Intravenous midazolam infusion for sedation of infants in the neonatal intensive care unit

Pharmacological interventions for pain and sedation management in newborn infants undergoing therapeutic hypothermia

BACKGROUND

Newborn infants affected by hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (HIE) undergo therapeutic hypothermia. As this treatment seems to be associated with pain, and intensive and invasive care is needed, pharmacological interventions are often used. Moreover, painful procedures in the newborn period can affect pain responses later in life, impair brain development, and possibly have a long-term negative impact on neurodevelopment and quality of life.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of pharmacological interventions for pain and sedation management in newborn infants undergoing therapeutic hypothermia. Primary outcomes were analgesia and sedation, and all-cause mortality to discharge.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, PubMed, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), and the trial register ISRCTN in August 2021. We also checked the reference lists of relevant articles to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCT), quasi-RCTs and cluster-randomized trials comparing drugs used for the management of pain or sedation, or both, during therapeutic hypothermia: any opioids (e.g. morphine, fentanyl), alpha-2 agonists (e.g. clonidine, dexmedetomidine), N-Methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonist (e.g. ketamine), other analgesics (e.g. paracetamol), and sedatives (e.g. benzodiazepines such as midazolam) versus another drug, placebo, no intervention, or non-pharmacological interventions.  Primary outcomes were analgesia and sedation, and all-cause mortality to discharge.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies identified by the search strategy for inclusion. We planned to use the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence. We planned to assess the methodological quality of included trials using Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group (EPOC) criteria (assessing randomization, blinding, loss to follow-up, and handling of outcome data). We planned to evaluate treatment effects using a fixed-effect model with risk ratio (RR) for categorical data and mean, standard deviation (SD), and mean difference (MD) for continuous data.  MAIN RESULTS: We did not find any completed studies for inclusion. Amongst the four excluded studies, topiramate and atropine were used in two and one trial, respectively; one study used dexmedetomidine and was initially reported in 2019 to be a randomized trial. However, it was an observational study (correction in 2021). We identified one ongoing study comparing dexmedetomidine to morphine.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no studies that met our inclusion criteria and hence there is no evidence to recommend or refute the use of pharmacological interventions for pain and sedation management in newborn infants undergoing therapeutic hypothermia.

Intravenous midazolam infusion for sedation of infants in the neonatal intensive care unit

BACKGROUND

Proper sedation for neonates undergoing uncomfortable procedures may reduce stress and avoid complications. Midazolam is a short-acting benzodiazepine that is used increasingly in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). However, its effectiveness as a sedative in neonates has not been systematically evaluated.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objeciveTo assess the effectiveness of intravenous midazolam infusion for sedation, as evaluated by behavioural and/or physiological measurements of sedation levels, in critically ill neonates in the NICU. Secondary objectivesTo assess effects of intravenous midazolam infusion for sedation on complications including the following.1. Incidence of intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH)/periventricular leukomalacia (PVL).2. Mortality.3. Occurrence of adverse effects associated with the use of midazolam (hypotension, neurological abnormalities).4. Days of ventilation.5. Days of supplemental oxygen.6. Incidence of pneumothorax.7. Length of NICU stay (days).8. Long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected for review randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of intravenous midazolam infusion for sedation in infants aged 28 days or younger.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We abstracted data regarding the primary outcome of level of sedation. We assessed secondary outcomes such as intraventricular haemorrhage, periventricular leukomalacia, death, length of NICU stay and adverse effects associated with midazolam. When appropriate, we performed meta-analyses using risk ratios (RRs) and risk differences (RDs), and if the RD was statistically significant, we calculated the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) or an additional harmful outcome (NNTH), along with their 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for categorical variables, and weighted mean differences (WMDs) for continuous variables. We assessed heterogeneity by performing the I-squared (I2) test.

