Article

Dexmedetomidine vs midazolam for sedation of critically ill patients: a randomized trial.

University of Vermont College of Medicine, USA.
JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association (Impact Factor: 29.98). 02/2009; 301(5):489-99. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2009.56
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Gamma-aminobutyric acid receptor agonist medications are the most commonly used sedatives for intensive care unit (ICU) patients, yet preliminary evidence indicates that the alpha(2) agonist dexmedetomidine may have distinct advantages.
To compare the efficacy and safety of prolonged sedation with dexmedetomidine vs midazolam for mechanically ventilated patients.
Prospective, double-blind, randomized trial conducted in 68 centers in 5 countries between March 2005 and August 2007 among 375 medical/surgical ICU patients with expected mechanical ventilation for more than 24 hours. Sedation level and delirium were assessed using the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) and the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU.
Dexmedetomidine (0.2-1.4 microg/kg per hour [n = 244]) or midazolam (0.02-0.1 mg/kg per hour [n = 122]) titrated to achieve light sedation (RASS scores between -2 and +1) from enrollment until extubation or 30 days.
Percentage of time within target RASS range. Secondary end points included prevalence and duration of delirium, use of fentanyl and open-label midazolam, and nursing assessments. Additional outcomes included duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay, and adverse events.
There was no difference in percentage of time within the target RASS range (77.3% for dexmedetomidine group vs 75.1% for midazolam group; difference, 2.2% [95% confidence interval {CI}, -3.2% to 7.5%]; P = .18). The prevalence of delirium during treatment was 54% (n = 132/244) in dexmedetomidine-treated patients vs 76.6% (n = 93/122) in midazolam-treated patients (difference, 22.6% [95% CI, 14% to 33%]; P < .001). Median time to extubation was 1.9 days shorter in dexmedetomidine-treated patients (3.7 days [95% CI, 3.1 to 4.0] vs 5.6 days [95% CI, 4.6 to 5.9]; P = .01), and ICU length of stay was similar (5.9 days [95% CI, 5.7 to 7.0] vs 7.6 days [95% CI, 6.7 to 8.6]; P = .24). Dexmedetomidine-treated patients were more likely to develop bradycardia (42.2% [103/244] vs 18.9% [23/122]; P < .001), with a nonsignificant increase in the proportion requiring treatment (4.9% [12/244] vs 0.8% [1/122]; P = .07), but had a lower likelihood of tachycardia (25.4% [62/244] vs 44.3% [54/122]; P < .001) or hypertension requiring treatment (18.9% [46/244] vs 29.5% [36/122]; P = .02).
There was no difference between dexmedetomidine and midazolam in time at targeted sedation level in mechanically ventilated ICU patients. At comparable sedation levels, dexmedetomidine-treated patients spent less time on the ventilator, experienced less delirium, and developed less tachycardia and hypertension. The most notable adverse effect of dexmedetomidine was bradycardia.
clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00216190 Published online February 2, 2009 (doi:10.1001/jama.2009.56).

0 Bookmarks
 · 
211 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Delirium is a form of acute brain dysfunction in the critically ill that is associated with significant morbidity and mortality in addition to increases in healthcare costs. Important risk factors for delirium include a patient’s underlying illness, metabolic disturbances, sedative and psychoactive medications, and underlying cognitive impairment. Vigilant monitoring and recognition are the first step in reducing the burden of delirium. The Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU (CAM-ICU) and the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (IDCSC) are the validated methods of diagnosing delirium in the intensive care unit. Definitive evidence of treatments to reduce the incidence or duration of delirium in the intensive care unit is limited. Protocolized care to ensure minimization of sedation and appropriate sedative selection, early ventilator liberation, adequate treatment of pain, early mobility, and proper sleep hygiene offer the best hope of reducing the incidence of delirium and its burden on healthcare and society.
    03/2015; 5(1). DOI:10.1007/s40140-014-0084-3
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Dexmedetomidine is a highly selective agonist of α2-receptors with sedative, anxiolytic, analgesic, and anesthetic properties. Neuroprotective effects of dexmedetomidine have been reported in various brain injury models. In the present study, we investigated the effects of dexmedetomidine on neurodegeneration, oxidative stress markers, and inflammation following the induction of hyperoxia in neonatal rats. Six-day-old Wistar rats received different concentrations of dexmedetomidine (1, 5, or 10 µg/kg bodyweight) and were exposed to 80% oxygen for 24 h. Sex-matched littermates kept in room air and injected with normal saline or dexmedetomidine served as controls. Dexmedetomidine pretreatment significantly reduced hyperoxia-induced neurodegeneration in different brain regions of the neonatal rat. In addition, dexmedetomidine restored the reduced/oxidized glutathione ratio and attenuated the levels of malondialdehyde, a marker of lipid peroxidation, after exposure to high oxygen concentration. Moreover, administration of dexmedetomidine induced downregulation of IL-1β on mRNA and protein level in the developing rat brain. Dexmedetomidine provides protections against toxic oxygen induced neonatal brain injury which is likely associated with oxidative stress signaling and inflammatory cytokines. Our results suggest that dexmedetomidine may have a therapeutic potential since oxygen administration to neonates is sometimes inevitable.
    Oxidative medicine and cellular longevity 01/2015; 2015:1-10. DOI:10.1155/2015/530371 · 3.36 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Use of dexmedetomidine or propofol rather than a benzodiazepine sedation strategy may improve ICU outcomes. We reviewed randomized trials comparing a benzodiazepine and nonbenzodiazepine regimen in mechanically ventilated adult ICU patients to determine if differences exist between these sedation strategies with respect to ICU length of stay, time on the ventilator, delirium prevalence, and short-term mortality. Methods: We searched CINAHL, MEDLINE, the Cochrane databases, and the American College of Critical Care Medicine’s Pain, Agitation, Delirium Management Guidelines’ literature database from 1996 to 2013. Citations were screened for randomized trials that enrolled critically ill, mechanically ventilated adults comparing an IV benzodiazepine-based to a nonbenzodiazepine-based sedative regimen and reported duration of ICU length of stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, delirium prevalence, and/or short-term mortality. Trial characteristics and results were abstracted in duplicate and independently, and the Cochrane risk of bias tool was used for quality assessment. We performed random effects model meta-analyses where possible. Results: We included six trials enrolling 1,235 patients: midazolam versus dexmedetomidine (n = 3), lorazepam versus dexmedetomidine (n = 1), midazolam versus propofol (n = 1), and lorazepam versus propofol (n = 1). Compared to a benzodiazepine sedative strategy, a nonbenzodiazepine sedative strategy was associated with a shorter ICU length of stay (n = 6 studies; difference = 1.62 d; 95% CI, 0.68–2.55; I2 = 0%; p = 0.0007) and duration of mechanical ventilation (n = 4 studies; difference = 1.9 d; 95% CI, 1.70–2.09; I2 = 0%; p < 0.00001) but a similar prevalence of delirium (n = 2; risk ratio = 0.83; 95% CI, 0.61–1.11; I2 = 84%; p = 0.19) and short-term mortality rate (n = 4; risk ratio = 0.98; 95% CI, 0.76–1.27; I2 = 30%; p = 0.88). Conclusions: Current controlled data suggest that use of a dexmedetomidine- or propofol-based sedation regimen rather than a benzodiazepine-based sedation regimen in critically ill adults may reduce ICU length of stay and duration of mechanical ventilation. Larger controlled studies are needed to further define the impact of nonbenzodiazepine sedative regimens on delirium and short-term mortality.
    Critical Care Medicine 09/2013; 41(9):S30-S38. DOI:10.1097/CCM.0b013e3182a16898 · 6.15 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
67 Downloads
Available from
May 28, 2014