ライフサイエンスコーパス: midazolam

1 Ds that lack a 3'-imidazo substituent (e.g., midazolam).

2 ously (0.05 mg/kg) and orally (3 mg of [15N3]midazolam).

3 e have many similar or superior qualities to midazolam.

4 ulness and LOC induced by the benzodiazepine midazolam.

5 dence interval, $2314-$17,045) compared with midazolam.

6 inistering a sedative premedication, such as midazolam.

7 ing propofol and 13 of 64 patients receiving midazolam.

8 samples were assayed for midazolam and [15N3]midazolam.

9 lled intravenous analgesia with fentanyl and midazolam.

10 with continuous infusions of sufentanil and midazolam.

11 of some inflammatory markers, compared with midazolam.

12 the NAc is necessary for the preference for midazolam.

13 ncreased in rats receiving both morphine and midazolam.

14 ve placebo control condition, the anesthetic midazolam.

15 nce doses of lorazepam 0.02+/-0.01 mg/kg/hr, midazolam 0.04+/-0.03 mg/kg/hr, and propofol 2.0+/-1.5 m

16 0.006), and high-dose fentanyl plus low-dose midazolam (0.007).

17 ne (0.2-1.4 microg/kg per hour [n = 244]) or midazolam (0.02-0.1 mg/kg per hour [n = 122]) titrated t

18 However, higher-dose midazolam (0.03 mg/kg) was associated with significant r

19 ravenous infusion of ketamine (0.5 mg/kg) or midazolam (0.045 mg/kg).

20 on of ketamine hydrochloride (0.5 mg/kg) and midazolam (0.045 mg/kg).

21 vs 4.4 +/- 1.3 hours, P < 0.0001), and oral midazolam (0.5 +/- 0.2 vs 0.7 +/- 0.4 hours, P < 0.01).

22 esults, CYP3A catalytic activity measured as midazolam 1'- and 4-hydroxylation in liver microsomes fr

23 Microinjections of midazolam (10 and 100 microM solutions) into the cNTS di

24 s associated with higher mean daily doses of midazolam (102 mg/d vs 82 mg/d; P = .04) and fentanyl (m

25 dexmedetomidine (123 hours [IQR, 67-337]) vs midazolam (164 hours [IQR, 92-380]; P = .03) but not wit

26 xmedetomidine (estimated score difference vs midazolam, 19.7 [95% CI, 15.2-24.2]; P < .001; and vs pr

27 slices the BZ agonists chlordiazepoxide and midazolam (2 and 50 microM) did not significantly enhanc

28 0 microg [cryoablation group]; P < .001) and midazolam (2.9 mg [RF group] vs 1.6 mg [cryoablation gro

29 administered with morphine (10mg/kg, s.c.), midazolam (2mg/kg, i.p.), and chelerythrine chloride (a

30 .), followed 30min later by either saline or midazolam (2mg/kg, intraperitoneal, i.p.), for 14 days b

31 infused lorazepam (7% vs. 15%, p = .037) and midazolam (30% vs. 81%, p < .0001).

32 Midazolam (48%) and propofol (19%) were reported as the

33 (CAM-ICU+) received continuous infusions of midazolam (59% vs. 32%, p < .05) or fentanyl (57% vs. 32

34 eiving magnesium required significantly less midazolam (7.1 mg/kg per day [0.1-47.9] vs 1.4 mg/kg per

35 1.5 to 48.9 +/- 8.95 mL/min/kg; p < .05) and midazolam (89.2 +/- 12.5 to 73.6 +/- 12.1 mL/min/kg; p <

36 In the acute setting of RSE, midazolam achieves clinical seizure control at a mean of

37 ction of two anesthetic agents, Morphine and Midazolam, acting simultaneously in the same individual.

38 nsisted of 50 microg of fentanyl and 1 mg of midazolam administered intravenously.

39 placebo, 0.02 mg/kg midazolam, or 0.03 mg/kg midazolam, administered intravenously over 3 minutes.

40 azolam utilization was defined as the sum of midazolam administration before initiating lorazepam and

41 Delirium occurrence was unrelated to midazolam administration, cumulative doses, or serum lev

42 The opposite pattern was observed under midazolam administration, suggesting that when recollect

43 An intravenous infusion of either midazolam alone or co-sedation was administered by a nur

44 iable sedation and is easier to titrate than midazolam alone, without significant difference in the r

45 ne as compared with rats receiving saline or midazolam alone.

46 Preoperative administration of midazolam, alone or combined with other pharmacologic ag

47 Co-administration of morphine and midazolam also exacerbated morphine-induced hyperactive

48 In rat hippocampal slices, we compared midazolam, an anesthetic BDZ, with clonazepam, an antico

49 sual search task, once after an injection of midazolam, an anesthetic that induces temporary amnesia,

50 There were 2,250 propofol-midazolam and 1,054 propofol-lorazepam matched patients.

51 current study was to compare the actions of midazolam and 1-hydroxymidazolam on network activity of

52 bation (14.1% of subjects with intramuscular midazolam and 14.4% with intravenous lorazepam) and recu

53 288 abstracts were identified for midazolam and 16 for clonidine with full texts obtained

54 eutic success was 56% (61 of 109) for buccal midazolam and 27% (30 of 110) for rectal diazepam (perce

55 portal venous blood samples were assayed for midazolam and [15N3]midazolam.

56 When both midazolam and barbiturates have failed, use of isofluran

57 is small and a trial was planned to compare midazolam and clonidine, two sedatives widely used withi

58 ation of a single dose of 5 and 10 mg/kg for midazolam and desipramine, respectively.

59 rage titrated dosages of 3.3 and 12.1 mg for midazolam and diazepam, respectively.

60 azepines (alpha2(H101R) mice) did not prefer midazolam and did not show midazolam-induced reward enha

61 ically ventilated patients, co-sedation with midazolam and fentanyl by constant infusion provides mor

62 We used midazolam and fexofenadine to assess CYP3A (intestinal a

63 tion of mechanical ventilation compared with midazolam and improved patients' ability to communicate

64 The actual cost of midazolam and lorazepam combined was $47,867, resulting

65 Comparison of propofol to midazolam and lorazepam in adult ICU patients.

66 Actual expenditures for both midazolam and lorazepam were subtracted from the project

67 sedatives examined included benzodiazepines (midazolam and lorazepam), propofol, and dexmedetomidine.

68 ctive benzodiazepine receptor full agonists, midazolam and lorazepam, in rhesus monkeys trained to se

69 midazolam exposure; delirium is unrelated to midazolam and may be linked to inflammatory status.

70 Midazolam and morphine are often used in pediatric inten

71 All patients received midazolam and nalbuphine intravenously.

72 nil, midazolam and propofol versus fentanyl, midazolam and propofol in 272 outpatients undergoing dia

73 ilation, dexmedetomidine was not inferior to midazolam and propofol in maintaining light to moderate

74 double-blinded clinical trial of alfentanil, midazolam and propofol versus fentanyl, midazolam and pr

75 red most often with lorazepam, compared with midazolam and propofol, at 14%, 6%, and 7% of the assess

76 s' ability to communicate pain compared with midazolam and propofol.

77 ents between buccal administration of liquid midazolam and rectal administration of liquid diazepam i

78 -up in performance across blocks in both the midazolam and saline conditions.

79 Midazolam and the IV route were the commonest sedative a

80 Thirty-three studies provided data for midazolam and two for clonidine.

81 s were sedated using continuous infusions of midazolam and/or fentanyl; no changes in ventilator sett

82 hat combined injectable (fentanyl-fluanisone/midazolam) and volatile (isoflurane) anesthetics in mice

83 SD) were $48+/-$76 (lorazepam), $182+/-$98 (midazolam), and $273+/-$200 (propofol) (p = .005).

84 y was 7.8+/-4.3 for lorazepam, 4.4+/-2.9 for midazolam, and 5.6+/-6.0 for propofol (p = .91).

