Comparative analysis of intravenous midazolam with nasal spray for conscious sedation in minor oral and maxillofacial surgeries

Aim: The aim of the current study was to evaluate the efficacy of nasal spray midazolam by collating it with conventional intravenous midazolam for conscious sedation in minor oral surgeries. Materials and Methods: Sixty patients were selected randomly and divided into two groups: group A for intranasal midazolam atomized spray (n = 30) and group B for intravenous midazolam (n = 30). Physiological parameters, anxiety score, sedation rating, patient’s cooperation score, and retrograde and anterograde amnesia were recorded for each patient during preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative period. Final evaluation of safety and efficacy in the nasal and intravenous routes of midazolam drug during minor oral surgery was compared. Results: In this study, both intranasal and intravenous groups showed decrease in systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure intraoperatively but within physiological limits and increase in the average pulse rates in both the groups. The average oxygen saturation levels were maintained to normal range in both the groups. The average respiratory rate decreased in both intranasal and intravenous groups during surgical procedure. The preoperative to postoperative anxiety scores were decreased significantly in the both groups and there was no significant difference in pre- to postoperative anxiety scores between the groups. Conclusion: Both intravenous and intranasal administration of midazolam showed better patient cooperation, satisfaction, and clinical effectiveness. Intranasal midazolam spray is effective in the reduction of subjective stress, reliable anxiolysis while preserving protective reflexes

Assessment of outcome of oral supplementation of Vitamin D3 as an adjunct to scaling and root planing in chronic periodontitis patients with type II diabetes mellitus – A randomized controlled clinical trial

Background: Both diabetes and periodontitis affect millions of people worldwide and Vitamin D insufficiency may create a conducive environment for the progression of diabetes and periodontal disease. The aim of the study was to assess the outcome of oral supplementation of Vitamin D3 in patients with Type 2Diabetes Mellitus with generalized chronic periodontitis, as an adjuvant toscaling and root planing. Methodology: A total of 92 patients, including 46 each in non-diabetic and diabetec group. Clinical parameters including Plaque Index (PI), Gingival Bleeding Index (GBI), Probing Pocket Depth (PPD), Clinical Attachment Level (CAL), levels of Vitamin D in serum, and Fasting Blood sugar were assessed at the baseline. SRP was finished for each participant in the trial. Following SRP, the first 25people in each group got 60,000 IU of oral vitamin D3 granules once a week for eight weeks, while the remaining 21 subjects from each group did not. At the conclusion of the 8th week following interventions, all the indicators were reviewed. Results: Following SRP and Vitamin D supplementation there was a measurably critical reduction in every one of the periodontal clinical indicators in both groups. In both groups, there was a statistically significant rise in serum vitamin D levels. Conclusion: In addition to SRP, vitamin D supplementation shows promise as a host immunomodulatory drug in the management of periodontitis, particularly in patients with diabetes mellitus