File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)

Conference Paper: A comparasion of intravenous sedation with dexmedetomidine and midazolam for unilateral third molar extraction under local anaesthesia

TitleA comparasion of intravenous sedation with dexmedetomidine and midazolam for unilateral third molar extraction under local anaesthesia
Authors
Issue Date2007
PublisherAlliance Communications Group. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.anesthesiaprogress.org/
Citation
The 11th International Dental Congress on Modern Pain Control, Yokohama, Japan, 4–7 October 2006. In Anesthesia Progress, 2007, v. 54 n. 3, p. 131 How to Cite?
AbstractAim. To compare dexmedetomidine and midazolam for intravenous sedation during unilateral third molar extraction under local anaesthesia. Methods. The study was double blind. Patients were randomised to receive either dexmedetomidine (up to 1 mcg/kg) or midazolam (up to 5 mg). The drug was infused until the Ramsay Sedation Score reached 4 or the maximum dose had been administered. Intraoperative vital signs and adverse events were recorded. Numerical rating pain scores and analgesic consumption were charted up to three days after surgery. Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores before and after surgery were compared. Amnesia was tested by asking patients to recall two pictures shown after sedation. Results. Forty-four patients have been recruited and undergone interim analysis. Sedation was achieved by median doses of 0.9O mcg/kg [dexmedetomidine] or 3.55 mg [midazolam]. Desaturation (SpO2 occurred in 5 patients (23%) who received dexmedetomidine and 4 patients (18%) who received midazolam. There was no significant difference in respiratory rate. Heart rate and blood pressure were lower in dexmedetomidine group during surgery. Patients' and surgeons' satisfaction, pain scores and MMSE scores did not differ significantly between groups. Midazolam was associated with greater amnesia. Conclusions. Our preliminary results show that dexmedetomidine produces comparable sedation to midazolam, with lower haemodynamic parameters and less amnesic effect. © 2007 The American Dental Society of Anesthesiology
DescriptionConference Theme: The Essential Role of Dental Anesthesiology in the 21st Century Safe and Comfortable Dentistry
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/112809
ISSN
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.279
PubMed Central ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorYing, CLAen_HK
dc.contributor.authorCheung, CWen_HK
dc.contributor.authorChiu, WKen_HK
dc.contributor.authorWong, AYCen_HK
dc.contributor.authorWong, GTCen_HK
dc.contributor.authorIrwin, MG-
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-26T03:48:10Z-
dc.date.available2010-09-26T03:48:10Z-
dc.date.issued2007en_HK
dc.identifier.citationThe 11th International Dental Congress on Modern Pain Control, Yokohama, Japan, 4–7 October 2006. In Anesthesia Progress, 2007, v. 54 n. 3, p. 131-
dc.identifier.issn0003-3006-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/112809-
dc.descriptionConference Theme: The Essential Role of Dental Anesthesiology in the 21st Century Safe and Comfortable Dentistry-
dc.description.abstractAim. To compare dexmedetomidine and midazolam for intravenous sedation during unilateral third molar extraction under local anaesthesia. Methods. The study was double blind. Patients were randomised to receive either dexmedetomidine (up to 1 mcg/kg) or midazolam (up to 5 mg). The drug was infused until the Ramsay Sedation Score reached 4 or the maximum dose had been administered. Intraoperative vital signs and adverse events were recorded. Numerical rating pain scores and analgesic consumption were charted up to three days after surgery. Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores before and after surgery were compared. Amnesia was tested by asking patients to recall two pictures shown after sedation. Results. Forty-four patients have been recruited and undergone interim analysis. Sedation was achieved by median doses of 0.9O mcg/kg [dexmedetomidine] or 3.55 mg [midazolam]. Desaturation (SpO2 occurred in 5 patients (23%) who received dexmedetomidine and 4 patients (18%) who received midazolam. There was no significant difference in respiratory rate. Heart rate and blood pressure were lower in dexmedetomidine group during surgery. Patients' and surgeons' satisfaction, pain scores and MMSE scores did not differ significantly between groups. Midazolam was associated with greater amnesia. Conclusions. Our preliminary results show that dexmedetomidine produces comparable sedation to midazolam, with lower haemodynamic parameters and less amnesic effect. © 2007 The American Dental Society of Anesthesiology-
dc.languageengen_HK
dc.publisherAlliance Communications Group. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.anesthesiaprogress.org/-
dc.relation.ispartofAnesthesia Progressen_HK
dc.rightsCreative Commons: Attribution 3.0 Hong Kong License-
dc.titleA comparasion of intravenous sedation with dexmedetomidine and midazolam for unilateral third molar extraction under local anaesthesiaen_HK
dc.typeConference_Paperen_HK
dc.identifier.emailCheung, CW: cheucw01@netvigator.com, cheucw@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailChiu, WK: chiuwk1@HKUCC.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailWong, GTC: gordontcwong@hotmail.comen_HK
dc.identifier.emailIrwin, MG: mgirwin@hkucc.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityCheung, CW=rp00244en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_OA_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.2344/0003-3006(2007)54[131:TIDCOM]2.0.CO;2-
dc.identifier.pmcidPMC1993867-
dc.identifier.hkuros126419en_HK
dc.identifier.volume54-
dc.identifier.issue3-
dc.identifier.spage131-
dc.identifier.epage131-
dc.publisher.placeUnited States-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats