Efficacy and safety of hydroxyzine for sleep in adults: Systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this systematic review is to assess the efficacy and safety of hydroxyzine for insomnia in adults. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL databases was conducted to identify relevant published studies through October 2022 using the search terms: hydroxyzine and sleep, insomnia, sleep disorder or sleep initiation and maintenance disorders. Studies identified for review included prospective, interventional designs or cohort trials that reported impact of hydroxyzine on sleep in adults. Animal studies, case reports, non-English articles, letters to the editor, case studies, and conference abstracts were excluded. Data were extracted using a standardized systematic process. RESULTS: Five articles were identified for inclusion, including 1 open-label and 4 randomized controlled trials, evaluating a total of 207 patients receiving hydroxyzine 25 mg, 50 mg, or 100 mg at bedtime. Mixed efficacy was demonstrated in the sleep measures of sleep onset, sleep maintenance, and sleep quality. The most common adverse drug effect was dry mouth, although 4 of the 5 studies did not report safety outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The studies in this review suggest hydroxyzine could be considered as a short-term treatment option for adults with insomnia for whom previous therapy was ineffective, not tolerated, or contraindicated. Additional long-term studies with an active comparator are needed to further establish its role in insomnia treatment.

Comparisons of Varying Dosages of Chloral Hydrate-Hydroxyzine with and without Meperidine for Managing Challenging Pediatric Dental Behavior: A Retrospective study of 35 years of Sedation Experiences.

PURPOSE: This retrospective study compares the efficacy and safety of variable dosing of Chloral Hydrate - Hydroxyzine with and without Meperidine (Mep)for managing varying levels of anxiety and uncooperative behavior of young pediatric dental patients over a 35-year period. STUDY DESIGN: Reviews of the sedation logs of 2,610 children, 3-7 years were compared in search of what dosing proves safe and effective for differing levels of challenging behavior. Variable dosing of CH with and without Mep were judged using a pragmatic approach which defined sedation success as optimal, adequate, inadequate, or over-dosage using oneway analysis of variance. Descriptive analyses of behavior and physiologic assessment was included with regard to the extent to which physical restraint occurred to control interfering behavior. Arousal levels requiring stimulation, oxygen desaturation, and adverse reactions were included as indications of safety. RESULTS: Where Mep was used, success rates were consistently higher; need for higher-end dosing of CH was not found beneficial when Mep was included. Significantly less need for physical restraint accompanied the addition of Mep. CONCLUSIONS: There appears to be strong basis for the safety and efficacy of the use of CH-H-Mep in combination at lower dosing than historically used. Addition of Mep was observed to enhance sedations, permit lower CH dosing, lessen or eliminate the need for physical restraint and adverse reactions.

Oral Sedation Postdischarge Adverse Events in Pediatric Dental Patients.

The study investigated patient discharge parameters and postdischarge adverse events after discharge among children who received oral conscious sedation for dental treatment. This prospective study involved 51 patients needing dental treatment under oral conscious sedation. Each patient received one of various regimens involving combinations of a narcotic (ie, morphine or meperidine), a sedative-hypnotic (ie, chloral hydrate), a benzodiazepine (ie, midazolam or diazepam), and/or an antihistamine (ie, hydroxyzine HCl). Nitrous oxide and local anesthesia were used in conjunction with all regimens. After written informed consent was obtained, each guardian was contacted by phone with specific questions in regard to adverse events following the dental appointment. Out of 51 sedation visits, 46 were utilized for analysis including 23 boys and 23 girls ranging from 2 years 2 months to 10 years old (mean 5.8 years). 60.1% of patients slept in the car on the way home, while 21.4% of that group was difficult to awaken upon reaching home. At home, 76.1% of patients slept; furthermore, 85.7% of patients who napped following the dental visit slept longer than usual. After the appointment, 19.6% exhibited nausea, 10.1% vomited, and 7.0% experienced a fever. A return to normal behavior was reported as follows: 17.4% in <2 hours, 39.1% in 2-6 hours, 28.3% in 6-10 hours, and 15.2% in >10 hours. Postdischarge excessive somnolence, nausea, and emesis were frequent complications. The time to normality ranged until the following morning demonstrating the importance of careful postdischarge adult supervision.

