A study of anxiety, and midazolam-induced amnesia in patients having lower third molar teeth extracted

Different Uses of Conscious Sedation for Managing Dental Anxiety During Third-Molar Extraction: Clinical Evidence and State of the Art

Dental anxiety, linked to avoiding dental treatment and heightened medical and surgical risks, prompted this systematic review. The objective is to synthesize existing evidence on conscious sedation techniques employed for managing dental anxiety in patients scheduled for third molar extraction surgery, aiming to identify optimal approaches and address knowledge gaps. This systematic review followed the "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses" checklist and the population, investigation, comparation, outcome framework. The protocol still needs to be registered. A thorough search was conducted, incorporating MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, clinicaltrials.gov, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews until February 2024. Only randomized controlled trials were considered, following "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses" guidelines. The risk of bias was evaluated following the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Eighteen randomized controlled trials involving 2081 patients were included. Certain factors limited the feasibility of a meaningful meta-analysis, leading to a narrative synthesis. Conscious sedation with virtual reality showed an association with improved dental anxiety in 4 studies. One study reported reduced cortisol levels with midazolam compared with a placebo, whereas another noted significant variations in perioperative renin levels with remifentanil versus placebo. This review reveals inconclusive and conflicting findings regarding the role of conscious sedation in managing dental anxiety during third molar extraction surgery. Persistent uncertainties arise due to a need for consistent, standardized outcome measures. Addressing these limitations in study design is crucial for future research.

Comparison of dexmedetomidine with midazolam for third molar surgery: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

The analgesic sedation of dexmedetomidine compared with midazolam for third molar surgery remains controversial. We conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the influence of dexmedetomidine versus midazolam for third molar surgery.

METHODS

We have searched PubMed, EMbase, Web of science, EBSCO, and Cochrane library databases through December 2022 for randomized controlled trials assessing the effect of dexmedetomidine versus midazolam for third molar surgery. This meta-analysis was performed using the random-effect model.

RESULTS

Four randomized controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with midazolam for third molar surgery, dexmedetomidine administration leads to comparable oxygen saturation (standard mean difference [SMD] = 0.25; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.24 to 0.74; P = .31), heart rate (SMD = -0.37; 95% CI = -1.18 to 0.44; P = .37), SBP (SMD = -0.24; 95% CI = -0.57 to 0.09; P = .16), DBP (SMD = -0.26; 95% CI = -0.60 to 0.07; P = .12), as well as nausea and vomiting (OR = 0.58; 95% CI = 0.05-6.61; P = .66).

CONCLUSIONS

Dexmedetomidine may obtain the comparable sedation efficacy with midazolam for third molar surgery.

Effect of Dexmedetomidine Added to Lidocaine Cartridge on the Level of Patient Sedation, Cooperation, and Patient and Surgeon Satisfaction during Mandibular Third-Molar Extraction Surgery: A Randomized Double-Blind Controlled Trial

Background. Various methods have been introduced for anxiety control during third-molar extraction surgery. Dexmedetomidine (DEX) is known to have analgesic, anxiolytic, and sympatholytic properties with minimal adverse effects. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the local injection of the combination of DEX and Lidocaine on patients’ anxiety and the surgeon’s satisfaction during third-molar extraction surgery. Methods. A total number of 26 healthy volunteers with symmetrical bilateral impacted mandibular third-molar teeth indicated for surgical removal were included in this double-blind randomized controlled trial. A single experienced surgeon performed two surgical extraction procedures within at least four-week time intervals using anesthetic cartridges containing “DEX + LIDO” or “LIDO alone” used randomly on each side for each patient. The Visual Analog Scale and the SDFQ index were used to evaluate patients’ anxiety and surgeon satisfaction during the procedure. Results. SDFQ reports showed that patients in the “DEX” group were 1.5 times more relaxed than those in the “LIDO alone” group. As a result, the level of sedation was considered statistically significant between the two groups (Wilcoxon test, $P$ value <0.019). Wilcoxon test results also showed significant differences between the two groups regarding patients’ overall cooperation in terms of interfering movement and verbal presentation of discomfort ( $P$ value <0.05); however, this difference was not considered significant regarding nonverbal signs of discomfort ( $P$ value >0.05). Moreover, both the surgeon and the patients reported a significantly higher satisfaction rate in the DEX group (paired T-test, df = 25, $P$ value <0.05). Conclusions. It was inferred from the outcomes of the present study that the application of DEX added to the LIDO local anesthesia cartridge could significantly benefit anxious patients with previous unpleasant dental treatment experiences. Trial Registration. This trial is registered with the clinical trial registration number: IRCT20200406046966N.

