Context: 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.

Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of prolonged sedation with dexmedetomidine vs midazolam for mechanically ventilated patients.

Design, Setting, And 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.

Interventions: 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.

Main Outcome Measures: 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.

Results: 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).

Conclusions: 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.

Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00216190 Published online February 2, 2009 (doi:10.1001/jama.2009.56).

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.2009.56DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

dexmedetomidine-treated patients
16
days [95%
16
dexmedetomidine midazolam
12
icu patients
12
patients
10
randomized trial
8
mechanically ventilated
8
mechanical ventilation
8
sedation level
8
percentage time
8

Similar Publications

Elderly and multimorbid patients are at high risk for developing unfavorable postoperative neurocognitive outcomes; however, well-adjusted and EEG-guided anesthesia may help titrate anesthesia and improve postoperative outcomes. Over the last decade, dexmedetomidine has been increasingly used as an adjunct in the perioperative setting. Its synergistic effect with propofol decreases the dose of propofol needed to induce and maintain general anesthesia.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

The authors sought to quantify the clinical impacts of granisetron, ketamine, dexmedetomidine, and lidocaine combined with fentanyl, for procedural sedation and analgesia in cystoscopy and for bladder catheter tolerance. This double-blind trial recruited four stratified blocked randomized eligible groups of patients (n = 120) formerly identified as needing cystoscopy, each receiving one of the above four anesthetic agents. Dexmedetomidine-sedated subjects experienced less pain from 5 to 120 minutes after the beginning of procedure, and next the ketamine manifested a better pain relief experienced.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is one of the therapeutic opportunities for patients with psychological disorders when they may decline to take medication. We sought to systematically compare the anesthetic efficacy of ketamine, propofol, and dexmedetomidine for electroconvulsive therapy in treatment-resistant major depressive disorder patients. This double-blind trial enrolled treatment-resistant major depressive disorder patients (n = 85) who had been hospitalized for ECT in the Amir Kabir Hospital's psychiatric ward (Arak, Iran).

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Purpose: The purpose of the present study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of remimazolam besylate compared with dexmedetomidine for the relief of agitated delirium in non-intubated older patients after orthopedic surgery.

Patients And Methods: Seventy-five patients were randomly divided into two groups. Patients assigned to the remimazolam group received a loading dose of 0.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Dexmedetomidine, an α2-adrenergic receptor agonist, is used as an anti-anxiety medication. It exerts a cholinergic effect, thereby reducing the release of tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α). We hypothesized that the use of dexmedetomidine as a sedative agent in transplantation would also protect allografts.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!