Sedation In Pediatric Patients Research Articles

Deep Sedation in Pediatric Patients With Single Ventricle Physiology Outside of the Operating Room.

Background: Advancements in palliative surgery of patients with single ventricle physiology have led to an increase in the need for deep sedation protocols for painful procedures. However, positive pressure ventilation during anesthesia can result in unfavorable cardiopulmonary interactions. This patient population may benefit from sedation from these painful procedures. Methods: This study aims to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of deep sedation by pediatric intensivists outside the operating room for children with single ventricle physiology. This is a single-center, retrospective chart review on consecutive pediatric patients with single ventricle physiology who received deep sedation performed by pediatric intensivists between 2013 and 2020. Results: Thirty-three sedations were performed on 27 unique patients. The median age was 3.7 years (25th%-75th%: 2.1-15.6). The majority of the sedations, 88% (29/33), were done on children with Fontan physiology and 12% (4/33) were status-post superior cavopulmonary anastomosis. The primary cardiac defect was hypoplastic left heart in 63% (17/27) of all sedation procedures. There were 24 chest tube placements and 9 cardioversions. Ketamine alone [median dose 1.5 mg/kg (range 0.8-3.7)], ketamine [median dose 1 mg/kg (range 0.1-2.1)] with propofol [median dose 2.3 mg/kg (range 0.7-3.8)], and ketamine [median dose 1.5 mg/kg (range 0.4-3.0)] with morphine [median dose 0.06 mg/kg (range 0.03-0.20)] were the most common sedation regimens used. Adverse events (AEs) occurred in 4 patients (15%), three of which were transient AEs. All sedation encounters were successfully completed. Conclusion: Procedural deep sedation can be safely and effectively administered to single ventricle patients by intensivist-led sedation teams in selective case.

Sedation in pediatric patients undergoing dental treatment: case reports

Anxiety, fear and phobia of dental treatment are present in a large part of the population. As an effective method to control anxiety, sedation is currently present in dental offices, acting in a positive way in dental care procedures. In pediatric dentistry, the fear regarding consultation is mainly caused by the fact that the environment is new and unknown, and sometimes it is necessary to use sedative drugs, so that the care is efficient, fast and safe. This study is a case report involving two pediatric patients with dental treatment phobia who underwent sedation performed in an outpatient clinic under the supervision of an anesthesiologist. We conclude that drug sedation is a technique that should be considered in cases where there was no success in behavioral management to control aversive behavior in pediatric patients with phobia and the incorporation of this technique enables safe and effective dental care.

291 Improving Emergency Department Postintubation Sedation in Pediatric Patients: A Quality Improvement Initiative

291 Improving Emergency Department Postintubation Sedation in Pediatric Patients: A Quality Improvement Initiative

Analgesia and Sedation of Pediatric Patients with Major Trauma in Pre-Hospital and Emergency Department Settings-A Narrative Review.

Children who sustain major injuries are at risk of receiving insufficient pain relief and sedation, which can have physical and psychological repercussions. Heightened emotional distress can increase the likelihood of developing symptoms of post-traumatic stress. Providing sufficient analgesia and sedation for children with major trauma presents specific challenges, given the potential for drug-related adverse events, particularly in non-intubated patients. The current literature suggests that a relatively low percentage of pediatric patients receive adequate analgesia in pre-hospital and emergency department settings following major trauma. There are only sparse data on the safety of the provision of analgesia and sedation in children with major trauma in the pre-hospital and ED settings. The few studies that examined sedation protocols in this context highlight the importance of physician training and competency in managing pediatric airways. There is a pressing need for prospective studies that focus upon pediatric major trauma in the pre-hospital and emergency department setting to evaluate the benefits and risks of administering analgesia and sedation to these patients. The aim of this narrative review was to offer an updated overview of analgesia and sedation management in children with major trauma in pre-hospital and ED settings.