Less stress, better success: a scoping review on the effects of anxiety on anesthetic and analgesic consumption

Preoperative anxiety has an incidence of 11-80% in patients undergoing surgical or interventional procedures. Understanding the role of preoperative anxiety on intraoperative anesthetic requirements and postoperative analgesic consumption would allow personalized anesthesia care. Over- or under-anesthetizing patients can lead to complications such as postoperative cognitive dysfunction in elderly patients, or procedural discomfort, respectively. Our scoping review focuses on the current evidence regarding the association between preoperative anxiety and intraoperative anesthetic and/or postoperative analgesic consumption in patients undergoing elective surgical or interventional procedures. Based on 44 studies that met the inclusion criteria, we found that preoperative anxiety has a significant positive correlation effect on intraoperative propofol and postoperative opioid consumption. The analysis of the literature is limited by the heterogeneity of preoperative anxiety tools used, study designs, data analyses, and outcomes. The use of shorter, validated preoperative anxiety assessment tools may help optimize the intraoperative anesthetic and postoperative analgesic regimen. Further research to determine the most feasible and clinically relevant preoperative anxiety tool and subsequent implementation has the potential to optimize perioperative care and improve patient outcomes.

Comparison of dexmedetomidine with midazolam for dental surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Dexmedetomidine and midazolam have become important approaches for the sedation of dental surgery. However, the comparison of these 2 drugs for the sedation of dental surgery has not been well established. We conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of dexmedetomidine versus midazolam for dental surgery.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials are searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the influence of dexmedetomidine versus midazolam on dental surgery are included. Two investigators independently have searched articles, extracted data, and assessed the quality of included studies. Meta-analysis is performed using the random-effect model.

RESULTS

Five RCTs and 420 patients are included in the meta-analysis. Compared with midazolam intervention for dental surgery, dexmedetomidine intervention has similar lowest SpO2, lowest heart rate and lowest systolic blood pressure, duration of surgery, and total volume of local anesthetic, but is associated with stable and reduced lowest diastolic blood pressure.

CONCLUSIONS

Similar benefits of dexmedetomidine and midazolam intervention are observed for the sedation of dental surgery in terms of SpO2, heart rate, systolic blood pressure, and the volume of local anesthetic, but dexmedetomidine may result in more stable diastolic blood pressure.

Conscious sedation for the management of dental anxiety in third molar extraction surgery: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Dental anxiety is a condition associated with avoidance of dental treatment and increased medical and surgical risks. This systematic review aims to summarize available evidence on conscious sedation techniques used for the management of Dental anxiety in patients scheduled for third molar extraction surgery, to identify best approaches and knowledge gaps.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted including MEDLINE/Pubmed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, clinicaltrials.gov and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews through March 2019. Only randomized controlled trials were included. PRISMA guidelines were followed. Risk of bias was appraised as reported in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.

RESULTS

Seventeen RCTs with a total of 1788 patients were included. Some aspects limited the feasibility of a meaningful meta-analysis, thus a narrative synthesis was conducted. Conscious sedation was associated with improvement in Dental anxiety in six studies. One study reported lower cortisol levels with midazolam vs. placebo, while another study found significant variation in perioperative renin levels with remifentanil vs. placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

This review found inconclusive and conflicting findings about the role of Conscious sedation in managing Dental anxiety during third molar extraction surgery. Relevant questions remain unanswered due to the lack of consistent, standardized outcome measures. Future research may benefit from addressing these limitations in study design.

