Advanced Search

Home > Journals > Minerva Stomatologica > Past Issues > Minerva Stomatologica 2006 March;55(3) > Minerva Stomatologica 2006 March;55(3):99-113

ISSUES AND ARTICLES   MOST READ   eTOC

CURRENT ISSUEMINERVA STOMATOLOGICA

A Journal on Dentistry and Maxillofacial Surgery


Official Journal of the Italian Society of Odontostomatology and Maxillofacial Surgery
Indexed/Abstracted in: CAB, EMBASE, Index to Dental Literature, PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Emerging Sources Citation Index

 

Minerva Stomatologica 2006 March;55(3):99-113

 ORIGINAL ARTICLES

Neurosedation in dentistry of the disabled patient: the use of Midazolam, Propofol, and Remifentanil

Collini S. 1, Pinto G. 1, Lejeune L. 1, Di Carlo S. 1, Meloncelli S. 1, Barraco G. 2, Gatto R. 3

1 Department of Anesthesia and Resuscitation 2nd Faculty of Medicine and Surgery La Sapienza University, Rome, Italy
2 Dentistry and Stomatology Unit University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy
3 Pedodontics Unit University of L’Aquila, L’Aquila, Italy

Aim. This prospective randomized study, deals with neurosedation in dental treatment of 200 disabled patients and unable to cooperate, subdivided in 4 groups of 50 male only patients, with age ranging from 28 to 59 (39±11), ASA I-III.
Methods. The pharmaceuticals used were Midazolam (group MID) Propofol (group Prop) and Remifentanil. Midazolam and Propofol were used following a bolus-infusion sequence, both separately and in combination among themselves (MID
PROP group), or with an opioid, Remifentanil (MID
PROP
REMI group).
ECG, heart rate , non invasive blood pressure (NIBP), SaO2, EtCO2 during the procedure were monitored. Induction time, duration of the sedation, recovery time and discharge were reported.
Results. The statistical analysis demonstrated the superiority of the PROP group for induction time in minute (3.1±0.5) in comparison with the MID group (10.6±2.1), the MID
PROP group (4.3±1.3) and MID
PROP
REMI (3.7±1.2). The recovery and discharge times have confirmed the superiority of the MID
PROP
REMI group in comparison with the other 3 groups.
Conclusion. This combination proved best at leveraging the synergistic characteristics of each single pharmaceutical and minimizing the collateral effects of each individually.

language: English, Italian


FULL TEXT  REPRINTS

top of page