Prospective, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled, phase 3 clinical trial comparing the safety and efficacy of intranasal dexmedetomidine to oral midazolam as premedication for propofol sedation in pediatric patients undergoing magnetic resonance imaging: the MIDEX MRI trial

BackgroundChildren under 6 years who need magnetic resonance imaging usually require sedation to obtain best quality images, but the optimal sedation protocol remains to be determined. In 2018, we showed a 22% interruption in image acquisition during magnetic resonance imaging when performing a propofol-based sedation using a bolus approach. As non-pharmacological premedication is often insufficient to reduce the anxiety of children related to parental separation, pharmacological premedication may be useful to facilitate the induction of anesthesia. In our institution, effective premedication is obtained oral intake of midazolam, though its administration relies on patients’ compliance and could also lead to paradoxical reaction. Dexmedetomidine has a safe profile in the pediatric population and can therefore represent an interesting alternative. The primary objective of this trial is to demonstrate the superiority of intranasal dexmedetomidine compared to oral midazolam as premedication in reducing the occurrence of any event requiring temporary or definitive interruption of the examination to allow anesthesiologist intervention in children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging under propofol sedation.MethodsIn this single-center, prospective, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active comparator-controlled, superiority trial, we planned to include 250 patients, aged 6 months to 6 years, undergoing a scheduled magnetic resonance imaging requiring the presence of an anesthesiologist. After informed consent, the patients will be randomized to receive either oral midazolam or intranasal dexmedetomidine as premedication. The data will be analyzed in intention to treat, using Kolmogorov–Smirnov Z, chi-square, Wilcoxon, and Mann–Whitney U tests. A P-value < 0.05 will be considered statistically significant.DiscussionThe MIDEX MRI study will assess the efficacy of intranasal dexmedetomidine compared to oral midazolam to improve the quality of a propofol-based sedation prior to magnetic resonance imaging, without negative repercussion on the postoperative period.Trial registrationClinicalTrial.gov NCT05192629. Registered on 14 January 2022. Protocol version 2.1

Safety and efficacy of pediatric sedation protocol for diagnostic examination in a pediatric emergency room: A retrospective study.

Pediatric patients undergoing diagnostic tests in the pediatric emergency room are frequently sedated. Although efforts are made to prevent adverse events, no sedation protocol has specified the optimal regimen, dosage, and interval of medication to prevent adverse events. This study analyzed the safety and efficacy of sequential pediatric sedation protocols for pediatric patients undergoing diagnostic tests in the pediatric emergency room of a single tertiary medical center. The medical records of patients aged < 18 years who visited the pediatric emergency room of Seoul Asan Medical Center between January and December 2019 for diagnostic testing were retrospectively reviewed. Sedation protocols consisted of 50 mg/kg and 25 mg/kg chloral hydrate, 0.1 mg/kg and 0.1 mg/kg midazolam, and 1 mg/kg and 0.5 to 1 mg/kg ketamine, administered sequentially at intervals of 30, 20, 10, 10, and 10 minutes, respectively. Patients were assessed prior to sedation, and adverse events were investigated. Of the 289 included patients, 20 (6.9%) experienced adverse events, none serious, and nine (3.1%) failed to reach the depth of sedation required to complete the test. The regimen (P = .622) and dosage (P = .777) of the sedatives were unrelated to the occurrence of adverse events when sedation was performed according to protocol. The sedation protocol used in these patients, consisting of sequential administration of minimum dosages, achieved a sufficient depth of sedation with relatively few adverse events, indicating that this protocol can be used safely and effectively for painless sedation in pediatric patients undergoing diagnostic testing.

The Effect of Anxiety and Stress on Acceptance of Dental Procedure before and after Inhalation Sedation in Pediatric Patients: An In Vivo Study.