Exploring Dentist Opinions on the Provision of Intravenous Sedation in Primary Dental Care for UK Armed Forces Personnel

Introduction: Anxiety toward dental treatment can lead to preventable morbidity, most notably oral pain and infection. This is of concern to the UK Armed Forces (UK AF), as dental care may not be immediately accessible during deployments and exercises, necessitating aeromedical evacuation. Current Defence Policy states that serving UK AF personnel requiring sedation to tolerate routine dental treatment are to have their Joint Medical Employment Standard (JMES) reviewed to restrict their deployability and employability. This article explores current sedation delivery, dentist opinion, and adherence to policy. Materials and Methods: The total number and type of intravenous (IV) sedation appointments over a 6-month period was assessed using surgical logbooks. Questionnaires were sent to all dentists in primary care responsible for treating military patients to ascertain their attitudes toward the requirement for sedation in support of recruitment and deployability. Ten-year retrospective data analyses were used to identify current trends in sedation use in the UK AF. Results: Responses were received from 117/137 (85%) dentists. All of the responding Civilian Dental Practitioners felt that there was a requirement for IV sedation in contrast to the Royal Navy (RN), where over a quarter (28%) disagreed. The majority, 48 (81%), of Army dentists felt that military patients unable to tolerate routine treatment under local anesthesia alone should not deploy on operations, compared with 7 (63%) of their civilian counterparts. Overall, 72 (62%) respondents felt that patients unable to tolerate routine treatment without sedation should not be recruited. Conclusions: Civilian Dental Practitioners in the sample indicated that they were less likely to recommend a patient for JMES review, less likely to prevent patients from deploying and less likely to believe that individuals requiring sedation for routine treatment should not be recruited into the UK AF. These attitudes are contrary to current Defence direction and could increase the risk of UK AF personnel experiencing morbidity on deployment requiring aeromedical evacuation. Over the longer term, civilianization of Defence dentistry is likely to reduce collective operational experience and Defence must ensure that clinicians understand the management of anxious patients in the military context and their responsibilities in relation to JMES. Furthermore, policy limiting the recruitment of personnel with significant dental anxiety is not being robustly adhered to. Based on the number of dental procedures undertaken under IV sedation in the UK AF, consistent application of this policy would not affect recruitment at an organizational level, but would limit the risk of deploying these personnel. Further work is required to understand dental anxiety within the UK Armed Forces so that the operational morbidity risks can be quantified and provision appropriately planned.

Effects of passiflora incarnata and midazolam for control of anxiety in patients undergoing dental extraction

Background

Anxiety symptoms are frequently observed in dental patients, whether they are undergoing simple or more invasive procedures such as surgery. This research aimed to compare the effects of Passiflora incarnata and midazolam for the control of anxiety in patients undergoing mandibular third molar extraction.

Material and Methods

Forty volunteers underwent bilateral extraction of their mandibular third molars in a randomized, controlled, double-blind, crossover clinical trial. Passiflora incarnata (260 mg) or midazolam (15 mg) were orally administered 30 minutes before surgery. The anxiety level of participants was evaluated by questionnaires and measurement of physical parameters, including heart rate (HR), blood pressure (BP), and oxygen saturation (SpO2).

Results

Considering each procedure independently, there were no significant differences between the protocols in BP, HR, and SpO2. Over 70% of the volunteers responded that they felt quiet or a little anxious under both protocols. With midazolam, 20% of the participants reported amnesia (not remembering anything at all), while Passiflora showed little or no ability to interfere with memory formation.

Conclusions

Passiflora incarnata showed an anxiolytic effect similar to midazolam, and was safe and effective for conscious sedation in adult patients who underwent extraction of their mandibular third molars.

Key words:Passiflora incarnata, midazolam, anxiety, oral surgery.

The anxiolytic effect of midazolam in third molar extraction: a systematic review

Purpose

To assess the efficacy of midazolam for anxiety control in third molar extraction surgery.

Methods

Electronic retrievals were conducted in Medline (via PubMed, 1950-2013.12), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 3), Embase (via OVID 1974-2013.12), and the System for Information on Grey Literature in Europe (SIGLE). The bibliographies of relevant clinical trials were also checked. Randomized controlled trials satisfying the inclusion criteria were evaluated, with data extraction done independently by two well-trained investigators. Disagreements were resolved by discussion or by consultation with a third member of the review team.

Results

Ten studies were included, but meta-analysis could not be conducted because of the significant differences among articles. All but one article demonstrated that midazolam could relieve anxiety. One article demonstrated that propofol offered superior anxiolysis, with more rapid recovery than with midazolam. Compared with lorazepam and diazepam, midazolam did not distinctly dominate in its sedative effect, but was safer. Two articles used midazolam in multidrug intravenous sedation and proved it to be more effective than midazolam alone.

Conclusion

It was found, by comparison and analysis, that midazolam might be effective for use for anxiety control during third molar extraction and can be safely administered by a dedicated staff member. It can also be used with other drugs to obtain better sedative effects, but the patient’s respiratory function must be monitored closely, because multidrug sedation is also more risky.