85 eiving morphine alone or in combination with midazolam, and chelerythrine prevented the development o

86 ially after the application of high doses of midazolam, and in case of impaired drug metabolism.

87 of delirium, use of fentanyl and open-label midazolam, and nursing assessments.

88 e were abolished by gabazine, insensitive to midazolam, and partially blocked by 20 microM Zn2+, cons

89 duced the need for concomitant sedation with midazolam, and reduced the levels of circulating unbound

90 .3% vs. 78.8%; P < 0.001) when compared with midazolam- and lorazepam-treated patients, respectively.

91 Midazolam appears to be able to bind to P450 3A4 in two

92 We hypothesized that the effects of midazolam are associated with altered prostanoid synthes

93 Buccal and intranasal forms of midazolam are emerging as suitable alternatives to recta

94 nclude that higher doses of propofol but not midazolam are required to sedate patients managed with P

95 Rectal diazepam and buccal midazolam are used for emergency treatment of acute febr

96 ervention studies that used either saline or midazolam as a control treatment.

97 as a marked loss in first-pass metabolism of midazolam as a result of diminished intestinal CYP3A act

98 entanyl as their first-line opioid (66%) and midazolam as their first-line benzodiazepine (86%) and p

99 Four patients also received subcutaneous midazolam at a rate of 0.15 to 0.3 mg/kg/hr (mean, 0.24

100 The network depressant action of midazolam at low concentrations was absent in slices fro

101 YPFP-NH(2) inhibited the oxidations of midazolam at two different positions (1'- and 4-) with 2

102 o standard sedation received propofol and/or midazolam-based sedation as clinically appropriate.

103 vehicle levels in monkeys maintained under a midazolam baseline, but not under a cocaine baseline ove

104 smembrane helix 7 (7.39), were important for midazolam binding but another, Tyr-282 in transmembrane

105 te but not for TRH binding, was critical for midazolam binding.

106 onsistent with the competitive antagonism of midazolam binding.

107 molecular model of the complex suggest that midazolam binds to TRH-R1 within a transmembrane helical

108 Midazolam, but not clonazepam, also augmented a form of

109 Midazolam, but not clonazepam, increased neurosteroid le

110 iated CYP3A4 expression and CYP3A4-catalyzed midazolam clearance in human primary hepatocytes.

111 flammation and organ failure strongly reduce midazolam clearance, a surrogate marker of CYP3A-mediate

112 rences among sedative premedications such as midazolam, clonidine, and dexmedetomidine.

113 onproprietary drugs (haloperidol, bufuralol, midazolam, clozapine, terfenadine, erlotinib, olanzapine

114 ied TRH-R1 to generate a model of the TRH-R1/midazolam complex.

115 When midazolam concentration was increased, it depressed neur

116 Systemic and cerebral venous midazolam concentrations were measured at 0.5, 1, 2, 3,

117 ing ketamine with an active placebo control, midazolam, conducted at a single site (Icahn School of M

118 Total projected midazolam cost for the 30 patients was $90,771.

119 lorazepam were subtracted from the projected midazolam cost to calculate the estimated cost savings.

120 as found to be a regioselective inhibitor of midazolam CYP3A metabolism.

121 Midazolam depressed neuronal activity at a low concentra

122 es that have been studied, such as ketamine, midazolam, diazepam, clonazepam, propofol, pentobarbital

123 heduled periodontal surgeries under IVS with midazolam, diazepam, or placebo control.