The study aimed to assess the anxiety and stress levels on acceptance of dental treatment in child patients approaching dental extraction procedures before and after nitrous oxide (N2O) inhalation sedation (IHS) by measuring serum amyloid A (SAA) and salivary cortisol (SC). A total of 32 children, ages ranging from 6 to 10 years, were randomly grouped as TI (before N2O IHS) and TII (after N2O IHS). Saliva samples were taken for biochemical evaluation of SAA before and after the procedure. Subjectively anxiety and stress levels were evaluated using modified child dental anxiety scale (MCDAS). Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare the means of dental anxiety, SAA, and SC before and after N2O IHS. The Karl Pearson correlation coefficient was employed to determine the correlation between dental anxiety and SAA and SC before and after N2O IHS. There were significant differences in the dental anxiety level in child patients after administration of N2O IHS, and it also showed an increased rate of acceptance of dental treatment. This study showed that N2O is a safe and effective method in reducing dental anxiety and increasing acceptance of dental treatment in child patients with improved behavior and with no adverse effects. Anxiety and stress will always hinder the acceptance of dental treatment in child patients, especially during extraction procedures. N2O IHS is a safe and effective technique to overcome anxiety and stress in child patients and as well as allows them to undergo dental treatment with improved behavior. Kunta S, Arora RV, Jain R, et al. The Effect of Anxiety and Stress on Acceptance of Dental Procedure before and after Inhalation Sedation in Pediatric Patients: An In Vivo Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2023;16(2):302-307.

Evaluation of Readability and Content of Patient Information Texts on Turkish Websites about Pediatric Dentistry Under Sedation

Aim: Disability status, fear, and anxiety can pose an obstacle to the planned dental treatment in children. In such cases, the delivery of dental treatment with sedation is a very common treatment method and more comfortable for both pediatric patients and physicians. This study aims to evaluate the readability and content of patient information texts on websites related to the delivery of dental treatments with sedation in pediatric patients.&#x0D; Material and Methods: The first 60 Turkish websites were scanned in Google (Google LLC, MountainView, California, USA) search using the keywords “pediatric dental treatment with sedation”. The patient information texts in 31 websites meeting the inclusion criteria were evaluated according to the Ateşman Readability Index (ARI) and their contents were also examined in terms of whether or not providing sufficient information about the procedure. &#x0D; &#x0D; Results: The texts examined in the study were moderately difficult (52.9±9.4) according to the ARI and at Grade 11-12 level, most of the websites examined were owned by private clinics (64.5%) and the texts were prepared by pedodontists. The content of information on the examined websites could be deemed sufficient in terms of definition of sedation (100%), the indications (100%) and the benefits (83.8%); however, the complications (29.1%), possible procedure-related complications (16.2%), its difference from general anesthesia (54.8%) and the cost (29.1%) were not addressed sufficiently.&#x0D; Conclusion: The results of the study suggested that the relevant patient information texts on Turkish websites need to be organized in a more understandable manner. For this purpose, readability tests may be used before publishing the text. The reason why most of the texts did not mention contraindications, complications, and cost of sedation may be intending not to create fear or prejudice about the procedure among readers. However, when preparing an information text on an interventional medical procedure, it is legally and ethically required to inform the reader about that procedure fully and clearly.

Does sevoflurane sedation in pediatric patients lead to "pseudo" leptomeningeal enhancement in the brain on 3 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging?

Prominent leptomeningeal contrast enhancement (LMCE) in the brain is observed in some pediatric patients during sedation for imaging. However, based on clinical history and cerebrospinal fluid analysis, the patients are not acutely ill and do not exhibit meningeal signs. Our study determined whether sevoflurane inhalation in pediatric patients led to this pattern of 'pseudo' LMCE (pLMCE) on 3 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). To highlight the significance of pLMCE in pediatric patients undergoing enhanced brain MRI under sedation to avoid misinterpretation in reports. A retrospective cross-sectional evaluation of pediatric patients between 0-8 years of age was conducted. The patients underwent enhanced brain MRI under inhaled sevoflurane. The LMCE grade was determined by two radiologists, and interobserver variability of the grade was calculated using Cohen's kappa. The LMCE grade was correlated with duration of sedation, age and weight using the Spearman rho rank correlation. A total of 63 patients were included. Fourteen (22.2%) cases showed mild LMCE, 48 (76.1%) cases showed moderate LMCE, and 1 case (1.6%) showed severe LMCE. We found substantial agreement between the two radiologists in detection of pLMCE on post-contrast T1 imaging (kappa value = 0.61; P < 0.001). Additionally, we found statistically significant inverse and moderate correlations between patient weight and age. There was no correlation between duration of sedation and pLMCE. pLMCE is relatively common on post-contrast spin echo T1-weighted MRI of pediatric patients sedated by sevoflurane due to their fragile and immature vasculature. It should not be misinterpreted for meningeal pathology. Knowing pertinent clinical history of the child is an essential prerequisite to avoid radiological overcalling and the subsequent burden of additional investigations.

