Article Data

  • Views 787
  • Dowloads 141

Original Research

Open Access

Premedication with midazolam is equally effective via the sublingual and intravenous route of administration

  • TOMISLAV RUŽMAN1
  • MARINA KREŠIĆ2
  • DUBRAVKA IVIĆ2
  • DANIJELA GULAM1
  • NATAŠA RUŽMAN3
  • JELENA BURAZIN2

1,Department of Anesthesiology Resuscitation and Intensive care unit University Hospital Osijek

2Department of Anesthesiology, Resuscitation and Intensive care unit Clinical Hospital Centre Osijek Medical Faculty, University Josip Juraj Stross-mayer Osijek

3,Institute of Public Health for Osijek-Baranya

DOI: 10.22514/SV92.112014.5 Vol.9,Issue 2,November 2014 pp.32-36

Published: 03 November 2014

*Corresponding Author(s): TOMISLAV RUŽMAN E-mail: tomislav1707@yahoo.com

Abstract

Background. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical efficacy and potential side effects of sublingual midazolam, used for premedication, in comparison with intravenous midazolam. The second aim was to explore cost-effectiveness of sublingual midazolam administration.

Methods. A prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blinded trial was conducted at the Clinical Hospital Centre Osijek, Croatia, during the period 1st of May till 31st of October, 2012. We enrolled 140 patients (American Society of Anesthesio-logists (ASA) physical status I-II, age≥18 years) scheduled for some kind of elective surgical procedure. Exclusion criteria were ASA III or higher, psychiatric disorders, allergy to midazolam and use of psychotropic drugs. Patients were randomi-zed into one of two groups. One group received 2.5 mg of midazolam intravenously and the other group received 1/4 of a midazolam tablet (approximately 3.75 mg) sublingually. Sedation was clinically evaluated using the Ramsey sedation scale at 0, 10, 20 and 30 minutes after drug administration. We also noted side effects and degree of amnesia.

Results. Ten minutes after administration of premedication, a significantly higher number of patients in the intravenous group had a Ramsey score of 2 (p=0.000). Ten and twenty minutes after drug administration, most of the patients in the sublingual group had a Ramsey score 1-2, and after 30 minutes most of them had a Ramsey score 2-3, which is comparable with the intravenous (p=0.642) group. 

Conclusion. Sublingual application of midazolam has an equivalent sedative effect as intravenous midazolam 20 minutes after administration but is associated with a bitter taste and weaker amnestic effect.

Keywords

premedication, midazo-lam, sublingual, intravenous

Cite and Share

TOMISLAV RUŽMAN,MARINA KREŠIĆ,DUBRAVKA IVIĆ,DANIJELA GULAM,NATAŠA RUŽMAN,JELENA BURAZIN. Premedication with midazolam is equally effective via the sublingual and intravenous route of administration. Signa Vitae. 2014. 9(2);32-36.

References

9. Kumar N, Sharma R, Sharma M, Verma I, Sharma M. Midazolam Pre-medication in Paediatrics: Comparison of the Intranasal and Sublin-gual Routes by Using an Atomizer Spray. JCDR 2012;6:65-8.

10. Bergendahl H, Lonnqvist PA, Eksborg S. Clonidine in paediatric anaesthesia: A review of the literature and comparison with benzodiaze-pines for premedication. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2000;50:135-43.

11. Ghai B, Grandhe RP, Kumar A, Chari P. Comparative evaluation of midazolam and ketamine with midazolam alone as oral premedication. Paediatr Anaesth 2005;15:554-9.

12. Schmidt AP, Valinetti EA, Banderira D, Bertacchi MF, Simoes CM, Auler JR. Effects of preanesthetic administration of midazolam, clonidine, or dexmedetomidine on postoperative pain and anxiety in children. Paediatr Anaesth 2007;17:667-74.

13. Dundee JW, Wilson DB. Amnesic action of midazolam. Anaesthesia 1980;35:459-61.

14. Marshall J, Rodarte A, Blumer J, Khoo KC, Akbari B, Kearns G. Pediatric pharmacodynamics of midazolam oral syrup. Pediatric Pharma-cology Research Unit Network. J Clin Pharmacol 2000;40:578-89.

