SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2026
Dexmedetomidine for acute respiratory conditions requiring non-invasive respiratory support in pediatric and adult patients: systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 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
Background: Dexmedetomidine is increasingly used as an anxiolytic and sedative in pediatric patients with acute respiratory distress for managing anxiety and agitation. However, its effectiveness and safety in the pediatric population remain unclear, and clinical practice is often guided by evidence derived from adults. Aim: A systematic review was conducted to examine the evidence on the use of dexmedetomidine in patients undergoing non-invasive respiratory support (NRS) for acute respiratory conditions in both pediatric and adult individuals. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted on PubMed, Web of Science and Embase up to September 2025, evaluating dexmedetomidine in patients requiring NRS. The risk of bias was assessed using JBI's critical appraisal tools, and available comparative studies randomized controlled studies (RCT) were analyzed in a meta-analysis. Certainty was graded according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) methodology. Results: Ten studies evaluating dexmedetomidine in pediatric NRS were identified. While most studies suggested that dexmedetomidine may improve tolerance to NRS and reduce agitation, the pediatric evidence base consists mainly of observational studies without randomized trials, preventing a quantitative synthesis. Consequently, any direct comparisons with adult results cannot be directly extrapolated and should be considered strictly exploratory. Twenty-four studies (9 RCTs) were conducted in adult patients. The evidence from adult studies was more robust, showing that dexmedetomidine has the potential to reduce agitation, aid NRS acceptance, and decrease the need for intubation, as well as the incidence of delirium. Conclusion: Current evidence supporting the use of dexmedetomidine in pediatric patients undergoing NRS is promising but remains insufficient. Findings from adult populations suggest that dexmedetomidine can effectively reduce agitation and may facilitate NRS acceptance in various conditions requiring respiratory support. However, future robust randomized controlled trials in pediatric patients are needed to determine efficacy, optimal dosing and safety in children with acute respiratory distress. These data will enable the development of age-specific guidelines and recommendations, ensuring a safer and more effective use.
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.