Median effective dose of esketamine for intranasal premedication in children with congenital heart disease

BackgroundEsketamine is commonly used as a premedication for its sedation effect. However, the proper dosage for intranasal use in children with congenital heart disease (CHD) has not been determined. This study aimed to estimate the median effective dose (ED50) of esketamine for intranasal premedication in children with CHD.MethodsThirty-four children with CHD who needed premedication in March 2021 were enrolled. Intranasal esketamine was initiated at a dose of 1 mg/kg. Based on the outcome of sedation in the previous patient, the dose for the subsequent patient was either increased or reduced by 0.1 mg/kg, which was adjusted between each child. Successful sedation was defined as a Ramsay Sedation Scale score ≥ 3 and Parental Separation Anxiety Scale score ≤ 2. The required ED50 of esketamine was calculated using the modified sequential method. Non-invasive blood pressure, heart rate, saturation of peripheral oxygen, sedation onset time, and adverse reactions were recorded at 5 min intervals after drug administration.ResultsThe 34 children enrolled had a mean age of 22.5 ± 16.4 (4–54) months and a mean weight of 11.2 ± 3.6 (5.5–20.5) kg; American Society of Anesthesiologists classification I–III. The ED50 of intranasal S(+)-ketamine (esketamine) required for preoperative sedation in pediatric patients with CHD was 0.7 (95% confidence interval: 0.54–0.86) mg/kg, and the mean sedation onset time was 16.39 ± 7.24 min. No serious adverse events, such as respiratory distress, nausea, and vomiting were observed.ConclusionsThe ED50 of intranasal esketamine was 0.7 mg/kg, which was safe and effective for preoperative sedation in pediatric patients with CHD.Trial registration: The trial was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry Network (ChiCTR2100044551) on 24/03/2021.

Correlation between the actual sleep time 24 hours prior to an examination and the time to achieve chloral hydrate sedation in pediatric patients in South Korea: a prospective cohort study.

This study investigated correlations between the actual sleep time 24 hours prior to an examination and the time to achieve chloral hydrate sedation in pediatric patients. With parental consent, 84 children who were placed under moderate or deep sedation with chloral hydrate for examinations from November 19, 2020 to July 9, 2022 were recruited. Patients' average age was 19.9 months. Pediatric neurology patients and those who underwent electroencephalography took significantly longer to achieve sedation with chloral hydrate. There was a negative correlation between the time to achieve sedation and actual sleep time within 24 hours prior to the examination. Positive correlations were found between the actual sleep time 24 hours prior to the examination and the second dose per weight, as well as between the sedation recovery time and awake hours before the examination. Sleep restriction is not an effective adjuvant therapy for chloral hydrate sedation in children, and sedation effects vary according to pediatric patients' characteristics. Therefore, it would be possible to reduce the unnecessary efforts of caregivers who restrict children's sleep for examinations. It is more important to educate parents about safe sedation than about sleep restriction.

