Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Intramuscular midazolam versus intravenous diazepam for treatment of seizures in the pediatric emergency department: A randomized clinical trial
Portela, JL; Garcia, PCR; Bruno , F; Piva, JP; Barcelos, A; Branco, R; Tasker, RC.
Affiliation
  • Portela, JL; Universidade Federal de Santa Maria. Hospital Universitário de Santa Maria. Pediatric Emergency Department. Rio Grande do Sul. Brazil
  • Garcia, PCR; Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul. School of Medicine. Department of Pediatrics. Rio Grande do Sul. Brazil
  • Bruno , F; Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul. School of Medicine. Department of Pediatrics. Rio Grande do Sul. Brazil
  • Piva, JP; Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul. School of Medicine. Department of Pediatrics. Rio Grande do Sul. Brazil
  • Barcelos, A; Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul. Hospital Universitário de Santa Maria. Pediatric Emergency Department. Rio Grande do Sul. Brazil
  • Branco, R; Addenbrooke's Hospital. Pediatric Intensive Care Locum Consultant. Cambridge. UK
  • Tasker, RC; Community Health Media Center. Pediatric NeuroCritical Care Program. Boston. USA
Med. intensiva (Madr., Ed. impr.) ; 39(3): 160-166, abr. 2015. ilus, tab
Article in En | IBECS | ID: ibc-135023
Responsible library: ES1.1
Localization: BNCS
ABSTRACT
AIM: To compare the therapeutic efficacy of intramuscular midazolam (MDZ-IM) with that of intravenous diazepam (DZP-IV) for seizures in children. DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial. Setting Pediatric emergency department. PATIENTS: Children aged 2 months to 14 years admitted to the study facility with seizures. Intervention Patients were randomized to receive DZP-IV or MDZ-IM. Main measurements Groups were compared with respect to time to treatment start (min), time from drug administration to seizure cessation (min), time to seizure cessation (min), and rate of treatment failure. Treatment was considered successful when seizure cessation was achieved within 5min of drug administration. RESULTS: Overall, 32 children (16 per group) completed the study. Intravenous access could not be obtained within 5min in four patients (25%) in the DZP-IV group. Time from admission to active treatment and time to seizure cessation was shorter in the MDZ-IM group (2.8 versus 7.4 min; p < 0.001 and 7.3 versus 10.6 min; p = 0.006, respectively). In two children per group (12.5%), seizures continued after 10min of treatment, and additional medications were required. There were no between-group differences in physiological parameters or adverse events (p = 0.171); one child (6.3%) developed hypotension in the MDZ-IM group and five (31%) developed hyperactivity or vomiting in the DZP-IV group. CONCLUSION: Given its efficacy and ease and speed of administration, intramuscular midazolam is an excellent option for treatment of childhood seizures, enabling earlier treatment and shortening overall seizure duration. There were no differences in complications when applying MDZ-IM or DZP-IV
RESUMEN
OBJETIVO: Comparar la eficacia de midazolam intramuscular (MDZ-IM) con la de diazepam intravenoso (DZP-IV) para convulsiones en niños. DISEÑO: Ensayo clínico aleatorizado. ÁMBITO: Servicio de Urgencias Pediátricas. PACIENTES: Niños de entre 2 meses y 14 años internados con convulsiones .Intervención Los pacientes fueron aleatorizados para recibir DZP-IV o MDZ-IM. MEDICIONES PRINCIPALES: tiempo hasta el inicio del tratamiento (minutos), tiempo entre la administración del medicamento y el cese de la convulsión (minutos), tiempo hasta el cese de la convulsión (minutos), y tasa de fallo del tratamiento. El tratamiento fue considerado exitoso cuando las convulsiones cesaron en los 5 min tras la administración del medicamento. RESULTADOS: Completaron el estudio 32 niños (16 por grupo). No fue posible obtener acceso intravenoso en 4 pacientes (25%) del grupo DZP-IV. El tiempo entre la internación y el tratamiento fue menor en el grupo MDZ-IM (2,8 vs. 7,4 min; p < 0,001), así como el tiempo hasta el cese de la convulsión (7,3 vs. 10,6 min; p = 0,006). En 2 niños de cada grupo (12,5%), las convulsiones continuaron después de 10min de tratamiento. No hubo diferencias entre los grupos en los parámetros fisiológicos o eventos adversos (p = 0,171); un niño (6,3%) del grupo MDZ-IM presentó hipotensión, y 5 del grupo DZP-IV (31%) presentaron hiperactividad o vómitos. CONCLUSIÓN: Dada su eficacia, facilidad y velocidad de administración, MDZ-IM es una excelente opción para el tratamiento de convulsiones infantiles, posibilitando un tratamiento precoz y reduciendo la duración de la convulsión. No hubo diferencias en las complicaciones al aplicar MDZ-IM o DZP-IV
Subject(s)

Full text: 1 Collection: 06-national / ES Database: IBECS Main subject: Seizures / Status Epilepticus / Midazolam / Diazepam / Epilepsy Type of study: Clinical_trials Limits: Adolescent / Child / Child, preschool / Female / Humans / Infant / Male Language: En Journal: Med. intensiva (Madr., Ed. impr.) Year: 2015 Document type: Article

Full text: 1 Collection: 06-national / ES Database: IBECS Main subject: Seizures / Status Epilepticus / Midazolam / Diazepam / Epilepsy Type of study: Clinical_trials Limits: Adolescent / Child / Child, preschool / Female / Humans / Infant / Male Language: En Journal: Med. intensiva (Madr., Ed. impr.) Year: 2015 Document type: Article