• Jian-wen Gu, Tao Yang, Yong-qin Kuang, Hai-dong Huang, Bin Kong, Hai-feng Shu, Si-xun Yu, and Jun-hai Zhang.
• Department of Neurosurgery, Chengdu Military General Hospital, Chengdu 610083, China. Electronic address: gujianwen5000@gmail.com.
• J Crit Care. 2014 Apr 1;29(2):287-90.

ObjectiveTo perform a meta-analysis to compare the safety and efficacy of propofol with midazolam for sedation of patients with severe traumatic brain injury.Materials And MethodsStudies were included in the meta-analysis if they met the following criteria: randomized controlled trial of sedative-hypnotic agents including propofol and midazolam; patients had severe traumatic brain injury; the primary outcome was the Glasgow Outcome Scale score; secondary outcomes included mortality, therapeutic failure, intracranial pressure, and cerebral perfusion pressure. The data were analyzed using software for meta-analysis.ResultsSeven relevant studies were identified. Three of these studies were excluded: one was a single-arm study, one compared morphine and propofol, and for one the full text article could not be obtained. The remaining 4 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The results of the meta-analysis showed that propofol and midazolam have similar effects on the Glasgow Outcome Scale score, mortality, intracranial pressure, and cerebral perfusion pressure.ConclusionOur meta-analysis of 4 studies showed that there are no important differences between propofol and midazolam when administered to provide sedation for patients with severe traumatic brain injury. Further randomized, controlled trials comparing propofol with midazolam for sedation of such patients are needed.Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

28 keywords...

hide…