Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2020 Jan-Feb;52(1):23-30.
doi: 10.4103/ijp.IJP_287_19. Epub 2020 Mar 11.

Comparison of midazolam and low-dose dexmedetomidine in flexible bronchoscopy: A prospective, randomized, double-blinded study

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Comparison of midazolam and low-dose dexmedetomidine in flexible bronchoscopy: A prospective, randomized, double-blinded study

Rahul Magazine et al. Indian J Pharmacol. 2020 Jan-Feb.

Abstract

Background: Dexmedetomidine is a clinically useful drug for providing sedation, but concern regarding its cardiovascular side effect profile can limit its widespread use during routine diagnostic flexible bronchoscopy (FB).

Materials and methods: Patients between 18 and 65 years of age, who required diagnostic FB, were screened. Eligible patients were randomized to either receive 0.5 μg/kg intravenous dexmedetomidine over 10 min or intravenous midazolam 0.035 mg/kg over 1 min. If required, rescue medication (intravenous midazolam 0.5 mg bolus) was administered. The primary outcome measure was the composite score. Other parameters observed were numerical rating scale, hemodynamic variables, oxygen saturation, number of doses of rescue medication, visual analog scale score for cough, ease of bronchoscopy, Ramsay Sedation Score, and postprocedure patient response after 24 h of bronchoscopy.

Results: A total of 54 patients were enrolled, 27 in each group. Total composite score (mean ± standard deviation) in dexmedetomidine and midazolam group at nasopharynx was 7.04 ± 2.19 and 6.59 ± 1.55 (P = 0.387), respectively. The corresponding values at the level of trachea were 9.22 ± 3.69 and 8.63 ± 2.13 (P = 0.475). In the dexmedetomidine group, patient response after 24 h of bronchoscopy showed the quality of sedation to be excellent in three patients, good in 10, fair in 11, and poor in 3 and discomfort to be nil in 14, mild 7, moderate in 3, and severe in 3. The corresponding values in the midazolam group for the quality of sedation were 0, 9, 18, 0 and for discomfort 10, 16, 1, 0. Other parameters did not reveal any statistically significant difference.

Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine at a dose of 0.5 μg/kg may provide clinically useful conscious sedation, comparable to midazolam.

Keywords: Dexmedetomidine; flexible bronchoscopy; midazolam; sedation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

There are no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
CONSORT flow diagram
Figure 2
Figure 2
Comparison of systolic blood pressure at different time points

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Du Rand IA, Blaikley J, Booton R, Chaudhuri N, Gupta V, Khalid S, et al. British Thoracic Society guideline for diagnostic flexible bronchoscopy in adults: Accredited by NICE. Thorax. 2013;68(Suppl 1):i1–44. - PubMed
    1. Barnett AM, Jones R, Simpson G. A survey of bronchoscopy practice in Australia and New Zealand. J Bronchology Interv Pulmonol. 2016;23:22–8. - PubMed
    1. Hwang J, Jeon Y, Park HP, Lim YJ, Oh YS. Comparison of alfetanil and ketamine in combination with propofol for patient-controlled sedation during fiberoptic bronchoscopy. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2005;49:1334–8. - PubMed
    1. Prabhudev AM, Chogtu B, Magazine R. Comparison of midazolam with fentanyl-midazolam combination during flexible bronchoscopy: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Indian J Pharmacol. 2017;49:304–11. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Yuan F, Fu H, Yang P, Sun K, Wu S, Lv M, et al. Dexmedetomidine-fentanyl versus propofol-fentanyl in flexible bronchoscopy: A randomized study. Exp Ther Med. 2016;12:506–12. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types