Influence of Age and Sex on the Pharmacokinetics of Midazolam and the Depth of Sedation in Pediatric Patients Undergoing Minor Surgeries

Whether age and sex influence the depth of sedation and the pharmacokinetics of midazolam is currently unknown. The influence of age and sex was investigated in 117 children (2 to 17 years) who required intravenous sedation for minor surgery (0.05 mg/kg). Plasma concentrations and sedation effects were simultaneously measured. The measured concentrations were analyzed using a two-compartment model with first-order elimination. Among the age ranges, significant differences were found (p < 0.05) between the volume of distribution (Vd) of the first compartment (V1) and that of the second (V2). With respect to sex, differences in V2 were found between age groups. At the administered dose, in patients younger than 6 years, a profound sedative effect (40-60 BIS) was observed for up to 120 min, while in older children, the effect lasted only half as long. The differences found in the Vd and bispectral index (BIS) in patients younger than 6 years compared to older patients may be due to immature CYP3A activity and body fat content; furthermore, the Vd varies with age due to changes in body composition and protein binding. Patients younger than 6 years require intravenous (IV) doses <0.05 mg/kg of midazolam for deep sedation. Dosage adjustments according to age group are suggested.

741 - Safety profile of deep sedation in pediatric patients undergoing deep sedation for minor procedures

741 - Safety profile of deep sedation in pediatric patients undergoing deep sedation for minor procedures

Dexmedetomidine compared to ketofol for sedation in pediatric patients undergoing dental procedures: a double-blind, randomized clinical trial

Background &amp; objective: Hospital phobia and anxiety are still prevalent issues in the pediatric patients. Various sedative regimes have been in dental practice, but the evidence for safe and effective sedative drugs in this population is scarce. We compared the safety and efficacy of intravenous combination of ketamine plus propofol (ketofol) with dexmedetomidine (Dex) as a sedative premedication in anxious children undergoing dental pulp therapy.&#x0D; Methodology: This double-blind, randomized clinical study recruited 40 anxious children who were to undergo dental pulp therapy. The study participants were allocated into two groups (20 subjects each). Subjects in Group I received ketofol solution (ketamine/propofol mixture, each mL contains 2 mg of ketamine plus 4 mg of propofol). A loading dose of 0.3125 mL/kg was administered intravenously (IV) over 10 min, followed by maintenance infusion at a rate of 0.05-0.125 mL/kg/h. Subjects in Group II received the Dex solution (4 µg/mL). A loading dose of 2 µg/kg was administered IV over 10 min, followed by a maintenance infusion of 0.1-1 µg/kg/h. Non-invasive blood pressure, SpO2, heart rate (HR), and respiratory rate (RR) were assessed at baseline, at 2 min, and then at 5 min intervals till 60 min. Ramsay sedation score was assessed before, during, and after the procedure and Aldrete's recovery rating score was assessed at the end of the procedure.&#x0D; Results: Compared to the Dex group, the ketofol group showed a statistically significant shorter sedation onset (P = 0.017) but longer discharge time as well as higher rescue dose and a number of interruptions (P &lt; 0.001). There was more stable respiration in Dex group, but with significantly more bradycardia. The mean arterial blood pressure showed some episodes of significant elevations with ketofol compared to Dex, while a biphasic response was observed in the Dex group.&#x0D; Conclusion: The use of Dex induced successful sedation of children who underwent tooth pulp therapy in terms of minimizing the number of interruptions during the procedure, the frequency of rescue drugs administration as well as the total procedure and discharge times. Dexmedetomidine showed no adverse respiratory effects but was associated with bradycardia and biphasic mean blood pressure alterations that require careful titration.&#x0D; Abbreviations: HR: heart rate; IV: Intravenous; RSS: NMDA: N-Methyl D-Aspartate PACU: Post Anesthesia Care Unit; Ramsay sedation score&#x0D; Citation: Hussien RM, Emam DF, Shoukry AA. Dexmedetomidine compared to ketofol for sedation in pediatric patients undergoing dental procedures: a double-blind, randomized clinical trial. Anaesth. pain intensive care 2022;26(5):595-601; DOI: 10.35975/apic.v26i5.2016

