Dexmedetomidine versus midazolam as intranasal premedication for intravenous deep sedation in pediatric dental treatment

Abstract

Background/purpose

Optimal sedation management for pediatric dental treatment demands special focus as it's tubeless and shares a same oral space. The study was to evaluate dexmedetomidine compared to midazolam for intranasal premedication in pediatric dental treatment under intravenous deep sedation.

Materials and methods

A hundred children aged 3–7 years scheduled for elective dental treatment under intravenous deep sedation anesthesia were enrolled, of whom 50 children (Group D) were intranasally premedicated with 2.0 μg/kg dexmedetomidine and the remaining 50 children (Group M) received traditional 0.2 mg/kg midazolam. Acceptance rate of venipuncture was regarded as the primary endpoint.

Results

The acceptance rate of venipuncture in Group D and Group M were 76% versus 52%, respectively ( P = 0.021). More children in Group M complained about bitter/sour taste than Group D (62% vs. 8%, P < 0.001). Intraoperatively, children in Group M were found to have more choking cough than Group D (30% vs. 9%, P = 0.003), and patients in Group M required more suction (18 [36%] in Group M vs. 4 [8%] in Group D, P = 0.001). There were no significant differences between the groups in the incidences of temporal hypoxemia (SpO ₂ ≤ 90%), however, two children in Group M experienced hypoxemia over 10 s.

Conclusion

Compared to the 0.2 mg/kg midazolam, children premedicated with 2.0 μg/kg intranasal dexmedetomidine showed superior venipuncture acceptance, had less intraoperative choking cough and required fewer suction. It seems to be a good alternative to midazolam as premedication for deep sedation in pediatric dental treatment.