Night-time sedating H1 -antihistamine increases daytime somnolence but not treatment efficacy in chronic spontaneous urticaria: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Many physicians believe that the most effective way to treat chronic urticaria is to take a nonsedating second-generation H1 -antihistamine in the morning and a sedating first-generation H1 -antihistamine, usually hydroxyzine, at night to enhance sleep. But is this belief well founded? OBJECTIVES: To test this belief by comparing the effectiveness and prevalence of unwanted sedative effects when treating patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) with levocetirizine 15 mg daily plus hydroxyzine 50 mg at night (levocetirizine plus hydroxyzine) vs. levocetirizine 20 mg daily (levocetirizine monotherapy). METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, cross-over study, 24 patients with difficult-to-treat CSU took levocetirizine plus hydroxyzine or levocetirizine monotherapy for periods of 5 days each. At the end of each treatment period, assessments were made of quality of life (Chronic Urticaria Quality of Life Questionnaire, CU-Q2 oL), severity of urticaria symptoms (Urticaria Activity Score, UAS), sleep disturbance during the night and daytime somnolence. RESULTS: Both treatments significantly decreased UAS, night-time sleep disturbances and CU-Q2 oL scores (P < 0·001) without significant differences between the two. Compared with baseline, daytime somnolence was significantly reduced by levocetirizine monotherapy (P = 0·006) but not by levocetirizine plus hydroxyzine (P = 0·218). Direct comparison of the two treatment modalities in terms of daytime somnolence favoured levocetirizine monotherapy (P = 0·026). CONCLUSIONS: The widespread belief that sleep is aided by the addition of a sedating first-generation H1 -antihistamine, usually hydroxyzine, at night is not supported. These results are in line with the urticaria guidelines, which state that first-line treatment for urticaria should be new-generation, nonsedating H1 -antihistamines only.

Bilastine vs. hydroxyzine: occupation of brain histamine H1 -receptors evaluated by positron emission tomography in healthy volunteers.

AIM: A close correlation exists between positron emission tomography (PET)-determined histamine H1 -receptor occupancy (H1 RO) and the incidence of sedation. Antihistamines with H1 RO <20% are classified as non-sedating. The objective was to compare the H1 RO of bilastine, a second generation antihistamine, with that of hydroxyzine. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, crossover study used PET imaging with [(11) C]-doxepin to evaluate H1 RO in 12 healthy males (mean age 26.2 years), after single oral administration of bilastine (20 mg), hydroxyzine (25 mg) or placebo. Binding potentials and H1 ROs were calculated in five cerebral cortex regions of interest: frontal, occipital, parietal, temporal, insula. Plasma bilastine concentrations, subjective sedation (visual analogue scale), objective psychomotor performance (digital symbol substitution test), physiological variables and safety (adverse events, AEs), were also evaluated. RESULTS: The mean binding potential of all five regions of interest (total binding potential) was significantly greater with bilastine than hydroxyzine (mean value 0.26 vs. 0.13, P < 0.01; mean difference and 95% CI -0.130 [-0.155, 0.105]). There was no significant difference between bilastine and placebo. Overall H1 RO by bilastine was significantly lower than that by hydroxyzine (mean value -3.92% vs. 53.95%, P < 0.01; mean difference and 95% CI 57.870% [42.664%, 73.075%]). There was no significant linear relationship between individual bilastine plasma concentrations and total binding potential values. No significant between-treatment differences were observed for sedation and psychomotor performance. Twenty-six non-serious AEs were reported. Sleepiness or sedation was not reported with bilastine but appeared in some subjects with hydroxyzine. CONCLUSIONS: A single oral dose of bilastine 20 mg had minimal H1 RO, was not associated with subjective sedation or objective impairment of psychomotor performance and was devoid of treatment-related sedative AEs, thus satisfying relevant subjective, objective and PET criteria as a non-sedating antihistamine.

Comparing the effect of prazosin and hydroxyzine on sleep quality in patients suffering from posttraumatic stress disorder.

