ClinicalTrials.gov
public full text
Public Domain
Intranasal Dexmedetomidine VS Oral Chloral Hydrate for Rescue Sedation During Magnetic Resonance Imaging
The purpose of this investigation was to test the hypothesis that intranasal dexmedetomidine is as effective as second dose of oral chloral hydrate for rescue sedation in infant age between 1 and 6 months who were not adequately sedated following initial dose of chloral hydrate.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Comparison of Outcomes During MRI Sedation With Midazolam-dexmedetomidine Versus Ketamine-dexmedetomidine#1376945
- Dexmedetomidine Use for Sedation in Patients Submitted to Tracheal Surgery#1060225
- A Trial Of Oral Chloral Hydrate Versus Intranasal Dexmedetomidine For Sedated Abr Exams#1173974
- Intranasal Dexmedetomidine for Severe Dental Anxiety: a Randomized Trial#1140995
- Dexmedetomidine vs. Midazolam Sedation for Endobronchial Ultrasound#451544
Record · ID 1498757
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive