Oral Midazolam-Ketamine versus Midazolam alone for Procedural Sedation of Children Undergoing Computed Tomography; a Randomized Clinical Trial

Introduction: Motion artifacts are a common problem in pediatric radiographic studies and are a common indication for pediatric procedural sedation. This study aimed to compare the combination of oral midazolam and ketamine (OMK) with oral midazolam alone (OM) as procedural sedatives among childre...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Saeed Majidinejad, Keramat Taherian, Mehrdad Esmailian, Mehdi Khazaei, Vajihe Samaie
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences 2018-12-01
Series:Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine
Subjects:
Online Access:https://journals.sbmu.ac.ir/aaem/index.php/AAEM/article/view/268
id doaj-243520adebac488d8a40220277b684ee
record_format Article
spelling doaj-243520adebac488d8a40220277b684ee2020-11-25T03:56:12ZengShahid Beheshti University of Medical SciencesArchives of Academic Emergency Medicine2645-49042018-12-013210.22037/aaem.v3i2.268Oral Midazolam-Ketamine versus Midazolam alone for Procedural Sedation of Children Undergoing Computed Tomography; a Randomized Clinical TrialSaeed Majidinejad0Keramat Taherian1Mehrdad Esmailian2Mehdi Khazaei3Vajihe Samaie4Department of Emergency Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, IranDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, IranDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, IranDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, IranDepartment of Internal Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, IranIntroduction: Motion artifacts are a common problem in pediatric radiographic studies and are a common indication for pediatric procedural sedation. This study aimed to compare the combination of oral midazolam and ketamine (OMK) with oral midazolam alone (OM) as procedural sedatives among children undergoing computed tomography (CT) imaging. Methods: The study population was comprised of six-month to six-year old patients with medium-risk minor head trauma, who were scheduled to undergo brain CT imaging. Patients were randomly allocated to two groups: one group received 0.5 mg/kg midazolam (OM group; n = 33) orally and the other one received 0.2 mg/kg midazolam and 5 mg/kg ketamine orally (OMK group; n=33). The vital signs were monitored and recorded at regular intervals. The primary outcome measure was the success rate of each drug in achieving adequate sedation. Secondary outcome measures were the time to achieve adequate sedation, time to discharge from radiology department, and the incidence of adverse events. Results: Adequate sedation was achieved in five patients (15.2%) in OM group and 15 patients (45.5%) in OMK group, which showed a statistically significant difference between the groups (P = 0.015). No significant difference was noted between OM and OMK groups with respect to the time of achieving adequate sedation (33.80 ± 7.56 and 32.87 ± 10.18 minutes, respectively; P = 0.854) and the time of discharging from radiology department (89.60 ± 30.22 and 105.27 ± 21.98 minutes, respectively; P=0.223). The complications were minor and similar among patients of both groups. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that in comparison with OM, OMK was more effective in producing a satisfactory level of sedation in children undergoing CT examinations without additional complications; however, none of these two regimens fulfilled clinical needs for procedural sedation.https://journals.sbmu.ac.ir/aaem/index.php/AAEM/article/view/268Midazolamketamineconscious sedationtomographyx-ray computed
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Saeed Majidinejad
Keramat Taherian
Mehrdad Esmailian
Mehdi Khazaei
Vajihe Samaie
spellingShingle Saeed Majidinejad
Keramat Taherian
Mehrdad Esmailian
Mehdi Khazaei
Vajihe Samaie
Oral Midazolam-Ketamine versus Midazolam alone for Procedural Sedation of Children Undergoing Computed Tomography; a Randomized Clinical Trial
Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine
Midazolam
ketamine
conscious sedation
tomography
x-ray computed
author_facet Saeed Majidinejad
Keramat Taherian
Mehrdad Esmailian
Mehdi Khazaei
Vajihe Samaie
author_sort Saeed Majidinejad
title Oral Midazolam-Ketamine versus Midazolam alone for Procedural Sedation of Children Undergoing Computed Tomography; a Randomized Clinical Trial
title_short Oral Midazolam-Ketamine versus Midazolam alone for Procedural Sedation of Children Undergoing Computed Tomography; a Randomized Clinical Trial
title_full Oral Midazolam-Ketamine versus Midazolam alone for Procedural Sedation of Children Undergoing Computed Tomography; a Randomized Clinical Trial
title_fullStr Oral Midazolam-Ketamine versus Midazolam alone for Procedural Sedation of Children Undergoing Computed Tomography; a Randomized Clinical Trial
title_full_unstemmed Oral Midazolam-Ketamine versus Midazolam alone for Procedural Sedation of Children Undergoing Computed Tomography; a Randomized Clinical Trial
title_sort oral midazolam-ketamine versus midazolam alone for procedural sedation of children undergoing computed tomography; a randomized clinical trial
publisher Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences
series Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine
issn 2645-4904
publishDate 2018-12-01
description Introduction: Motion artifacts are a common problem in pediatric radiographic studies and are a common indication for pediatric procedural sedation. This study aimed to compare the combination of oral midazolam and ketamine (OMK) with oral midazolam alone (OM) as procedural sedatives among children undergoing computed tomography (CT) imaging. Methods: The study population was comprised of six-month to six-year old patients with medium-risk minor head trauma, who were scheduled to undergo brain CT imaging. Patients were randomly allocated to two groups: one group received 0.5 mg/kg midazolam (OM group; n = 33) orally and the other one received 0.2 mg/kg midazolam and 5 mg/kg ketamine orally (OMK group; n=33). The vital signs were monitored and recorded at regular intervals. The primary outcome measure was the success rate of each drug in achieving adequate sedation. Secondary outcome measures were the time to achieve adequate sedation, time to discharge from radiology department, and the incidence of adverse events. Results: Adequate sedation was achieved in five patients (15.2%) in OM group and 15 patients (45.5%) in OMK group, which showed a statistically significant difference between the groups (P = 0.015). No significant difference was noted between OM and OMK groups with respect to the time of achieving adequate sedation (33.80 ± 7.56 and 32.87 ± 10.18 minutes, respectively; P = 0.854) and the time of discharging from radiology department (89.60 ± 30.22 and 105.27 ± 21.98 minutes, respectively; P=0.223). The complications were minor and similar among patients of both groups. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that in comparison with OM, OMK was more effective in producing a satisfactory level of sedation in children undergoing CT examinations without additional complications; however, none of these two regimens fulfilled clinical needs for procedural sedation.
topic Midazolam
ketamine
conscious sedation
tomography
x-ray computed
url https://journals.sbmu.ac.ir/aaem/index.php/AAEM/article/view/268
work_keys_str_mv AT saeedmajidinejad oralmidazolamketamineversusmidazolamaloneforproceduralsedationofchildrenundergoingcomputedtomographyarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT keramattaherian oralmidazolamketamineversusmidazolamaloneforproceduralsedationofchildrenundergoingcomputedtomographyarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT mehrdadesmailian oralmidazolamketamineversusmidazolamaloneforproceduralsedationofchildrenundergoingcomputedtomographyarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT mehdikhazaei oralmidazolamketamineversusmidazolamaloneforproceduralsedationofchildrenundergoingcomputedtomographyarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT vajihesamaie oralmidazolamketamineversusmidazolamaloneforproceduralsedationofchildrenundergoingcomputedtomographyarandomizedclinicaltrial
_version_ 1724466481897406464