Independent predictors of satisfaction in impacted third molar surgery patients

OBJECTIVES

Patient satisfaction and dissatisfaction are critical dimensions leading to favorable or unfavorable treatment outcomes. Although impacted third molar (ITM) surgery is one of the most common dental surgical procedures, it is a challenging operation because of numerous potential complications and patients generally suffer from severe psychosomatic symptoms as a result of severe perioperative anxiety. We hypothesize that multiple independent factors, including perioperative anxiety and various postoperative complications, affect satisfaction of the ITM surgery patients.

METHODS

Survey data from 219 participants encompassed basic patient demographic traits, difficulty of surgery, perioperative anxiety, pain sensation and common postoperative complications. The t-test and one-way anova with Duncan's multiple-range tests were applied to detect differences in mean values of perioperative anxiety, perioperative pain sensation and satisfaction based on basic demographic characteristics and postoperative complications. The significance of postoperative complications according to demographic data and difficulty of extraction was also analyzed. A paired t-test was applied to detect the significance of anxiety level and pain sensation changes over time. Lastly, univariate and multiple stepwise regression analyses were used to analyze the relationships among perioperative anxiety, pain sensation and satisfaction to determine the predictive factor of patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

Basic demographic traits proved not to have a direct significant effect on satisfaction in ITM surgery patients, but some demographic factors and difficulty of surgery showed significant relationships with postoperative complications. Univariate analysis revealed that perioperative anxiety, pain sensation, postoperative infection, numbness/paresthesia and ecchymoses have a significant influence on patient satisfaction. In particular, preoperative anxiety level and numbness/paresthesia were independent predictive factors of patient satisfaction upon multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that the patients who undergo ITM surgery often have severe anxiety that seriously impacts patient satisfaction and resultant treatment outcomes. In addition, patient satisfaction directly depends on the occurrence of some postoperative complications. Appreciation of these predictive factors and increasing patient satisfaction may help clinicians to provide optimal care for ITM surgery patients.

Evaluation of Sedation Failure in the Outpatient Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Clinic

PURPOSE

Our goal was to report on the incidence of sedation failures in our outpatient oral surgery clinic. Sedation failure is the inability to complete a procedure under intravenous sedation. There is very little in the oral surgery literature on this subject.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Proper Institutional Review Board approval was obtained from the appropriate governing body for this project. The medical records of 539 intravenous sedation patients treated at the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Clinic at our institution were retrospectively evaluated to determine the incidence of failed sedation. Patients sedated with midazolam and fentanyl were placed in group A. There were 323 patients in group A. We placed patients sedated with midazolam, fentanyl and methohexital into group B. There were 216 patients in group B. The gender, medical history, type of procedure being performed, amount of drug given, and the patient's vital signs throughout the procedure were recorded.

RESULTS

There were 9 failed sedations with a rate of 1.6% (9/539); 3 in group B (1%) and 6 in group A (2%). Five of our failures were undergoing multiple tooth extractions. Two of the failures were undergoing surgical removal of impacted third molars. Two patients underwent mandibular fracture reduction. Failure was attributed to increased agitation and combativeness, uncontrolled hypertension, tachycardia and desaturation.

CONCLUSION

The mandible fracture population and multiple teeth extraction patients had higher rates of failure than other groups. This may be the result of procedure length, type of procedure, or a preoperative anxiety and attitude toward treatment expressed by the patient making sedation unpredictable. Level of training and experience of the practitioner may contribute to sedation failure. These results allow us to develop a prospective study protocol of outpatient sedation and to quantify more detailed information about preoperative anxiety, medical status, and social history than we had available during our chart review. More specific conclusions may help us determine if certain patient populations are at a higher risk for failed sedations.

A comparison of midazolam and midazolam with remifentanil for patient-controlled sedation during operations on third molars

Our aim was to compare patients' satisfaction and cooperation, and clinical efficacy, of midazolam alone, and midazolam and remifentanil for patient-controlled sedation during removal of third molars. Forty patients, American Society of Anesthesiologists grades I and II, admitted for extraction of impacted mandibular third molars were included in this randomised, prospective study. They were given an intravenous bolus of midazolam 0.03 mg/kg and then allowed to use patient-controlled sedation. In the midazolam group, 2 ml of 0.5 mg/ml midazolam was given automatically. In the midazolam-remifentanil group, 2 ml of 0.5 mg/ml midazolam and 12.5 microg/ml remifentanil were given in the same manner. The lockout period was 5 min. Vital signs and oxygen saturation were recorded. Patients' and surgeons' satisfaction, and the patients' degree of amnesia about the local anaesthetic, drilling, removal of the tooth, and pain during extraction were also assessed. There were no significant differences between systolic and diastolic blood pressures during sedation, but heart rate after 30 min in the combined group was significantly lower than in the midazolam group (p<0.05). Surgeons described the midazolam group as excellent in 9 and good in 11. In the combined group, satisfaction was excellent in 11, good in 7, and satisfactory or unacceptable in 1 of each. Immediately postoperatively, 19 patients in each group ranked their satisfaction as excellent and 1 as good. Twenty-four hours later it was unchanged in the midazolam group, while 15 patients in the other group thought it was excellent, 3 good, and 2 poor. Patient-controlled analgesia with midazolam or midazolam and remifentanil is safe and reliable during extraction of third molars.

Recovery of dynamic balance after additional small divided doses of midazolam given intravenously for sedation

We have previously reported that a dynamic balance test with perturbation stimuli and computerised dynamic posturography sensitively reflected the inhibitory effect on balance of intravenous midazolam sedation given intravenously as a single dose, and recovery time was within 80 min. The purpose of this study was to investigate the recovery of dynamic balance after additional doses of midazolam. Eighteen young adult male volunteers were sedated with midazolam given intravenously. The initial dose was given until the Wilson sedation score reached 3, and an additional dose was given until the same score was obtained 40 min later. They were tested with perturbation stimuli 40, 80, 100, and 120 min after the additional doses had been given. Their recovery time was recorded. The mean (S.D.) initial dose of midazolam was 0.07 (0.005) mg kg(-1), and additional doses were 41 (7)% of the initial dose. The serial changes in bispectral index after initial and additional doses were similar. The recovery time for the dynamic balance test (within 80 min) was the same as that recorded in the previous single-dose study. The recovery time of the psychomotor function test was within 75 min. Additional doses of midazolam aiming for a Wilson sedation score of 3 at a dose about 40% of the initial dose and given 40 min after the initial dose are valid in terms of the maintenance of sedation and recovery of dynamic balance. Complete recovery time, including psychomotor function, was within 80 min of the additional dose of the drug.

Translational research in central nervous system drug discovery

Of all the therapeutic areas, diseases of the CNS provide the biggest challenges to translational research in this era of increased productivity and novel targets. Risk reduction by translational research incorporates the "learn" phase of the "learn and confirm" paradigm proposed over a decade ago. Like traditional drug discovery in vitro and in laboratory animals, it precedes the traditional phase 1-3 studies of drug development. The focus is on ameliorating the current failure rate in phase 2 and the delays resulting from suboptimal choices in four key areas: initial test subjects, dosing, sensitive and early detection of therapeutic effect, and recognition of differences between animal models and human disease. Implementation of new technologies is the key to success in this emerging endeavor.

The efficacy of combination analgesic therapy in relieving dental pain

BACKGROUND

An experience of poorly managed pain related to dental treatment can lead patients to avoid or postpone treatment. The development of new pain management strategies equips dental clinicians with additional treatment options that can provide more effective pain relief

LITERATURE REVIEWED

The author reviewed dental and medical literature dealing with the safety, efficacy and mechanisms of action of common analgesic treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

For the treatment of mild to moderate pain, acetaminophen and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, or NSAIDs, continue to be the most appropriate options. The use of cyclo-oxygenase2-inhibitor NSAIDs should be strongly considered for use with patients at risk of experiencing gastrointestinal toxicity. The pathophysiology of pain is a complex central and peripheral nervous system process, and the use of combination analgesics that act at multiple pain sites can improve pain relief after a dental procedure. For moderate to moderately severe pain, tramadol or combination medications such as tramadol with acetaminophen or codeine with acetaminophen are appropriate. For severe pain, use of opioids or opioid combinations is advised.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Providing appropriate treatment after dental surgery requires a careful medical history and an educated anticipation of the level of pain the patient may encounter. New analgesic options are available and should be considered, particularly combination analgesics, which can provide faster onset and prolonged duration of action and can combat pain at multiple sites of action.