Intranasal Dexmedetomidine for the Management of Preoperative Anxiety-Related Insomnia: A Randomized, Three-Blinded, Clinical Trial Compared with Lorazepam and Placebo.
{"title":"Intranasal Dexmedetomidine for the Management of Preoperative Anxiety-Related Insomnia: A Randomized, Three-Blinded, Clinical Trial Compared with Lorazepam and Placebo.","authors":"Wen-Yi Yang, Kuan Huang, Zhi-Jian Lin, Wen Zeng, Xin Liu, Hong-Bo Liu, Mao-Lin Zhong, Jun Wei, Wei-Dong Liang, Li-Feng Wang, Li Chen","doi":"10.2147/DDDT.S487463","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the efficacy and safety of intranasal dexmedetomidine (Dex), oral lorazepam, and a placebo in managing preoperative anxiety-related insomnia.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>A total of 90 patients exhibiting symptoms of preoperative anxiety and insomnia were randomly assigned to three groups: Dex (receiving 2.5 µg/kg Dex intranasally and starch tablets orally), lorazepam (receiving saline intranasally and 2 mg lorazepam orally), and placebo (receiving saline intranasally and starch tablets orally). Interventions were conducted the night before surgery. The primary outcome was measured using the Leeds Sleep Evaluation Questionnaire (LSEQ) to evaluate changes in sleep quality pre- and post-intervention. Secondary outcomes included monitoring sleep on the night of the intervention, sleep satisfaction scores, changes in vital signs within 2 hours post-intervention, and adverse reaction rates.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>According to sleep assessments using the LSEQ, the Dex group demonstrated significant improvements in ease of getting to sleep (GTS), ease of awakening (AFS), and alertness and behavior after waking (BFW) compared to the lorazepam group (<i>p</i> < 0.05). However, no significant differences were observed in the quality of sleep (QOS) between the two groups (<i>p</i> > 0.05). Sleep monitoring indicated that the Dex group had a median sleep onset latency (SOL) of 19.0 min, significantly shorter than those recorded for the lorazepam group at 33.5 min and the placebo group at 57.0 min (<i>p</i> < 0.001). The total sleep time (TST) and sleep efficiency (SE) were 403.7 min and 84.5% for the Dex group, similar to the lorazepam group (408.6 min, 83.2%)(<i>p</i> >0.999) and superior to the placebo group (278.8 min, 57.4%)(<i>p</i> < 0.001). Sleep satisfaction scores did not significantly differ between the Dex and lorazepam groups (<i>p</i> > 0.999). No serious adverse reactions were reported across the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both 2.5 μg/kg intranasal Dex and 2 mg oral lorazepam effectively improved sleep quality in patients with preoperative anxiety-related insomnia. While both treatments were comparable in maintaining sleep, intranasal Dex was more effective in initiating sleep and enhancing daytime functionality than lorazepam.</p>","PeriodicalId":11290,"journal":{"name":"Drug Design, Development and Therapy","volume":"18 ","pages":"6061-6073"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11663697/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drug Design, Development and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/DDDT.S487463","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MEDICINAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of intranasal dexmedetomidine (Dex), oral lorazepam, and a placebo in managing preoperative anxiety-related insomnia.
Patients and methods: A total of 90 patients exhibiting symptoms of preoperative anxiety and insomnia were randomly assigned to three groups: Dex (receiving 2.5 µg/kg Dex intranasally and starch tablets orally), lorazepam (receiving saline intranasally and 2 mg lorazepam orally), and placebo (receiving saline intranasally and starch tablets orally). Interventions were conducted the night before surgery. The primary outcome was measured using the Leeds Sleep Evaluation Questionnaire (LSEQ) to evaluate changes in sleep quality pre- and post-intervention. Secondary outcomes included monitoring sleep on the night of the intervention, sleep satisfaction scores, changes in vital signs within 2 hours post-intervention, and adverse reaction rates.
Results: According to sleep assessments using the LSEQ, the Dex group demonstrated significant improvements in ease of getting to sleep (GTS), ease of awakening (AFS), and alertness and behavior after waking (BFW) compared to the lorazepam group (p < 0.05). However, no significant differences were observed in the quality of sleep (QOS) between the two groups (p > 0.05). Sleep monitoring indicated that the Dex group had a median sleep onset latency (SOL) of 19.0 min, significantly shorter than those recorded for the lorazepam group at 33.5 min and the placebo group at 57.0 min (p < 0.001). The total sleep time (TST) and sleep efficiency (SE) were 403.7 min and 84.5% for the Dex group, similar to the lorazepam group (408.6 min, 83.2%)(p >0.999) and superior to the placebo group (278.8 min, 57.4%)(p < 0.001). Sleep satisfaction scores did not significantly differ between the Dex and lorazepam groups (p > 0.999). No serious adverse reactions were reported across the groups.
Conclusion: Both 2.5 μg/kg intranasal Dex and 2 mg oral lorazepam effectively improved sleep quality in patients with preoperative anxiety-related insomnia. While both treatments were comparable in maintaining sleep, intranasal Dex was more effective in initiating sleep and enhancing daytime functionality than lorazepam.
期刊介绍:
Drug Design, Development and Therapy is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal that spans the spectrum of drug design, discovery and development through to clinical applications.
The journal is characterized by the rapid reporting of high-quality original research, reviews, expert opinions, commentary and clinical studies in all therapeutic areas.
Specific topics covered by the journal include:
Drug target identification and validation
Phenotypic screening and target deconvolution
Biochemical analyses of drug targets and their pathways
New methods or relevant applications in molecular/drug design and computer-aided drug discovery*
Design, synthesis, and biological evaluation of novel biologically active compounds (including diagnostics or chemical probes)
Structural or molecular biological studies elucidating molecular recognition processes
Fragment-based drug discovery
Pharmaceutical/red biotechnology
Isolation, structural characterization, (bio)synthesis, bioengineering and pharmacological evaluation of natural products**
Distribution, pharmacokinetics and metabolic transformations of drugs or biologically active compounds in drug development
Drug delivery and formulation (design and characterization of dosage forms, release mechanisms and in vivo testing)
Preclinical development studies
Translational animal models
Mechanisms of action and signalling pathways
Toxicology
Gene therapy, cell therapy and immunotherapy
Personalized medicine and pharmacogenomics
Clinical drug evaluation
Patient safety and sustained use of medicines.