A Common Reference-Based Indirect Comparison Meta-Analysis of Buccal versus Intranasal Midazolam for Early Status Epilepticus.
CNS Drugs · 2015-08-22 · Meta-analysis
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intranasal and buccal midazolam have recently emerged as possible alternatives to intravenous or rectal diazepam or intravenous lorazepam in the treatment of early status epilepticus (SE). However, to date no randomized controlled trial (RCT) has directly compared intranasal midazolam with buccal midazolam. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to indirectly compare intranasal midazolam with buccal midazolam in the treatment of early SE using common reference-based indirect comparison meta-analyses. METHODS: RCTs comparing intranasal or buccal midazolam versus either intravenous or rectal diazepam for early SE were systematically searched. Random-effects Mantel-Haenszel meta-analyses were performed to obtain odds ratios (ORs) for the efficacy and safety of intranasal or buccal midazolam versus either intravenous or rectal diazepam. Adjusted indirect comparisons were then made between intranasal and buccal midazolam using the obtained results. RESULTS: Fifteen studies, with a total of 1662 seizures in 1331 patients (some studies included patients with more than one episode of SE) were included; 1303 patients were younger than 16 years. Indirect comparisons showed no difference between intranasal and buccal midazolam for seizure cessation (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.32-3.01, comparator: intravenous diazepam; OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.46-1.64, comparator: rectal diazepam). For serious adverse effects, we found a large width and asymmetrical distribution of confidence intervals around the obtained OR of 2.81 (95% CI 0.39-20.12; comparator: rectal diazepam). No data were available for OR using intravenous diazepam as the comparator. CONCLUSIONS: Indirect comparisons suggest that intranasal and buccal midazolam share similar efficacy in the treatment of early SE in children. Intranasal midazolam should be used with caution and under clinical monitoring of vital functions. RCTs directly comparing intranasal midazolam with buccal midazolam are required to confirm these findings.
Abstract © the authors or publisher, via PubMed. Reuse and removal
Tags
Children · Diazepam · Intranasal administration · Midazolam · Sedatives & anxiolytics
Related articles
- Efficacy and safety of intranasal and buccal midazolam versus intravenous, intramuscular, and rectal benzodiazepines for the termination of acute seizures in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis. (Seizure, 2026)
- Drug management for acute tonic-clonic convulsions including convulsive status epilepticus in children. (Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2018)
- Midazolam versus diazepam for the treatment of status epilepticus in children and young adults: a meta-analysis. (Acad Emerg Med, 2010)
- Termination of seizures in the paediatric age group, best benzodiazepine and route of administration: A network meta-analysis. (Eur J Neurosci, 2022)
- Efficacy and safety of anti-epileptic drugs in patients with active convulsive seizures when no IV access is available: Systematic review and meta-analysis. (Epilepsy Res, 2016)
- Intranasal midazolam therapy for pediatric status epilepticus. (Am J Emerg Med, 2006)