OBJECTIVES: In light of the high prevalence of sleep disorders in patients suffering from posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), this study sought to compare the effect of prazosin and hydroxyzine on sleep quality in this patient group. METHODS: A total of 100 patients suffering from PTSD were assessed (mean age = 35.51 years, SD = 6.41; 28% females). Next, they were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups: prazosin (33 patients), hydroxyzine (34 patients) or placebo (33 patients). The trial lasted for 8 weeks. The patients' sleep quality was assessed using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index. Items taken from the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview were used to operationalize PTSD. RESULTS: Compared to controls, patients treated with prazosin and hydroxyzine reported improved sleep and less nightmares. Improvement was greatest in patients treated with prazosin compared to hydroxyzine and placebo. Improvement in sleep was associated with an amelioration of their PTSD symptoms. CONCLUSION: Both prazosin and hydroxyzine can be used to treat psychopharmacological sleep disorders and nightmares in patients suffering from PTSD, also leading to reductions in PTSD symptoms.

The conventional antihistamine drug cyproheptadine lacks QT-interval-prolonging action in halothane-anesthetized guinea pigs: comparison with hydroxyzine.

Antihistamines are known to belong to the chemical class that may induce long QT syndrome. Among them, cyproheptadine has been shown to exert multifaceted actions on the ventricular repolarization phase; namely, shortening of the action potential duration at supra-therapeutic concentrations of 2 - 8 µM and prolongation of the QT interval at ≥ 10 µM. Since information is limited regarding the in vivo electrophysiological effects of cyproheptadine, we assessed it using the halothane-anesthetized guinea-pig model, which was compared with effects of another antihistamine drug, hydroxyzine. Sub-therapeutic to therapeutic doses of hydroxyzine at 1 and 10 mg/kg, i.v. prolonged the QT interval and duration of monophasic action potential, whereas therapeutic to supra-therapeutic doses of cyproheptadine at 0.1 and 1 mg/kg, i.v. hardly affected the indices of ventricular repolarization. These results suggest that cyproheptadine may be categorized into antihistamines with little effect on the ventricular repolarization.

Psychomotor and subjective effects of bilastine, hydroxyzine, and cetirizine, in combination with alcohol: a randomized, double-blind, crossover, and positive-controlled and placebo-controlled Phase I clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the effects of concomitant administration of alcohol and bilastine versus alcohol alone on the central nervous system. METHODS: Twenty-four healthy young volunteers of both sexes participated in a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, crossover, and positive-controlled and placebo-controlled clinical trials. At 1-week intervals, subjects received six different treatments: (i) placebo; (ii) alcohol 0.8 g/kg alone (ALC); (iii) ALC in combination with: bilastine 20 mg (B20 + A); (iv) bilastine 80 mg (B80 + A); (v) cetirizine 10 mg (CET + A); and (vi) hydroxyzine 25 mg (HYD + A). Psychomotor performance tests (fine motor, finger tapping, nystagmus, critical flicker-fusion frequency, temporal estimation, 'd2' cancellation, and simple reaction time) and subjective self-reports (drunkenness, drowsiness, mental slowness, clumsiness, anger, attentiveness, competence, happiness, hostility, interest, and extroversion) were carried out at baseline and multiple points thereafter. RESULTS: All active treatments induced a significant psychomotor impairment. The greatest and most lasting impairment was observed with HYD + A followed by B80 + A and CET + A. In contrast, objective measures showed less impairment with B20 + A and ALC, both with a similar magnitude. Self-reports showed a subjective perception of performance impairment in all active treatments. CONCLUSION: Concomitant administration of bilastine (at therapeutic dose) and alcohol does not produce greater central nervous system depressant effects than ACL alone.

Cutaneous drug eruption induced by antihistamines.

Topical application of antihistamines commonly leads to sensitization for patients, but systemic administration of antihistamines rarely induces allergic hypersensitivity, which is mainly linked to phenothiazine-derived and piperazine-derived compounds. We report a 70-year-old woman whose medical history included lichen planus, and who was referred by the dermatology department of our hospital for suspected allergy to corticosteroids. The reason for referral was that on the fourth day of treatment with prednisone and hydroxyzine, the patient presented a bilateral highly pruritic palmar erythema that evolved to a generalized morbilliform rash with subsequent complete desquamation. At a later time, she took cetirizine for a cold, and developed palmar erythema and desquamation. Skin tests (prick and intradermal tests) were performed with steroids, and patch tests (read after 48 and 96 h) with corticosteroids and antihistamines. Controlled oral challenge tests were performed with prednisone and with an alternative antihistamine. Skin tests were negative for all corticosteroids. Patch tests were negative for all corticosteroids, but the antihistamine test was positive for hydroxyzine. Oral challenge with prednisone and dexchlorpheniramine was negative. The patient was diagnosed with cutaneous drug eruption from hydroxyzine and cetirizine. We consider it is important to assess every patient whose skin condition worsens after treatment with antihistamines, especially hydroxyzine, because it is known that antihistamines are often not recognised as the culprit in cases of cutaneous eruption.