124 ippocampal growth (beta = -0.31, p = 0.003), midazolam dose (beta = -0.27, p = 0.03), and surgery (be

125 , 1.67; 95% CI, 1.005-2.767; p = 0.047), and midazolam dose (hazard ratio, 0.998; 95% CI, 0.997-1.0;

126 tients (42.5+/-16.2 vs. 27.0+/-15.3; p=.02); Midazolam dose did not differ between PH and non-PH pati

127 Total midazolam dose predicted decreased hippocampal volumes (

128 By univariate linear regression analysis, midazolam dose was dependent on age, morphine dose, and

129 Total sedative (propofol and midazolam) dose was recorded for the first three days of

130 first coma was associated with fentanyl and midazolam doses (p=0.03 and p=0.01, respectively).

131 The maximum serum concentration after oral midazolam dosing was significantly different between the

132 The results suggest that diazepam and midazolam each may have advantages for IVS.

133 y ICU benzodiazepine dose of > or = 75 mg of midazolam equivalent (RR 2.1, 95% CI 1.1-3.5).

134 ve care unit benzodiazepine dose > 100 mg of midazolam-equivalent agent (relative risk 2.4, 95% confi

135 hydroxymidazolam could add to the effects of midazolam, especially after the application of high dose

136 These results indicate that midazolam exacerbated morphine tolerance through a spina

137 Midazolam exposure was associated with macro- and micros

138 Coma is associated with fentanyl and midazolam exposure; delirium is unrelated to midazolam a

139 sitively correlated with cerebral fractional midazolam extraction.

140 Bolus dosing of fentanyl and midazolam fails to reduce the intracranial hypertension

141 medications, including propofol, etomidate, midazolam, fentanyl, ketamine, and nitrous oxide.

142 (14)C]TETS and [(3)H]EBOB binding, including midazolam, flurazepam, avermectin Ba1, baclofen, isoguva

143 Oral midazolam for children and patient-controlled propofol s

144 oints included the total dose of concomitant midazolam for sedation and quantitative plasma venom lev

145 and after administration of fentanyl and/or midazolam for the treatment of episodic intracranial hyp

146 ation in children is best achieved with oral midazolam formulated in flavoured syrups, and the inhala

147 ter for the ketamine group compared with the midazolam group (95% CI=2.33, 7.59; Cohen's d=0.75).

148 y 1 for the ketamine group compared with the midazolam group (estimate=7.65, 95% CI=1.36, 13.94), and

149 higher in the sevoflurane group than in the midazolam group (mean +/- SD, 205 +/- 56 vs. 166 +/- 59,

150 s 55% for the ketamine group and 30% for the midazolam group (odds ratio=2.85, 95% CI=1.14, 7.15; num

151 ater improvement in the MADRS score than the midazolam group 24 hours after treatment.

152 atment were 1.2 minutes in the intramuscular-midazolam group and 4.8 minutes in the intravenous-loraz

153 of 448 subjects (73.4%) in the intramuscular-midazolam group and in 282 of 445 (63.4%) in the intrave

154 was lower in the ketamine group than in the midazolam group by 7.95 points (95% confidence interval

155 in the sevoflurane group, compared with the midazolam group, and no serious adverse event was observ

156 igned to the sevoflurane group and 25 to the midazolam group.

157 77.3% for dexmedetomidine group vs 75.1% for midazolam group; difference, 2.2% [95% confidence interv

158 acokinetic studies in vivo demonstrated that midazolam half-life, C(max), and area under the concentr

159 Midazolam has a clinically active metabolite, 1-hydroxym

160 (stage of early status epilepticus), buccal midazolam has become an important out-of-hospital treatm

161 When midazolam has failed to control RSE, the evidence points

162 entanyl, chloral hydrate, pentobarbital, and midazolam hydrochloride--by using the Fisher exact test.

163 strongly correlated with CYP3A4 content and midazolam hydroxylation activity.

164 ounted for 31% of the variability in hepatic midazolam hydroxylation activity.

165 er research indicates that the amnestic drug midazolam impairs recollection more than familiarity.

166 Participants were randomized to ketamine or midazolam in a 2:1 fashion under double-blind conditions

167 a single intravenous infusion of ketamine or midazolam in a 2:1 ratio (N=73).