The comparison of ketamine-dexmedetomidine (ketadex) and ketamine-propofol (ketofol) for procedural sedation in pediatric patients: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

IntroductionThe combination of different agents used for procedural sedation allows a greater range of desirable effects while minimizing side effects. The ketamine-dexmedetomidine combination (ketadex) and ketamine-propofol combination (ketofol) are successful examples. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the safety and efficacy of ketadex with ketofol used for procedural sedation in pediatric patients. MethodsWe searched Pubmed, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials, and Embase from inception to June 2022. Studies were independently evaluated for inclusion criteria and exclusion criteria by two reviewers. Outcome measures for safety comparison were the incidence of hypotension, bradycardia, respiratory depression, nausea, vomiting, and agitation; Outcome measure for efficacy comparison was clinicians' satisfaction. In addition, we compared the recovery time of ketadex and ketofol. ResultsNine studies were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with ketofol, ketadex sedation in pediatric patients had lower risk of respiratory depression (RR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.34–0.76, P = 0.0009). However, ketadex displayed significant effect on recovery time (MD: 8.38 min, 95% CI: 7.55–9.22 min, P < 0.00001). Ketadex had similar incidence of hypotension (RR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.33–2.67, P = 0.92) and bradycardia (RR: 1.80, 95% CI: 0.64–5.06, P = 0.26) compared to those with ketofol. Clinicians' satisfaction rate of ketadex and ketofol were both high (RR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.69–1.25, P = 0.62). Also, no significant difference was observed between ketadex and ketofol on the incidence of nausea, vomiting, and agitation. ConclusionsBoth ketadex and ketofol can provide effective sedation and maintain stable hemodynamics. In consideration of good safety profile in respiratory problems, we suggest ketadex is a better option for procedural sedation in pediatric patients.

Delayed Adverse Events after Procedural Sedation in Pediatric Patients with Hematologic Malignancies.

Background and objectives: Procedural sedation for bone marrow examination (BME) and intrathecal chemotherapy (ITC) is necessary for pediatric patients with hematological malignancies. There has been no report on adverse events after discharge from the recovery room. This retrospective study evaluated the types and incidences of delayed adverse events among pediatric patients scheduled for BME or ITC under deep sedation in a single center for 3 years. Materials and Methods: The patients were divided into two groups: inpatients (group I) and outpatients (group O). All patients were managed during the procedures and the recovery period. In total, 10 adverse events were assessed; these occurred 2 h (T1, acute), 12 h (T2, early), and 24 h (T3, delayed) after the procedure. The duration of each adverse event was also recorded and was classified as 2 h (D1), 12 h (D2), or 24 h (D3). The data of 263 patients (147 inpatients and 116 outpatients) who met the inclusion criteria were analyzed. Results: The overall incidence of adverse events was statistically significant difference: 48.3% in group I and 33.6% in group O (p = 0.011). The rates of adverse events at T1 and T2 were significantly different between groups I and O (42.8% vs. 11.2% and 7.5% vs. 20.7%, respectively) (p < 0.001). The adverse events were mostly of D1 or D2 duration in both groups. Patients with a higher proportion of ketamine in a propofol–ketamine mixture had a significantly higher proportion of adverse events at T1 (34.6%), as compared with those with a mixture with a lower proportion of ketamine (21.1%) or propofol alone (17.9%) (p = 0.012). Conclusions: The most common adverse events were dizziness or headache; typically, they did not last longer than 12 h. The propofol-ketamine combination with a higher proportion of ketamine seems to produce more adverse events within 2 h after the procedure. Nevertheless, all sedative types appear safe to use without additional management.

The usefulness and safety of dexmedetomidine for postoperative sedation in pediatric patients with moyamoya disease.