The fetal safety of cetirizine: an observational cohort study and meta-analysis.

Cetirizine, a second-generation antihistamine, is an active metabolite of hydroxyzine used in the treatment of allergies, but the data on fetal safety are inconclusive. Pregnant women who were counselled by the 'Motherisk Program' regarding cetirizine exposure were enrolled in a cohort study and compared with pregnant women counselled for non-teratogenic exposures. The objective was to measure the rate of adverse pregnancy outcomes. Subsequently, we also conducted a meta-analysis of cohort studies that examined the pregnancy outcomes of women exposed to hydroxyzine or cetirizine during pregnancy. In the cohort study, there were no significant differences in the rates of major malformations between the cetirizine exposed and comparison group. In the meta-analysis, cetirizine was not associated with increased teratogenic risk. In contrast, a meta-analysis of cetirizine and hydroxyzine studies showed a marginal association with major malformations. Cetirizine is not associated with a clinically important increase in risk of adverse fetal outcomes.

Hypersensitivity to antihistamines.

Antihistamines are the cornerstone of allergy therapy and are not expected to cause hypersensitivity reactions. We describe two cases, one had urticaria to multiple anti-H1-preparations and the other had anaphylaxis to hydroxyzine. We also provide a review of the English literature on reported reactions regarding causative preparations and manifestations. The latter showed a wide range; most commonly urticaria/angioedema, contact dermatitis, anaphylaxis, and fixed drug eruption (FDE). Most reported cases were young to middle age adults, with apparent predilection to female subjects. The onset of reactions varied from a few minutes for anaphylaxis and urticaria/angioedema, several hours for maculopapular rashes, or longer for contact dermatitis and FDE. Almost all antihistamines have been reported as causing reactions; cetirizine was the most common oral preparation followed by its parent drug, hydroxyzine. Doxepin cream was the most commonly implicated topical preparation in causing contact dermatitis. A causal relationship is often difficult to recognize because the reaction may be similar to the disease being treated with that antihistamine preparation. Reactions to one preparation are likely to occur, but not always, to other members of the same class. Diagnosis is based on clinical suspicion and may be verified by challenge testing. Except for patch testing in contact dermatitis or fixed eruption, other tests have not shown optimal reliability. In most cases, challenge testing with multiple preparations would identify one or more preparations that can be tolerated. Although hypersensitivity to antihistamines seems to be very rare, awareness of the problem would reduce its misdiagnosis.

A preliminary randomised double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial of hydroxyzine for treating sleep bruxism in children.

This is a randomised placebo-controlled clinical trial investigating the efficacy of hydroxyzine for treating parent-reported sleep bruxism in children. Participants of this trial were 30 patients randomly allocated to one of the two groups in a ratio of 1:2. One group received hydroxyzine and the other group received placebo. The outcome measures were Visual Analogue Scale test and Clinical Global Severity scale. Assessments occurred at baseline and at the end of week 4. The side effects of drugs were assessed using a checklist. The number of children in the hydroxyzine and placebo groups was 21 and 9, respectively. The mean age of children in the hydroxyzine and placebo groups was 8·4(s.d. = 3·3) and 6·5(s.d. = 1·5) years, respectively. Hydroxyzine more than placebo decreased bruxism score (3·8 versus 2·2). No serious adverse effect was reported. Current evidence support that hydroxyzine is effective and well tolerated for treating bruxism in children.

Worsening of contact dermatitis by oral hydroxyzine: a case report.

Hydroxyzine is commonly used to treat pruritic skin lesions. Although rare, hydroxyzine can sometimes be linked to worsening dermatitis in patients who have sensitivities to phenothiazines and/or ethylenediamines. Herein we describe a patient who developed papulovesicular eruptions following the use of topical neomycin. Our patient's contact dermatitis initially improved after the use of oral steroids. However, the patient's skin condition was exacerbated by the continued use of hydroxyzine to treat her pruritus. Patch testing was positive at 48 hours for neomycin sulfate, ethylenediamine dihydrochloride, and p-phenylenediamine. Given the suspected cross-reactivity between hydroxyzine and ethylenediamine, hydroxyzine was discontinued and the patient's cutaneous symptoms improved. In summary, physicians must be aware that oral hydroxyzine can worsen contact dermatitis in ethylenediamine-sensitive patients.

