpoint included 30-day mortality and SAE. Analyses were made on an intention-to-treat basis. The trial was stopped early after a planned interim analysis by the safety monitoring committee. At that time, 111 patients had been randomized: 55 to midazolam and 56 to morphine. There were no significant differences in the primary endpoint (in-hospital mortality for midazolam vs. morphine 12.7% vs. 17.9%; risk ratio[RR] 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.29-1.74; p = 0.60). SAE were less common with midazolam versus morphine (18.2% vs. 42.9%; RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.22-0.80; p = 0.007), as were the composite endpoint (23.6% vs. 44.6%; RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.30-0.92; p = 0.03).
CONCLUSION
Although the number of patients was too small to draw final conclusions and there were no significant differences in mortality between midazolam and morphine, a significantly higher rate of SAEs was found in the morphine group.
Topics: Humans; Adolescent; Midazolam; Morphine; Pulmonary Edema; Heart Failure; Hospital Mortality
PubMed: 35780488
DOI: 10.1002/ejhf.2602 -
Neurocritical Care Jun 2024Pediatric refractory status epilepticus (RSE) often requires management with anesthetic infusions, but few data compare first-line anesthetics. This study aimed to... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
BACKGROUND
Pediatric refractory status epilepticus (RSE) often requires management with anesthetic infusions, but few data compare first-line anesthetics. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and adverse effects of midazolam and ketamine infusions as first-line anesthetics for pediatric RSE.
METHODS
Retrospective single-center study of consecutive study participants treated with ketamine or midazolam as the first-line anesthetic infusions for RSE at a quaternary care children's hospital from December 1, 2017, until September 15, 2021.
RESULTS
We identified 117 study participants (28 neonates), including 79 (68%) who received midazolam and 38 (32%) who received ketamine as the first-line anesthetic infusions. Seizures terminated more often in study participants administered ketamine (61%, 23/38) than midazolam (28%, 22/79; odds ratio [OR] 3.97, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.76-8.98; P < 0.01). Adverse effects occurred more often in study participants administered midazolam (24%, 20/79) than ketamine (3%, 1/38; OR 12.54, 95% CI 1.61-97.43; P = 0.016). Study participants administered ketamine were younger, ketamine was used more often for children with acute symptomatic seizures, and midazolam was used more often for children with epilepsy. Multivariable logistic regression of seizure termination by first-line anesthetic infusion (ketamine or midazolam) including age at SE onset, SE etiology category, and individual seizure duration at anesthetic infusion initiation indicated seizures were more likely to terminate following ketamine than midazolam (OR 4.00, 95% CI 1.69-9.49; P = 0.002) and adverse effects were more likely following midazolam than ketamine (OR 13.41, 95% CI 1.61-111.04; P = 0.016). Survival to discharge was higher among study participants who received midazolam (82%, 65/79) than ketamine (55%, 21/38; P = 0.002), although treating clinicians did not attribute any deaths to ketamine or midazolam.
CONCLUSIONS
Among children and neonates with RSE, ketamine was more often followed by seizure termination and less often associated with adverse effects than midazolam when administered as the first-line anesthetic infusion. Further prospective data are needed to compare first-line anesthetics for RSE.
Topics: Humans; Ketamine; Midazolam; Status Epilepticus; Male; Female; Infant; Retrospective Studies; Child, Preschool; Child; Infant, Newborn; Infusions, Intravenous; Adolescent
PubMed: 37783824
DOI: 10.1007/s12028-023-01859-2 -
Neuropsychopharmacology : Official... Jun 2023This study is the first randomized controlled trial to test the effects of ketamine in Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD). BPD remains undertreated in the community... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
This study is the first randomized controlled trial to test the effects of ketamine in Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD). BPD remains undertreated in the community and no medication has FDA approval for this indication. People with BPD experience chronic mood disturbances with depressed mood, suicidal ideation, and severe social difficulties. In this double-blind, randomized controlled pilot study, we tested the effects of one infusion of ketamine (0.5 mg/kg, n = 10) or the psychoactive comparator drug midazolam (0.04 mg/kg, n = 12) in adults with BPD. Infusions were well tolerated in both groups. Dissociative symptoms during infusion were more intense with ketamine than midazolam (t(12.3) = 3.61, p = 0.01), but they resolved by 40 min after infusion in both groups. Post-infusion adverse events were at the expected low levels in both groups. For our primary outcome measure of suicidal ideation and our secondary outcome measure of depression, we found numerical reduction but not significant group or group x timepoint difference (p > 0.05). For our secondary outcome measures of anxiety and BPD symptoms, we did not observe group or group x timepoint differences. There was a group x timepoint effect for socio-occupational functioning (F(1,20.12) = 5.16, p = 0.03, at Day 14, ketamine group showed more improvement than midazolam group). An exploratory analysis revealed that improvement in socio-occupational functioning was correlated with improvement in depression in the ketamine group (r(8) = 0.65, p = 0.04) but not midazolam group (r(9) = 0.41, p = 0.216). This pilot study provides the first randomized controlled evidence of the effects of antidepressant-dosed ketamine in people with BPD. Our results provide reason for optimism that antidepressant-dosed ketamine will be well-tolerated in larger studies and may provide clinical benefit for mood symptoms and related impairments in people with BPD.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Ketamine; Pilot Projects; Borderline Personality Disorder; Midazolam; Antidepressive Agents; Double-Blind Method
PubMed: 36804489
DOI: 10.1038/s41386-023-01540-4 -
The American Journal of Psychiatry Apr 2018Pharmacotherapy to rapidly relieve suicidal ideation in depression may reduce suicide risk. Rapid reduction in suicidal thoughts after ketamine treatment has mostly been... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Randomized Controlled Trial
OBJECTIVE
Pharmacotherapy to rapidly relieve suicidal ideation in depression may reduce suicide risk. Rapid reduction in suicidal thoughts after ketamine treatment has mostly been studied in patients with low levels of suicidal ideation. The authors tested the acute effect of adjunctive subanesthetic intravenous ketamine on clinically significant suicidal ideation in patients with major depressive disorder.
