Efficacy of buccal midazolam compared to intravenous diazepam in controlling convulsions in children: A randomized controlled trial.
Author(s): Talukdar B, Chakrabarty B
Affiliation(s): Department of Pediatrics, Maulana Azad Medical College and Asssociated Chacha Nehru Bal Chikitsalaya (CNBC), Delhi-110031, India.
Publication date & source: 2008-12-27, Brain Dev., [Epub ahead of print]
A study was done to examine the efficacy of buccal midazolam in controlling convulsion in children by comparing it with intravenous diazepam, a standard mode of treating convulsions. One hundred and twenty cases presenting with convulsions to emergency were treated randomly with either buccal midazolam (in a dose of 0.2mg/kg) or intravenous diazepam (in a dose of 0.3mg/kg). Partial seizures, generalized tonic, clonic and tonic-clonic convulsions were included irrespective of duration or cause. One episode per child only was included. The frequency of overall control of convulsive episodes within 5min were 85% and 93.3% in buccal midazolam and intravenous diazepam groups, respectively; the difference was, however, not statistically significant (p=0.142). The mean time needed for controlling the convulsive episodes after administration of the drugs was significantly less with intravenous diazepam (p=<0.001). The mean time for initiation of treatment was significantly less with buccal midazolam (p=<0.001). The mean time for controlling the convulsive episodes after noticing these first were significantly less with buccal midazolam than with intravenous diazepam (p=0.004) that is likely to be due to longer time needed for initiating treatment with intravenous diazepam in preparing the injection and establishing an IV line. There was no significant side effect in both the groups. The findings suggest that buccal midazolam can be used as an alternative to intravenous diazepam especially when getting an IV line becomes difficult. In situations where establishing an IV line is a problem, buccal midazolam may be the first choice.