After revascularization surgery in pediatric patients with moyamoya disease (MMD), resting and avoiding crying is important. However, this inaction is often difficult because of pain or anxiety. Dexmedetomidine (DEX), which has sedative and analgesic properties, may be useful in reducing those uncomfortable conditions; however, its common side effects include bradycardia and hypotension, which have a risk of decreasing the cerebral blood flow. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of using DEX for pediatric patients with MMD in the acute period after revascularization surgery. This retrospective study included pediatric patients with MMD who underwent revascularization surgery. Based on whether DEX was used for light sedation during postoperative days (PODs) 0-1 after extubation, the patients were divided into DEX or control groups. For neurological outcomes, the incidence of symptomatic cerebral infarction and transient neurological events (TNEs) during PODs 0-1 and the entire hospitalization were investigated. In addition, the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) was used to assess the effect of DEX, and bradycardia and hypotension were evaluated as side effects. A total of 84 surgical procedures were included in this study (27 in the DEX group and 57 in the control group). During PODs 0-1, symptomatic infarction was not observed in either group. The incidence of TNEs was almost the same in both groups: 2 (7.4%) of the 27 procedures in the DEX group and 4 (7.0%) of the 57 procedures in the control group (p > 0.99). Moreover, the incidences of symptomatic infarction and TNEs during the entire hospitalization did not differ significantly (symptomatic infarction, p > 0.99; TNEs, p = 0.20). Regarding the DEX effect, the median RASS scores during PODs 0-1 were -1.0 (drowsy) in the DEX group and +1.0 (restless) in the control group, showing a significant difference (p < 0.01). Regarding side effects, bradycardia was observed only in 3 (11.1%) of the 27 procedures in the DEX group (p = 0.03), and hypotension was not observed in any of the cases. In pediatric patients with MMD who are extubated after revascularization surgery, DEX produced appropriate light sedation and analgesia. The risk for symptomatic infarction is almost the same in cases in which DEX is used and those in which it is not; however, neurosurgeons should be cautious of bradycardia and TNEs as potential side effects.

Efficacy and safety of the combination of propofol and S(+)-ketamine for procedural sedation in pediatric patients undergoing totally implantable venous access port implantation: A prospective randomized controlled study.

BackgroundTotally implantable venous access port (TIVAP) implantation is usually performed under general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation in children. Procedural sedation without endotracheal intubation has been applied to minor pediatric surgeries like central venous catheter insertion. To explore a more efficient and less invasive anesthesia mode to implant TIVAPs for children, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of procedural sedation using propofol and S(+)-ketamine compared with general anesthesia.MethodsSixty-six patients aged 6 months to 10 years undergoing TIVAP implantation were randomly allocated to two groups. Patients under procedural sedation [S(+)-ketamine-propofol (sketofol) group] were given target-controlled infusion of propofol 4 μg/ml using the Paedfusor model and S(+)-ketamine 0.5 mg/kg as induction, and had target-controlled infusion of propofol 3–4 μg/ml as maintenance. Patients in sketofol group received medium-flow oxygen inhalation through facemasks during surgery. Patients under general anesthesia (control group) were given propofol 2 mg/kg, cisatracurium 0.2 mg/kg, fentanyl 3 μg/kg as induction, and sevoflurane 0.8 minimum alveolar concentration as maintenance after endotracheal intubation. Primary outcome was the postoperative emergence agitation evaluated 5 min after awakening.ResultsPostoperative emergence agitation evaluated 5 min after awakening was lower in sketofol group versus control group [1.0 (0.5, 1.0) vs. 3.0 (2.0, 4.0); median difference (95% CI): 2.0 (1.0, 2.0); P < 0.001]. Time to awakening was significantly lower in sketofol group versus control group [15.0 (5.0, 23.0) vs. 26.0 (20.5, 37.5); median difference (95% CI): 11.0 (7.0, 19.0); P < 0.001], as well as time to discharge from post anesthesia care unit [35.0 (24.0, 45.0) vs. 45.0 (37.5, 59.5); median difference (95% CI): 10.0 (10.0, 23.0); P < 0.001]. Postoperative complications or adverse events were not reported in sketofol group.ConclusionsCompared to general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation, procedural sedation using propofol and S(+)-ketamine improves the postoperative emergence agitation right after the recovery of consciousness, and has advantage in shortening anesthetic recovery time for pediatric patients undergoing TIVAP implantation.