168 We analyzed dosing of propofol and midazolam in patients undergoing PH through a retrospect

169 Use of midazolam in preterm neonates, particularly those not un

170 uces the systemic clearances of fentanyl and midazolam in rats after cardiac arrest through alteratio

171 valuated the comparative value of continuous midazolam in secondary analyses.

172 as no difference between dexmedetomidine and midazolam in time at targeted sedation level in mechanic

173 Isoflurane sedation was changed to midazolam in two nonsurviving patients because of hemody

174 propofol facilitates receptor gating, while midazolam increases receptor occupancy by the agonist.

175 e, we have determined that propofol, but not midazolam, increases the efficacy of piperidine-4-sulpho

176 Furthermore, neither dose of midazolam induced significant changes in HVPG as compare

177 ience, yet only one of these was affected by midazolam-induced amnesia.

178 e cortical areas lasting for >300 ms, during midazolam-induced LOC, TMS-evoked activity was local and

179 e) did not prefer midazolam and did not show midazolam-induced reward enhancement in ICSS, in contras

180 Midazolam infusion did not affect systemic hemodynamics

181 otal intensive care unit costs compared with midazolam infusion for intensive care unit sedation, pri

182 Midazolam infusion preceded by a high bolus dose in newb

183 In contrast, midazolam infusion significantly reduced sagittal sinus

184 ding to our pediatric ICU sedation protocol, midazolam infusion was continued until the hourly midazo

185 Midazolam infusion, as per our described algorithm, is e

186 ere randomly assigned to receive ketamine or midazolam infusion.

187 reased brain perfusion and metabolism during midazolam infusion.

188 andin F1 alpha concentrations increased with midazolam infusion.

189 ry and sagittal sinus vein before and during midazolam infusion.

190 fear learning when administrated 1 d before midazolam injection.

191 the mechanism of inverse agonism effected by midazolam involves its direct interaction with Trp-279,

192 Buccal midazolam is at least as effective as rectal diazepam in

193 ubjects in status epilepticus, intramuscular midazolam is at least as safe and effective as intraveno

194 tion of 1-hydroxymidazolam to the effects of midazolam is controversial.

195 As midazolam is more potent than its metabolite 1-hydroxymi

196 Midazolam is primarily metabolized by the CYP3A4/CYP3A5

197 Midazolam is the most titratable drug in our population,

198 The benzodiazepine midazolam is widely used in critical care medicine.

199 r clinical effects are thus likely caused by midazolam itself.

200 ents (propofol group), and other agents like midazolam, lorazepam, and pentobarbital were used in the

201 sedation; anxiolysis; critical care; midazolam; lorazepam; propofol; benzodiazepines; intensi

202 n coadministration, geometric mean values of midazolam maximal observed serum concentration and area

203 Midazolam may be used for shorter procedures for faster

204 Alternatives, such as midazolam, may offer advantages in particular circumstan

205 Intravenous and oral midazolam (MDZ) clearances were used to measure the in v

206 Midazolam (MDZ) is metabolized by CYP3A4 to two hydroxyl

207 Midazolam (MDZ) oxidation by recombinant CYP3A4 purified

208 ugs undergoing metabolism, only the sedative midazolam (MDZ) serves as a marker substrate for the in

209 of analgesics/sedatives (fentanyl, morphine, midazolam), mechanical ventilation, hypotension, and sur

210 ination profiles of several drugs, including midazolam, metoprolol, and tolbutamide.

211 ion was analyzed in per-protocol population (midazolam, n = 233, vs dexmedetomidine, n = 227; propofo

212 to moderate sedation for more than 24 hours (midazolam, n = 251, vs dexmedetomidine, n = 249; propofo

213 drugs commonly used in pediatric anesthesia (midazolam, nitrous oxide, and isoflurane) in doses suffi

214 24 hours was greater with ketamine than with midazolam (odds ratio, 2.18; 95% CI, 1.21 to 4.14), with

215 rly goal-directed sedation patients received midazolam on 6 of 173 (3.5%) versus 4 of 114 (3.5%) stan

216 esults, finasteride abolished the effects of midazolam on contextual fear learning when administrated

217 meaningful differences between propofol and midazolam on costs or measures of effectiveness.

