The effect of dexmedetomidine-ketamine combination versus dexmedetomidine on behavior of uncooperative pediatric dental patients: a randomized controlled clinical trial.
Sara Hassan El-Rouby, Yasmi O Crystal, Ahmed M Elshafie, Nadia A Wahba, Magda M El-Tekeya
Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB January 1, 2024 DOI: 10.1590/1678-7757-2024-0057 via PubMed
Summary
AI-generated from the abstractBoth a dexmedetomidine-ketamine combination and dexmedetomidine alone effectively maintain stable heart rate and blood pressure in uncooperative children aged 3–5 years needing dental treatment. The combination significantly improves children's behavior during local anesthesia and the dental procedure compared to dexmedetomidine alone, but children accept the drug less readily when it includes ketamine. Adverse events, amnesia, and effects on postoperative behavior are similar between the two regimens. Salivary secretory immunoglobulin A levels do not differ significantly, suggesting it is not a useful stress biomarker in sedated children.
Study at a glance
| Characteristics | Randomized controlled trial Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Sample size | 56 |
| Population | Uncooperative healthy children aged 3-5 years requiring dental treatment |
| Interventions | Buccal dexmedetomidine (2 μg/kg) and ketamine (2 mg/kg) Buccal dexmedetomidine (4 μg/kg) |
| Dose | 2 μg/kg dexmedetomidine and 2 mg/kg ketamine; 4 μg/kg dexmedetomidine |
| Keywords | Pediatric dentistry Dental sedation Anxiety management Oral health Children's healthcare |
| Citations | 4 |
| Key finding | The dexmedetomidine-ketamine combination significantly improves behavior during local anesthesia and operative procedures compared to dexmedetomidine alone, but drug acceptance is lower with the combination. |
Abstract
Uncooperative behavior in pediatric dentistry is one of the most common manifestations of dental anxiety. Managing anxious patients can be attained by moderate sedation. This study aimed to compare the effect of sedation by dexmedetomidine-ketamine combination (DEX-KET) versus dexmedetomidine (DEX) on behavior of uncooperative pediatric dental patients. In total, 56 uncooperative healthy children (3-5 years old) requiring dental treatment were divided randomly into two groups: Group I (study group), which received buccal dexmedetomidine (2 μg/kg) and ketamine (2 mg/kg), and Group II (control group), which received only buccal dexmedetomidine (4 μg/kg). Drugs effects were assessed in terms of hemodynamic parameters, patient's drug acceptance, child behavior, postoperative effect of sedation, amnesic effect, incidence of adverse events, as well as procedural induced stress measured by salivary secretory immunoglobulin A (s-IgA). Hemodynamic results did not reveal a statistically significant difference between the two study groups (P>0.05). There was a significant difference in patient's acceptance to sedative drug between both groups, favoring DEX (p=0.005). Children who received DEX-KET showed significantly better behavior than those who received DEX for local anesthesia (p=0.017) and during operative procedure (p=0.037). Adverse events, post-operative and amnesic effects of drugs were comparable in both groups (p>0.05). Moreover, the mean difference in the salivary s-IgA levels between initial and final value was not statistically significant between both groups (p=0.556). Both DEX-KET combination and DEX alone are effective in providing hemodynamic stability. DEX-KET combination significantly improved the behavior of sedated children compared to DEX alone but the drug acceptance was decreased in the DEX-KET group. Both regimens did not have a negative effect on postoperative behavior of children and had comparable amnesic effect with no significant adverse events. Salivary s-IgA is not considered a potential stress biomarker in sedated children.