Virtual sedation as a substitute to pharmacological sedation during PICC placement in pediatric patients: A feasibility study.

In pediatric patients, PICC insertion is often performed under sedation to reduce pain and anxiety, which is associated with risks such as laryngospasm, apnea, and hypoxia. Furthermore, it requires a pediatric anesthesiologist. The aim of our study was to evaluate the VR as an alternative to pharmacological sedation to reduce those risks and the overall cost. We tested a VR immersive experience for ten children requiring a PICC. To achieve this, we ran a software, specifically designed for the pediatric healthcare setting, on a commercially available VR headset.In order to evaluate this new practice, we recorded the following data:Patient's anxiety before and after the procedure, recorded through a modified numeric rating scale from 0 (no anxiety) to 10 (worst anxiety imaginable).Patient's pain before (e.g., because of preexisting medical conditions) and after the procedure through a Wong-Baker scale.Caregiver's satisfaction.No active or passive restraint was enforced during the whole procedure, patients had to keep their arms still all by themselves. Out of the 10 patients only in a single case, we had to interrupt the attempt with the VR technique and let the anesthesiologist perform a sedation. From the immediate beginning said patient had trouble adapting to the virtual environment and tried to remove the headset.In all other cases, we noticed a drop in the anxiety level of the patient and the pain never increased. Globally, caregivers were pleased with the experience and reported an average satisfaction rate of 9.3 out of 10. Virtual reality seems a valid alternative to traditional sedation in pediatric patients undergoing a PICC placement procedure. Additional studies, with adequate sample size, of patients are necessary to assess the benefit from this new approach, as well as its impact on the overall procedure length.

Preoperative sedation in children with congenital heart disease: 50% and 95% effective doses, hemodynamic effects, and safety of intranasal dexmedetomidine

Study objectiveTo determine the 50% and 95% effective doses (ED50 and ED95, respectively), hemodynamic effects, and safety of intranasal dexmedetomidine for preoperative sedation in pediatric patients with congenital heart disease (CHD) with a left-to-right shunt. DesignDouble-blind sequential allocation trial. SettingPediatric preoperative waiting area. Patients86 pediatric patients ASA physical status II–III scheduled for cardiac surgery, aged1-month to 6-years-old with left-to-right type CHD. InterventionsChildren were divided into three groups according to age: infants (1 month–1 year), toddlers (1–3 years), and preschoolers (3–6 years). The first patient in all groups received intranasal dexmedetomidine (2 μg/kg), using the up-and-down Dixon method, and the and the next patient's dose was dependent on the previous patient's response. MeasurementsAssessment using the Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale and the Mask Acceptance Scale was performed before and every 5 min after treatment. Pulse oxygen saturation and heart rate were recorded at baseline, at 10-min intervals, and after admission to the operating room. Systolic pulmonary artery pressure was measured before anesthesia induction. Main resultsThe respective ED50 (95% confidence interval [CI]) and ED95 (95% CI) values for preoperative sedation using intranasally administered dexmedetomidine were 3.1 (2.8–3.3) and 3.5 (3.3–4.0) μg/kg for infants; 3.4 (3.2–3.6) and 3.9 (3.7–4.4) μg/kg for toddlers; and 2.4 (2.2–2.6) and 2.9 (2.6–3.3) μg/kg for preschoolers. ED50 was lower for preschoolers than for toddlers (p < 0.001) and infants (p = 0.044). No obvious difference in ED50 was found between infants and toddlers. There was no significant difference in sedation onset time among the groups, and no adverse events were observed during sedation in all patients. ConclusionsIntranasal dexmedetomidine can be safety used for preoperative sedation inchildren with CHD and is effective for sedation when dosed appropriately.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov (ChiCTR2100047472); registered 20 June 2021.