ArticleMedicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal2026
Midazolam versus midazolam-promethazine combination for oral sedation in third molar surgery: A randomized split-mouth trial.
Article in Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOral sedation is widely utilized in dental surgical practice for anxiety management during third molar extractions. Midazolam is one of the most frequently employed drugs; however, the clinical benefits of its association with promethazine have not yet been clearly established. MATERIAL AND
methodsThis is a randomized, double-blind, split-mouth clinical trial. Eighteen anxious patients were included, all with indications for bilateral extraction of impacted or semi-impacted mandibular third molars, presenting similar surgical difficulty on both sides. In one session, patients received 15mg of midazolam alone (Group A), and in another, 15mg of midazolam combined with 25mg of promethazine (Group B). Sedation levels (Ramsay scale), anxiety (Corah scale), and physiological parameters were evaluated.
resultsThere was no statistically significant difference in the depth of sedation between the groups (p>0.05). Oxygen saturation and heart rate showed slight, statistically significant variations at specific time points in Group B (p<0.05), although without relevant clinical repercussions. Blood pressure and respiratory rate remained stable across both protocols.
conclusionsThe association of promethazine with midazolam did not increase sedative efficacy compared to midazolam alone. However, it demonstrated clinical safety, proving to be a viable alternative in sedative drug protocols.
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.