Seizure treatment in children: can intranasal midazolam be used without an atomizer?

IF 0.9 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Einstein-Sao Paulo Pub Date : 2025-09-15 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.31744/einstein_journal/2025AO1535
Karini Da Rosa, Cassiano Mateus Forcelini, Débora Miotto Lorenzetti, Matheus Alberto Cella, Marina Camargo Galera, Vítor Alexandre Ferraz de Carvalho E Souza, Rafael Linden, Charise Dallazem Bertol
{"title":"Seizure treatment in children: can intranasal midazolam be used without an atomizer?","authors":"Karini Da Rosa, Cassiano Mateus Forcelini, Débora Miotto Lorenzetti, Matheus Alberto Cella, Marina Camargo Galera, Vítor Alexandre Ferraz de Carvalho E Souza, Rafael Linden, Charise Dallazem Bertol","doi":"10.31744/einstein_journal/2025AO1535","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Convulsive status epilepticus is the most common neurological emergency in children with high morbidity and mortality rates. Intranasal midazolam administration using an atomizer is the preferred treatment method. However, Brazilian pediatric emergencies often require rapid midazolam instillation using syringes. We aimed to compare the plasma midazolam levels in children who received intranasal medication with an atomizer and those who received medication via rapid instillation using only a syringe to treat seizures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This exploratory cross-sectional study was conducted between January 2022 and March 2024 at the emergency department of a hospital in Southern Brazil. Thirteen children with tonic-clonic status epilepticus received intranasal midazolam via either an atomizer or syringe, at similar dosages. The peak plasma midazolam concentrations, measured approximately 10 min following intranasal administration, were compared between the groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No significant difference was observed in the plasma midazolam concentrations (ng/mL) between the syringe and atomizer groups (median and interquartile range: 148.8 [126.3-293.7] ng/mL versus 133.3 [76.4-176.3] ng/mL; p=0.414), as well as in the time from administration to sampling (8.0 [7.75-10.0] min versus 9.5 [6.75-10.0] min; p=0.710) or in weight-adjusted dose (0.48 [0.44-0.50] mg/kg versus 0.49 [0.47-0.56] mg/kg; p=0.414).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study is the first to validate the common Brazilian practice of using syringes alone for rapid nasal midazolam delivery during pediatric emergencies. Future studies should elucidate the clinical outcomes of this approach.</p>","PeriodicalId":47359,"journal":{"name":"Einstein-Sao Paulo","volume":"23 ","pages":"eAO1535"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Einstein-Sao Paulo","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31744/einstein_journal/2025AO1535","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Convulsive status epilepticus is the most common neurological emergency in children with high morbidity and mortality rates. Intranasal midazolam administration using an atomizer is the preferred treatment method. However, Brazilian pediatric emergencies often require rapid midazolam instillation using syringes. We aimed to compare the plasma midazolam levels in children who received intranasal medication with an atomizer and those who received medication via rapid instillation using only a syringe to treat seizures.

Methods: This exploratory cross-sectional study was conducted between January 2022 and March 2024 at the emergency department of a hospital in Southern Brazil. Thirteen children with tonic-clonic status epilepticus received intranasal midazolam via either an atomizer or syringe, at similar dosages. The peak plasma midazolam concentrations, measured approximately 10 min following intranasal administration, were compared between the groups.

Results: No significant difference was observed in the plasma midazolam concentrations (ng/mL) between the syringe and atomizer groups (median and interquartile range: 148.8 [126.3-293.7] ng/mL versus 133.3 [76.4-176.3] ng/mL; p=0.414), as well as in the time from administration to sampling (8.0 [7.75-10.0] min versus 9.5 [6.75-10.0] min; p=0.710) or in weight-adjusted dose (0.48 [0.44-0.50] mg/kg versus 0.49 [0.47-0.56] mg/kg; p=0.414).

Conclusion: This study is the first to validate the common Brazilian practice of using syringes alone for rapid nasal midazolam delivery during pediatric emergencies. Future studies should elucidate the clinical outcomes of this approach.

儿童癫痫发作的治疗:鼻内咪达唑仑可以不用雾化器使用吗?
目的:惊厥性癫痫持续状态是儿童最常见的神经系统急症,具有较高的发病率和死亡率。使用雾化器鼻内给药咪达唑仑是首选的治疗方法。然而,巴西的儿科急诊往往需要使用注射器快速滴注咪达唑仑。我们的目的是比较使用喷雾器鼻内给药和仅使用注射器快速滴注给药治疗癫痫发作的儿童血浆中咪达唑仑的水平。方法:这项探索性横断面研究于2022年1月至2024年3月在巴西南部一家医院的急诊科进行。13名患有强直阵挛性癫痫持续状态的儿童通过雾化器或注射器接受了相同剂量的鼻内咪达唑仑。在鼻内给药后约10分钟测得的血浆峰值咪达唑仑浓度在两组之间进行比较。结果:注射组和雾化组血浆咪达唑仑浓度(ng/mL)(中位数和四分位数范围分别为148.8 [126.3-293.7]ng/mL和133.3 [76.4-176.3]ng/mL, p=0.414)、给药至采样时间(8.0 [7.75-10.0]min和9.5 [6.75-10.0]min, p=0.710)和体重调整剂量(0.48 [0.44-0.50]mg/kg和0.49 [0.47-0.56]mg/kg, p=0.414)均无显著差异。结论:这项研究首次验证了巴西在儿科急诊期间使用注射器快速鼻腔给药咪达唑仑的常见做法。未来的研究应该阐明这种方法的临床结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Einstein-Sao Paulo
Einstein-Sao Paulo MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
210
审稿时长
38 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信