You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 301 No. 23, June 17, 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Letters
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related article
 •Related letters
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Topic Collections
 •Bacterial Infections
 •Neurology
 •Critical Care/ Intensive Care Medicine
 •Adult Critical Care
 •Anesthesia
 •Substance Abuse/ Alcoholism
 •Quality of Care
 •Patient Safety/ Medical Error
 •Drug Therapy
 •Adverse Effects
 •Drug Therapy, Other
 •Infectious Diseases
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Comparing Dexmedetomidine With Midazolam for Sedation of Patients in the ICU

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor: For the randomized trial of dexmedetomidine vs midazolam for sedation of critically ill patients by Dr Riker and colleagues,1 the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved dexmedetomidine for up to 30 days of mechanical ventilation. The authors reported no death related to dexmedetomidine when administered at doses greater than 1.4 µg/kg per hour for days in a cohort of patients who were predominately (276/366, 75%) in severe sepsis.

There are 2 safety concerns about the use of dexmedetomidine in this study. First, the authors noted significant incidence of bradycardia (103/244, 42%) in patients treated with dexmedetomidine. Hemodynamic compensation for bradycardia by increasing the stroke volume and systemic vascular resistance are often impaired in patients with severe sepsis.2 The use of inotropic and vasopressor medications may be necessary to maintain hemodynamic stability in these patients. The study did not report whether there were any differences in dosing . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Mohamed Y. Rady, MD, PhD
rady.mohamed@mayo.edu

Bhavesh M. Patel, MD; Joel S. Larson, MD
Department of Critical Care Medicine
Mayo Clinic Hospital
Phoenix, Arizona



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Dexmedetomidine vs Midazolam for Sedation of Critically Ill Patients: A Randomized Trial
Richard R. Riker, Yahya Shehabi, Paula M. Bokesch, Daniel Ceraso, Wayne Wisemandle, Firas Koura, Patrick Whitten, Benjamin D. Margolis, Daniel W. Byrne, E. Wesley Ely, Marcelo G. Rocha, and for the SEDCOM (Safety and Efficacy of Dexmedetomidine Compared With Midazolam) Study Group
JAMA. 2009;301(5):489-499.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

RELATED LETTERS

Comparing Dexmedetomidine With Midazolam for Sedation of Patients in the ICU
Jack DePriest and Luis Gonzalez, III
JAMA. 2009;301(23):2439.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Comparing Dexmedetomidine With Midazolam for Sedation of Patients in the ICU
Christopher Paciullo
JAMA. 2009;301(23):2440.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Comparing Dexmedetomidine With Midazolam for Sedation of Patients in the ICU
Amit Gupta, David Lee, and Mark Su
JAMA. 2009;301(23):2440-2441.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Comparing Dexmedetomidine With Midazolam for Sedation of Patients in the ICU—Reply
Richard R. Riker, Yahya Shehabi, and Marcelo G. Rocha
JAMA. 2009;301(23):2441-2442.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  






HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2009 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.