218 The effects of both doses of midazolam on HVPG did not differ significantly from thos

219 t this hypothesis, we examined the effect of midazolam on prostanoid production in the carotid artery

220 on (ICSS) paradigm to evaluate the impact of midazolam on reward enhancement, we demonstrated that mi

221 of this study was to evaluate the effects of midazolam on the HVPG.

222 noted in the co-sedation group compared with midazolam-only (0.4 +/- 0.1 and 1.0 +/- 0.2, respectivel

223 odes of ileus with co-sedation compared with midazolam-only (2 vs. 0).

224 Compared with the midazolam-only group, the co-sedation group had fewer ho

225 e did not observe significant differences in midazolam or 1'-hydroxymidazolam clearance or area under

226 in rhesus monkeys trained to self-administer midazolam or cocaine, under a progressive-ratio schedule

227 effects of intravenous sedation (IVS) using midazolam or diazepam during periodontal procedures on p

228 ere ARDS onset to receive either intravenous midazolam or inhaled sevoflurane for 48 hours.

229 When preceded by nitrous oxide, midazolam or normocapnia, the risk of inducing epileptif

230 Long-term sedation with midazolam or propofol in intensive care units (ICUs) has

231 -1.5 kg) randomly assigned to receive either midazolam or vehicle (5% dextrose) infusion for 6 hrs.

232 Participants who injected midazolam or were in prison during open-label follow-up

233 adherent than were those who did not inject midazolam (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.2-4.3; p=0.02) or were not i

234 omized to receive either placebo, 0.02 mg/kg midazolam, or 0.03 mg/kg midazolam, administered intrave

235 ith continuously infused sedation (propofol, midazolam, or lorazepam).

236 omized by block design to receive lorazepam, midazolam, or propofol.

237 Sedation with dexmedetomidine, midazolam, or propofol; daily sedation stops; and sponta

238 n propofol-treated patients as compared with midazolam- or lorazepam-treated patients (risk ratio, 0.

239 the hepatic CYP3A activity, but the reduced midazolam oral bioavailability suggests that moderate al

240 either a) a loading dose of 300 microg/kg of midazolam over 15 mins, followed by a continuous intrave

241 ased after administration of fentanyl and/or midazolam (overall aggregate mean Deltaarea under the cu

242 n of high-dose fentanyl (p = 0.02), low-dose midazolam (p = 0.006), and high-dose fentanyl plus low-d

243 essed patients within 24 hours compared with midazolam, partially independently of antidepressant eff

244 Under the influence of midazolam, participants did not show facilitation in sea

245 Dexmedetomidine vs midazolam patients had more hypotension (51/247 [20.6%]

246 impact of inflammation and organ failure on midazolam pharmacokinetics was developed using NONMEM 7.

247 sed the effect of PF-00562271 on single-dose midazolam PK in a subgroup of patients.

248 n (median age, 5.1 mo [range, 0.02-202 mo]), midazolam plasma (n = 532), cytokine (e.g., IL-6, tumor

249 /-4.7 vs. 2.0+/-1.8 ng/mL, p=0.0001) as were midazolam plasma levels (1050+/-2232 vs. 168+/-249 ng/mL

250 -bottle choice drinking paradigm to evaluate midazolam preference and an intracranial self-stimulatio

251 ding ketamine, isoflurane, nitrous oxide and midazolam, produced increased neurodegeneration in 7-day

252 had therapy with: thiopental, pentobarbital, midazolam, propofol, ketamine, inhalational anaesthetics

253 Midazolam provides rapid and reliable amnesia, even when

254 Dexmedetomidine/midazolam ratio in time at target sedation was 1.07 (95%

255 efore initiating lorazepam and the projected midazolam requirement after initiating lorazepam.

