Literature DB >> 19255992

A comparison of oral chloral hydrate and sublingual midazolam sedation for echocardiogram in children.

Thanarat Layangool1, Chaisit Sangtawesin, Thawatchai Kirawittaya, Worakan Prompan, Anchalee Attachoo, Amornrat Pechdamrongsakul, Yanisa Intasorn, Prisana Hanchai, Chalerat Ounjareon, Putra Noisang.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of oral chloral hydrate and sublingual midazolam to sedate the children undergoing echocardiography. MATERIAL AND
METHOD: A double-blind, randomized trial study in the children judged to require sedation prior echocardiogram were performed. Two hundred sixty-four patients between 6 months and 5 years of age were randomized to chloral hydrate or midazolam groups. Either 50 mg/kg of chloral hydrate orally or 0.3 mg/kg of midazolam sublingually was given in each groups. If the child was not responded within 30 minutes after the first dose, another half dose of each drug for the second dose will be required. The action duration time, sedation score level and the ability to complete echocardiogram were collected.
RESULTS: Both groups were comparable with respect to age, sex, body weight, underlying heart disease, baseline O2 saturation and functional heart classification. The children in chloral hydrate group needed the second dose for sedation more than midazolam group (10.6%, 5.3% p = 0.111). The onset, action duration and total study time were significantly shorter in midazolam than in chloral hydrate group (p < 0.001). The number of the patients who had the action duration within the optimal time (< 45 min) were significantly more cases in midazolam than in chloral hydrate group (93.1%, 43.5% p < 0.001). Success rate of echocardiogram was 99.2% in each group. There was no difference in echocardiographic time performed in both groups. The children in chloral hydrate group had deeper in level of sedation (p < 0.001). Both groups showed no significant difference in term of the ability to complete echocardiographic examination. The reaction of the children to take the medication and the number of the patients who had systemic O2 saturation change more than 5%from the baseline were higher in chloral hydrate group significantly (14.4%, 4.5% p = 0.006 and 9.9%, 3.1% p = 0.025).
CONCLUSION: Sublingual midazolam at the dose of 0.3 mg/kg can be used to sedate the children at age group between 6 months to 5 years who undergoing echocardiogram with comparable rate of success and safety as 50 mg/kg of chloral hydrate orally. The less depth in the level of consciousness after sedation with midazolam compare to chloral hydrate may be advantage in a high risk patient to avoid deep sedation but may be disadvantage in case who need more comprehensive echocardiographic evaluation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19255992

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Assoc Thai        ISSN: 0125-2208


  11 in total

1.  Chloral Hydrate: Is It Still Being Used? Are There Safer Alternatives?

Authors:  Matthew Grissinger
Journal:  P T       Date:  2019-08

Review 2.  Alternative delivery systems for agents to treat acute agitation: progress to date.

Authors:  Kimberly Nordstrom; Michael H Allen
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 9.546

3.  Pediatric chloral hydrate poisonings and death following outpatient procedural sedation.

Authors:  Sean Patrick Nordt; Cyrus Rangan; Madhu Hardmaslani; Richard F Clark; Carlan Wendler; Michael Valente
Journal:  J Med Toxicol       Date:  2014-06

4.  The Effect of Oral Midazolam and Chloral Hydrate Before Echocardiography in Pediatric Patients: A Randomized Double-Blind Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Forod Salehi; Hamid Reza Riasi; Ali Ebrahimzadeh; Sima Askari Janatabadi
Journal:  Glob Pediatr Health       Date:  2017-10-16

5.  Safety and efficacy of chloral hydrate for conscious sedation of infants in the pediatric cardiovascular intensive care unit.

Authors:  Mei-Lian Chen; Qiang Chen; Fan Xu; Jia-Xin Zhang; Xiao-Ying Su; Xiao-Zhen Tu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 1.889

6.  Efficacy of chloral hydrate oral solution for sedation in pediatrics: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Zhe Chen; Mao Lin; Zongyao Huang; Linan Zeng; Liang Huang; Dan Yu; Lingli Zhang
Journal:  Drug Des Devel Ther       Date:  2019-07-31       Impact factor: 4.319

7.  Clonidine Versus Chloral Hydrate for Recording Sleep EEG in Children.

Authors:  Mahmoud Reza Ashrafi; Hossein Mohebbi; Mahmoud Mohamadi; Elham Azizi; Gholam Reza Zamani; Alireza Tavasoli; Reza Shervin Badv; Firozeh Hosseini
Journal:  Iran J Child Neurol       Date:  2020

Review 8.  Non-Parenteral Medications for Procedural Sedation in Children- A Narrative: Review Article.

Authors:  Razieh Fallah; Farzad Ferdosian; Ahmad Shajari
Journal:  Iran J Child Neurol       Date:  2015

9.  Chloral hydrate-dependent reduction in the peptidoglycan-induced inflammatory macrophage response is associated with lower expression levels of toll-like receptor 2.

Authors:  Qingjun Pan; Yuan Liu; Xuezhi Zhu; Huafeng Liu
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2014-02-26       Impact factor: 2.447

10.  Chloral Hydrate Treatment Induced Apoptosis of Macrophages via Fas Signaling Pathway.

Authors:  Jun Cai; Yanxia Peng; Ting Chen; Huanjin Liao; Lifang Zhang; Qiuhua Chen; Yiming He; Ping Wu; Tong Xie; Qingjun Pan
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2016-12-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.