Retrospective Evaluation of Moderate Sedation Visits That Used Oral Meperidine and Hydroxyzine With Oral or Intranasal Midazolam.

Purpose: To examine the influence of substituting intranasal (IN) midazolam (MID) for oral (PO) MID, within the three-drug combination of meperidine (MEP), hydroxyzine (H) and MID, on sedation treatment outcomes. Methods: A retrospective, cross-sectional analysis examined patient variables and sedation outcomes in 508 pediatric dental patients sedated by single- and multi-drug sedation regimens (MEP-H; MEP-H-(PO)-MID; MEP-H-(IN)-MID; single-agent MID). The outcome assessment examined sedation visit effectiveness, sedation treatment completion, treatment time and medication administration to discharge time. Multivariable logistic regression analyses assessed predictive variables associated with sedation visit effectiveness. Results: Both three-drug combinations (MEP-H-(PO)-MID; MEP-H-(IN)-MID) were used for behavior guidance in children of a similar age (median age=7.1 and 6.5 years, respectively, for the two drug combinations) and weight (median weight = 23.7 and 23.5 kg, respectively, for the two drug combinations). These three-drug combinations had a higher likelihood of sedation effectiveness over the reference sedation regimen of single-agent midazolam (MEP-H-(PO)-MID adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 2.65; 95 percent confidence interval [95% CI]=1.09 to 6.45; P=0.032; and MEP-H-(IN)-MID OR=2.08; 95% CI=1.03 to 4.18; P=0.039). MEP-H-(IN)MID was associated with a shorter medication administration to discharge time for patients by 23 minutes (interquartile range [IQR]=9.5 to 34 minutes) compared to MEP-H-(PO) MID (P<0.05) while providing a comparable number of teeth treated (median=five). All sedation drug regimens, including MEP-H-(IN)MID, had high levels of oxygen saturation during all sedation appointments. Conclusion: Substituting IN for PO MID in MEP-H-MID was associated with a shorter total time to discharge while demonstrating comparable efficacy during sedation.

Hydroxyzine-induced Torsade de Pointes in a Patient with Complete Atrioventricular Block.

An 82-year-old woman was admitted to our hospital because of dyspnea and bradycardia during exertion. Electrocardiography revealed complete atrioventricular block. During pacemaker implantation, a small dose (12.5 mg) of hydroxyzine was injected for sedation, and torsade de pointes (Tdp) occurred. The QT interval was prolonged after administration of hydroxyzine, and Tdp was observed after the R on T phenomenon occurred, indicating that hydroxyzine was capable of prolonging the QT interval and causing Tdp. Therefore, we must be cautious when administering hydroxyzine for sedation during surgery, especially in patients with bradycardia.

Moderate sedation for echocardiography of preschoolers.

Preschoolers frequently require sedation for echocardiograms. This study compared various sedation drugs at the authors' institution, as well as the charges for moderate versus deep sedation. From 2001 to 2007, sedation was administered to 703 patients ages 2 to 4 years. Four drug regimens were used: chloral hydrate (CH), chloral hydrate with diphenhydramine (CH + D), chloral hydrate with hydroxyzine hydrochloride (CH + H), and midazolam. The mean onset of sedation was 37 min, and the mean duration of sedation was 47 min. The CH group fell asleep the most quickly (30 min; p < 0.001), and the CH + D patients experienced the most prolonged sedations (13%; p < 0.001). Studies were completed by 97% of the chloral hydrate group, 98% of the CH + D group, and 94% of the CH + H group compared with 66% of the midazolam group (p < 0.001). Complications (7.4%) were minor and not significant for any particular medication. The charges for moderate sedation averaged $709 compared with $3,628 for deep sedation. The findings demonstrated that chloral hydrate was the fastest-acting agent and had a high success rate with minimally prolonged sedations. The low complication rate for chloral hydrate, and the much lower cost for its use to induce moderate sedation have made chloral hydrate our preference for the echocardiographic sedation of preschoolers.