METHOD
In a randomized clinical trial, adults (N=80) with current major depressive disorder and a score ≥4 on the Scale for Suicidal Ideation (SSI), of whom 54% (N=43) were taking antidepressant medication, were randomly assigned to receive ketamine or midazolam infusion. The primary outcome measure was SSI score 24 hours after infusion (at day 1).
RESULTS
The reduction in SSI score at day 1 was 4.96 points greater for the ketamine group compared with the midazolam group (95% CI=2.33, 7.59; Cohen's d=0.75). The proportion of responders (defined as having a reduction ≥50% in SSI score) at day 1 was 55% for the ketamine group and 30% for the midazolam group (odds ratio=2.85, 95% CI=1.14, 7.15; number needed to treat=4.0). Improvement in the Profile of Mood States depression subscale was greater at day 1 for the ketamine group compared with the midazolam group (estimate=7.65, 95% CI=1.36, 13.94), and this effect mediated 33.6% of ketamine's effect on SSI score. Side effects were short-lived, and clinical improvement was maintained for up to 6 weeks with additional optimized standard pharmacotherapy in an uncontrolled follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS
Adjunctive ketamine demonstrated a greater reduction in clinically significant suicidal ideation in depressed patients within 24 hours compared with midazolam, partially independently of antidepressant effect.
Topics: Adult; Behavior Rating Scale; Depressive Disorder, Major; Double-Blind Method; Female; Humans; Infusions, Intravenous; Ketamine; Male; Midazolam; Middle Aged; Suicidal Ideation; Suicide; Young Adult; Suicide Prevention
PubMed: 29202655
DOI: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2017.17060647 -
Clinical Pharmacokinetics Jul 2022Many patients treated for COVID-19 related acute respiratory distress syndrome in the intensive care unit are sedated with the benzodiazepine midazolam. Midazolam...
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
Many patients treated for COVID-19 related acute respiratory distress syndrome in the intensive care unit are sedated with the benzodiazepine midazolam. Midazolam undergoes extensive metabolism by CYP3A enzymes, which may be inhibited by hyperinflammation. Therefore, an exaggerated proinflammatory response, as often observed in COVID-19, may decrease midazolam clearance. To develop a population pharmacokinetic model for midazolam in adult intensive care unit patients infected with COVID-19 and to assess the effect of inflammation, reflected by IL-6, on the pharmacokinetics of midazolam.
METHODS
Midazolam blood samples were collected once a week between March 31 and April 30 2020. Patients were excluded if they concomitantly received CYP3A4 inhibitors, CYP3A4 inducers and/or continuous renal replacement therapy. Midazolam and metabolites were analyzed with an ultra-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method. A population pharmacokinetic model was developed, using nonlinear mixed effects modelling. IL-6 and CRP, markers of inflammation, were analyzed as covariates.
RESULTS
The data were described by a one-compartment model for midazolam and the metabolites 1-OH-midazolam and 1-OH-midazolam-glucuronide. The population mean estimate for midazolam clearance was 6.7 L/h (4.8-8.5 L/h). Midazolam clearance was reduced by increased IL-6 and IL-6 explained more of the variability within our patients than CRP. The midazolam clearance was reduced by 24% (6.7-5.1 L/h) when IL-6 increases from population median 116 to 300 pg/mL.
CONCLUSIONS
Inflammation, reflected by high IL-6, reduces midazolam clearance in critically ill patients with COVID-19. This knowledge may help avoid oversedation, but further research is warranted.
Topics: Adult; Critical Illness; Cytochrome P-450 CYP3A; Humans; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Inflammation; Interleukin-6; Midazolam; COVID-19 Drug Treatment
PubMed: 35397768
DOI: 10.1007/s40262-022-01122-5 -
Anesthesia Progress 2017Nitrous oxide and midazolam have been used as sedative agents to decrease fear and anxiety associated with dental procedures. Although these agents have been widely used... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Nitrous oxide and midazolam have been used as sedative agents to decrease fear and anxiety associated with dental procedures. Although these agents have been widely used individually, the combination of the two is also commonly used. Four clinical trials were identified that compared the combination technique with the individual use of the drugs. The standardized mean difference (SMD) for each outcome measure was considered for final analysis. Three studies with 534 participants were included in the final meta-analysis, and the SMD [95% CI] was obtained as -0.15 [-0.32, 0.03] and was not statistically significant for cooperation scores. Two studies reported the dose of midazolam required for inducing sedation in 450 participants, and the pooled estimate of SMD [95% CI] was obtained as -0.29 [-0.48, -0.10] and was significant. Two studies with 450 participants reported the time taken to recover from sedation, and the pooled estimate of SMD [95% CI] was obtained as -0.20 [-0.39, -0.01] and favored the combination technique. To conclude, the combination technique combines the pros and cons of both drugs in causing fewer adverse effects due to midazolam by reducing the total dose and also helps to provide better acceptance of nitrous oxide inhalation.
Topics: Anesthesia, Dental; Conscious Sedation; Humans; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Midazolam; Nitrous Oxide; Outcome Assessment, Health Care
PubMed: 28604098
DOI: 10.2344/anpr-63-03-06