Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2025
Safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of Dexmedetomidine two-phase flow atomization in healthy subjects: a randomized, parallel study.
Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Postoperative continuous infusion of dexmedetomidine does not improve gastrointestinal function recovery after laparoscopic colorectal surgery: A randomized clinical trial.The Journal of international medical research · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn this study, we aimed to compare the sedative effects, pharmacokinetics (PKs), and safety of dexmedetomidine (DEX) administered using a two-phase flow atomization device with those of conventional intranasal drop-based administration in healthy volunteers.
methodsThis prospective, parallel, double-blind study compared the PK and pharmacodynamic (PD) profiles of DEX administered via conventional intranasal drop (Group C) or two-phase flow atomization (Group E). Twenty-two healthy adult volunteers were enrolled and randomly assigned to the two groups using a computer-generated randomization sequence. Each participant received DEX at a dose of 2 µg/kg. Sedation was assessed using the Ramsay Sedation Scale and the bispectral index, and PK analysis was performed on blood samples collected at multiple time points.
resultsThe two-phase flow atomization group exhibited a significantly faster onset of sedation than the conventional intranasal drop-based administration group and a longer duration of sedation. Compared with Group C, Group E presented an increasing trend in the maximum plasma concentration and in the area under the concentration‒time curve from time zero to the last time point (AUC0t). We found no significant differences in other PK parameters between the two groups, with all P-values > 0.05. The plasma concentrations were slightly higher in the two-phase flow atomization group after 30 min. The changes in systolic blood pressure and heart rate of both groups of volunteers were within 25% of the baseline values, with no adverse reactions such as hypotension or sinus bradycardia.
conclusionsThe findings indicate that the two-phase flow atomization device offers faster onset and longer duration of sedation with DEX nasal administration, with a favorable safety profile in healthy volunteers (American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Class 1) under specific conditions. Therefore, based on the sedation dynamics, we infer that this device may enhance drug deposition in the olfactory region of the nasal cavity, thereby enhancing the effects of the drug in the central nervous system through nose-to-brain delivery. This study provides new insights into the optimization of nasal drug delivery devices, particularly for pediatric patients and patients in clinical settings requiring rapid sedation.
trial registrationThis study was registered at ChiCTR.org.cn (registration number ChiCTR2400091480) on 29/10/2024.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.