SynthesisBMC anesthesiology2026
Comparative safety and sedation effectiveness of intranasal dexmedetomidine versus midazolam for preoperative anxiety reduction in pediatric surgical patients: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC anesthesiology, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRelieving pre-operative anxiety in children is a major concern for anesthesiologists. Midazolam has been the most commonly used sedative agent due to its long history of efficacy. However, it has been associated with complications, such as agitation, cognitive impairment, amnesia, and respiratory depression. For these reasons, other drugs, such as dexmedetomidine, have been explored as safe and effective alternatives in children undergoing surgery.
objectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of intranasal dexmedetomidine as compared to intranasal or oral midazolam in reducing preoperative anxiety in pediatric surgical patients.
methodsPubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched for relevant articles published from inception to January 2026. The search was limited to articles written in English and involved keywords and MeSH terms related to midazolam, dexmedetomidine, surgery, and children.
resultsNineteen randomized controlled trials with 1475 pediatric surgical patients were included. The pooled analysis revealed that intranasal dexmedetomidine was associated with significantly lower anxiety scores at or before induction (SMD: -1.10; 95% CI: -1.68 to -0.53; p = 0.0002), parental separation anxiety (SMD: -0.56; 95% CI: -0.99 to -0.12; p = 0.01), and mean heart rate (HR) (MD: -6.60 beats/min; 95% CI: -10.56 to -2.64; p = 0.001) compared to intranasal midazolam. However, intranasal dexmedetomidine was comparable to oral midazolam in terms of anxiety at or before induction (MD: -7.70; 95% CI: -18.89 to 3.59; p = 0.18), parental separation anxiety (RR: 1.13; 95% CI: 0.44 to 2.88; p = 0.80), and postoperative emergence agitation (RR: 0.22; 95% CI: 0.02 to 2.94; p = 0.25).
conclusionIntranasal dexmedetomidine is more effective than intranasal midazolam in reducing preoperative anxiety in children. No statistically significant difference was detected between intranasal dexmedetomidine and oral midazolam, but studies may have been underpowered to detect clinically important differences. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: CRD420251234972.
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.