Efficacy and Safety of Orally Administered Intravenous Midazolam Versus a Commercially Prepared Syrup

Background: Among different categories of sedative agents, benzodiazepines have been prescribed for more than three decades to patients of all ages. The effective and predictable sedative and amnestic effects of benzodiazepines support their use in pediatric patients. Midazolam is one of the most extensively used benzodiazepines in this age group. Oral form of drug is the best accepted route of administration in children. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of a commercially midazolam syrup versus orally administered IV midazolam in uncooperative dental patients. Second objective was to determine whether differences concerning sedation success can be explained by child‘s behavioral problems and dental fear. Patients and Methods: Eighty eight uncooperative dental patients (Frankl Scales 1,2) aged 3 to 6 years, and ASA I participated in this double blind, parallel randomized, controlled clinical trial. Midazolam was administered in a dose of 0.5 mg/kg for children under the age 5 and 0.2 mg/kg in patients over 5 years of age. Physiologic parameters including heart rate, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation and blood pressure were recorded. Behavior assessment was conducted throughout the course of treatment using Houpt Sedation Rating Scale and at critical moments of treatment (injection and cavity preparation) by North Carolina Scale. Dental fear and behavioral problems were evaluated using Child Fear Schedule Survey-Dental Subscale (CFSS-DS), and Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). Independent t-test, Chi-Square, and Pearson correlation were used for statistical analysis. Results: Acceptable overall sedation ratings were observed in 90% and 86% of syrup and IV/Oral group respectively; Chi-Square P = 0.5. Other domains of Houpt Scale including: sleep, crying and movement were also not significantly different between groups. Physiological parameters remained in normal limits during study without significant difference between groups. Conclusions: “Orally administered IV midazolam” preparation can be used as an alternative for commercially midazolam syrup.

Safety and Efficacy of Intravenous Colistin in Neonates With Culture Proven Sepsis

Background: Although it is well described among adults, intravenous colistin use and its associated toxicities in newborns are poorly understood. Objectives: We present our experience of efficacy and safety of intravenous colistin in the treatment of sepsis in term and preterm neonates. Patients and Methods: The records of neonates who received colistin between January 2013 and February 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. All neonates with culture proven nosocomial infections due to multidrug resistant organisms and treated continuously with colistin for more than 72 hours were included in the study. Results: Patients were evaluated for clinical and microbiological response to the drug and its and side effects. Twelve newborn infants with mean 31.8 ± 3.5 weeks gestational age and median 1482 (810 - 3200) gram birth weight were included. 11/12 (91.7%) patients showed microbiological clearance with intravenous colistin. One patient who had recurrent cerebrospinal fluid positive culture was treated with intraventricular colistin. The major side effects observed was hyponatremia and hypokalemia in 2 (16.6%) patients, all infants required magnesium supplementation. Conclusions: Intravenous colistin administration appears to be safe and efficacious for multidrug-resistant gram-negative infections in neonates, including preterm infants. However, we believe that large prospective controlled studies are needed to confirm its efficacy and safety in neonates.

Clinical effect of intravenous thrombolysis combined with nicorandil therapy in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

Purpose: To evaluate the effectiveness of intravenous thrombolysis in combination with nicorandil in the treatment of acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Methods: Patients who developed acute STEMI and underwent intravenous thrombolysis in the hospital were selected and divided into observation group (n = 128) and control group (n = 114). Besides thrombolytic therapy, the observation group was also given 20 mg of nicorandil. The control group received conventional thrombolytic therapy only. Clinical effects and rehabilitation of patients were observed. Results: Cardiac troponin I (cTNI) level of the observation group was 4.0 ± 1.5, 8.3 ± 2.8 and 9.8 ± 3.9 after 4, 12 and 24 h, respectively, which is much lower than 5.8 ± 1.4, 11.4 ± 2.7 and 13.2 ± 4.2 in the control group (p < 0.05). ST-segment resolution of observation group was higher (44 ± 14, 52 ± 17, 69 ± 21 and 80 ± 18) % at different time points, compared with the control group (p < 0.05). The proportion of patients with Curtis-Walker score > 3 points, and ventricular wall motion score (4.70 %; 1.38 ± 0.11) in the observation group were both lower than those of the control group (21.00 %; 1.43 ± 0.15) (p < 0.05). The difference in adverse cardiac events between the observation group (N = 6, 4.70 %) and control group (N = 12, 10.50 %) was not statistically significant (p > 0.05) Conclusion: Combining intravenous thrombolysis with nicorandil therapy can enhance myocardial perfusion level, reduce myocardial damage, improve cardiac function and decrease risk of arrhythmia for acute STEMI patients.

Do we really ponder about necessity of intravenous hydration in acute bronchiolitis?

Objective: The goal was to establish the role of intravenous hydration therapy on mild bronchiolitis. Methods: This was a retrospective case control study. Infants between 1 month and 2 years of age admitted to our general pediatrics ward between June 2012 and June 2013 with a diagnosis of uncomplicated acute bronchiolitis were enrolled to the study. Hospital medical files were reviewed to get information about children personal history, symptoms of the disease, disease severity scores and their management. Patients were classified into 4 groups according to the management; nebulized short-acting β2-agonist (salbutamol) +hydration; nebulized short-acting β2-agonist (salbutamol); hydration and neither bronchodilator nor hydration. We examined length of stay in the hospital as an outcome measure. Results: A total of 94 infants were studied. There was no significant difference between groups in terms of length of stay in hospital. Conclusions: IV hydration is not effective on length of stay in hospital in mild acute bronchiolitis patients.