右美托咪啶和咪达唑仑用于程序化镇静疗效和安全性的系统评价

摘要

目的:系统评价右美托咪定和咪达唑仑用于程序化镇静时的疗效和安全性.方法:计算机检索PubMed、EMBase、Cochrane Library、CNKI、CBM和万方等数据库,全面收集右美托咪啶和咪达唑仑用于程序化镇静效果比较的临床随机对照试验(RCT),检索时限为建库至2017年3月.根据纳入标准筛选文献,并进行数据提取和质量评价,对研究结局进行系统评价.疗效结局指标为患者和医生的满意度评分、疼痛评分;安全性结局指标为低血压、低氧血症、循环和呼吸系统等并发症的发生率.结果:最终纳入14项RCT,共949例患者.与咪达唑仑组比较,右美托咪啶组患者的疼痛、谵妄发生率及镇痛需求比较差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);但呼吸抑制和低血压发生率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).结论:成年患者镇静时,右美托咪定可以作为咪达唑仑镇静的理想替代药物.%Objective:To systematically review the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine and midazolam in procedural sedation. Methods: PubMed,EMBase,Cochrane Library,CNKI,CBM and WanFang databases were retrieved to collect the randomized controlled trials (RCT) about comparion of efficacy and safety between dexmedetomidine and midazolam in procedural sedation up to March, 2017. Based on the inclusion criteria, the data extraction and quality evaluation were performed, and then the systematic evaluation was carried out.The outcome measures for efficacy were the satisfaction scores and pain scores of the patients and clinicians;the outcome measures for safety comparison were hypotension, hypoxia, and circulatory and respiratory complications.Results:There were 14 RCT satisfied the inclusion criteria including 949 patients.Compared with midazolam group, the incidence of pain, delirium, and analgesia of the patients in dexmedetomidine group had significant differences (P<0.05);but the incidence of respiratory depression, low blood pressure had no significant differences (P>0.05).Conclusion:When the adult patients are sedated, dexmedetomidine can be used as an ideal alternative to midazolam sedation.