256 olam infusion was continued until the hourly midazolam requirement was stable for at least 24 hrs.

257 group (p = .021), with similar morphine and midazolam requirements (p = .317).

258 ation of the benzodiazepine receptor agonist midazolam, resulted in a dose-dependent inhibition of su

259 The patient was treated with ketamine, midazolam, ribavirin, and amantadine.

260 Midazolam selectively influenced the putative ERP-correl

261 Moreover, midazolam shortened cortical up states at low, but not a

262 nd that the GABAA agonists phenobarbital and midazolam significantly increased status epilepticus-ass

263 Triazolam, oral midazolam, St. John's Wort, carbamazepine and pimozide,

264 Midazolam stopped 30 (75%) of 40 seizures and diazepam 2

265 s in the HFOV group received higher doses of midazolam than did patients in the control group (199 mg

266 ding site for a competitive inverse agonist, midazolam, three of the four residues that directly cont

267 Transitioning from intravenous midazolam to enterally administered lorazepam in critica

268 ne-treated patients vs 76.6% (n = 93/122) in midazolam-treated patients (difference, 22.6% [95% CI, 1

269 the in vivo pharmacokinetics of fentanyl and midazolam, two clinically relevant cytochrome P450 3A su

270 Midazolam, used at a dose of 0.02 mg/kg, is effective in

271 Overall, midazolam utilization (in milligrams) was reduced by 46.

272 Total projected midazolam utilization was defined as the sum of midazola

273 ncluded six trials enrolling 1,235 patients: midazolam versus dexmedetomidine (n = 3), lorazepam vers

274 ), lorazepam versus dexmedetomidine (n = 1), midazolam versus propofol (n = 1), and lorazepam versus

275 Midazolam via the IV route with or without oral route is

276 The inhibition at 50 microg/kg midazolam was 65+/-11% compared to the baseline response

277 More midazolam was administered in the placebo recipients tha

278 nuous and appropriate level of sedation once midazolam was discontinued.

279 However, midazolam was found to cause a greater incidence of amne

280 Midazolam was given to 576 (9%) of 6680 neonates and 536

281 orally, the maximum plasma concentration for midazolam was increased by 2.5-fold, and the clearance d

282 Buccal midazolam was more effective than rectal diazepam for ch

283 djusted for with logistic regression, buccal midazolam was more effective than rectal diazepam.

284 ial tested the hypothesis that intramuscular midazolam was noninferior to intravenous lorazepam by a

285 The systemic clearance of midazolam was significantly greater (P <.05) in healthy

286 The bioavailability of midazolam was significantly higher (P <.05) in cirrhotic

287 Midazolam was successfully discontinued in 24 (80%) pati

288 Buccal midazolam was universally acceptable to the nursing and

289 , dextromethorphan, and oral and intravenous midazolam) was administered to 18 RYGB recipients and 18

290 Simultaneous doses of midazolam were given intravenously (0.05 mg/kg) and oral

291 Fentanyl and midazolam were independently administered by intravenous

292 Other drugs, such as midazolam, were also administered.

293 tion in PTSD symptom severity, compared with midazolam, when assessed 24 hours after infusion (mean d

294 e verb-generation task, and the GABA agonist midazolam (which increases neural inhibition) improves s

295 it P450 3A4-mediated oxidative metabolism of midazolam with an IC(50) value of 71 microM.

296 The MIDEX trial compared midazolam with dexmedetomidine in ICUs of 44 centers in

297 we examined whether (1) co-administration of midazolam with morphine would exacerbate morphine tolera

298 olled trial was undertaken to compare buccal midazolam with rectal diazepam for emergency-room treatm

299 trial compared the efficacy of intramuscular midazolam with that of intravenous lorazepam for childre

300 d binding of the substrates testosterone and midazolam, with K(i) values similar to the spectral bind