15. Karl HW, Rosenberger JL, Larach MG, Ruffle JM. Transmucosal administration of midazolam for premedication of pediatric patients. Comparison of the nasal and sublingual routes. Anaesthesiology 1993;78:885-91.

16. Lim TW, Thomas E, Choo SM. Premedication with midazolam is more effective by the sublingual than oral route. CJA July 1997;44:723-6.

17. Kogan A, Katz J, Efrat R, Eidelman LA. Premedication with midazolam in young children: A comparison of four routes of administration. Paediatr Anaesth 2002;12:685-92.

18. Wilton NC, Leigh J, Rosen DR, Pandit UA. Preanaesthetic sedation of pre schoolchildren using intranasal midazolam. Anesthesiology 1988;69:972-5.

19. Coté CJ, Cohen IT, Suresh S, Rabb M, Rose JB, Weldon BC et al. A comparison of three doses of commercially prepared oral midazolam syrup in children. Anaesth Analg 2002;94:37-43.

20. Naqash I, Waqar-ul N, Zargar J. Midazolam premedication in children: Comparision of nasal and sublingual routes. Anaesth Clin Pharmacol 2004;20:141-5.

21. Saint-Maurice C, Meistleman C, Rey E. Pharmacokinetics of rectal midazolam for Pre-medication. Anesthesiology 1986;65:536-8.

22. Fujii J, Intosume N, Nakano M. Relative bioavailabiliy of midazolam following sublingual versus oral administration in healthy volunteers. J Pharmacobio Dyn 1988;11:206-9.

23. Gupta S, Gadani H, Kedia S. Is premedication with midazolam more effective by the sublingual than the oral route? Anesth Essays Res 2011;5:43-7.

24. Odou P, Barthélémy C, Chatelier D, Luyckx M, Brunet C, Dine T et al. Pharmacokinetics of midazolam: comparison of sublingual and intravenous routes in rabbit: Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet 1999;24:1-7.

Abstracted / indexed in

Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch) Created as SCI in 1964, Science Citation Index Expanded now indexes over 9,200 of the world’s most impactful journals across 178 scientific disciplines. More than 53 million records and 1.18 billion cited references date back from 1900 to present.

Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition aims to evaluate a journal’s value from multiple perspectives including the journal impact factor, descriptive data about a journal’s open access content as well as contributing authors, and provide readers a transparent and publisher-neutral data & statistics information about the journal.

Chemical Abstracts Service Source Index The CAS Source Index (CASSI) Search Tool is an online resource that can quickly identify or confirm journal titles and abbreviations for publications indexed by CAS since 1907, including serial and non-serial scientific and technical publications.

IndexCopernicus The Index Copernicus International (ICI) Journals database’s is an international indexation database of scientific journals. It covered international scientific journals which divided into general information, contents of individual issues, detailed bibliography (references) sections for every publication, as well as full texts of publications in the form of attached files (optional). For now, there are more than 58,000 scientific journals registered at ICI.

Geneva Foundation for Medical Education and Research The Geneva Foundation for Medical Education and Research (GFMER) is a non-profit organization established in 2002 and it works in close collaboration with the World Health Organization (WHO). The overall objectives of the Foundation are to promote and develop health education and research programs.

Scopus: CiteScore 0.5(2021) Scopus is Elsevier's abstract and citation database launched in 2004. Scopus covers nearly 36,377 titles (22,794 active titles and 13,583 Inactive titles) from approximately 11,678 publishers, of which 34,346 are peer-reviewed journals in top-level subject fields: life sciences, social sciences, physical sciences and health sciences.

Embase Embase (often styled EMBASE for Excerpta Medica dataBASE), produced by Elsevier, is a biomedical and pharmacological database of published literature designed to support information managers and pharmacovigilance in complying with the regulatory requirements of a licensed drug.

Submission Turnaround Time

Conferences

Top