MAIN RESULTS

We included in the review three trials enrolling 148 neonates. We identified no new trials for this update. Using different sedation scales, each study showed a statistically significantly higher sedation level in the midazolam group compared with the placebo group. However, none of the sedation scales used have been validated in preterm infants; therefore, we could not ascertain the effectiveness of midazolam in this population. Duration of NICU stay was significantly longer in the midazolam group than in the placebo group (WMD 5.4 days, 95% CI 0.40 to 10.5; I2 = 0%; two studies, 89 infants). One study (43 infants) reported significantly lower Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP) scores during midazolam infusion than during dextrose (placebo) infusion (MD -3.80, 95% CI -5.93 to -1.67). Another study (46 infants) observed a higher incidence of adverse neurological events at 28 days' postnatal age (death, grade III or IV IVH or PVL) in the midazolam group compared with the morphine group (RR 7.64, 95% CI 1.02 to 57.21; RD 0.28, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.49; NNTH 4, 95% CI 2 to 14) (tests for heterogeneity not applicable). We considered these trials to be of moderate quality according to GRADE assessment based on the following outcomes: mortality during hospital stay, length of NICU stay, adequacy of analgesia according to PIPP scores and poor neurological outcomes by 28 days' postnatal age.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Data are insufficient to promote the use of intravenous midazolam infusion as a sedative for neonates undergoing intensive care. This review raises concerns about the safety of midazolam in neonates. Further research on the effectiveness and safety of midazolam in neonates is needed.

Evidence and consensus based guideline for the management of delirium, analgesia, and sedation in intensive care medicine. Revision 2015 (DAS-Guideline 2015) - short version

In 2010, under the guidance of the DGAI (German Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine) and DIVI (German Interdisciplinary Association for Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine), twelve German medical societies published the “Evidence- and Consensus-based Guidelines on the Management of Analgesia, Sedation and Delirium in Intensive Care”. Since then, several new studies and publications have considerably increased the body of evidence, including the new recommendations from the American College of Critical Care Medicine (ACCM) in conjunction with Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) and American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) from 2013. For this update, a major restructuring and extension of the guidelines were needed in order to cover new aspects of treatment, such as sleep and anxiety management. The literature was systematically searched and evaluated using the criteria of the Oxford Center of Evidence Based Medicine. The body of evidence used to formulate these recommendations was reviewed and approved by representatives of 17 national societies. Three grades of recommendation were used as follows: Grade “A” (strong recommendation), Grade “B” (recommendation) and Grade “0” (open recommendation). The result is a comprehensive, interdisciplinary, evidence and consensus-based set of level 3 guidelines. This publication was designed for all ICU professionals, and takes into account all critically ill patient populations. It represents a guide to symptom-oriented prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of delirium, anxiety, stress, and protocol-based analgesia, sedation, and sleep-management in intensive care medicine.

The Neonatal Pain, Agitation and Sedation Scale and the bedside nurse's assessment of neonates

OBJECTIVE

To determine the reliability of an objective measure of pain, agitation and sedation using the Neonatal Pain, Agitation and Sedation Scale (N-PASS) compared with nursing bedside assessment.

STUDY DESIGN

Neonates admitted in neonatal intensive care unit over a 6-month period were eligible. Pain and sedation were assessed with N-PASS, and a subjective questionnaire was administered to the bedside nurse.

RESULT

A total of 218 neonates were eligible (median: gestational age 34.6 weeks, age at assessment 7 days). N-PASS pain score correlated significantly with both nurses' pain score (Spearman coefficient (r)=0.37; P<0.001) and agitation score (r=0.56; P<0.001). N-PASS sedation score correlated with nurses' sedation score (r=-0.39; P<0.001). Adjusting for gestational age, day of life, intrauterine drug exposure and use of high frequency ventilation only slightly attenuated the correlations (r=0.36, 0.55 and -0.31, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The N-PASS captures nursing assessment of pain, agitation and sedation in this broad population and provides a quantitative assessment of subjective descriptions that often drives patient therapy.

Acute Neonatal Respiratory Failure

Acute respiratory failure requiring assisted ventilation is one of the most common reasons for admission to the neonatal intensive care unit. Respiratory failure is the inability to maintain either normal delivery of oxygen to the tissues or normal removal of carbon dioxide from the tissues. It occurs when there is an imbalance between the respiratory workload and ventilatory strength and endurance. Definitions are somewhat arbitrary but suggested laboratory criteria for respiratory failure include two or more of the following: PaCO₂ > 60 mmHg, PaO₂ < 50 mmHg or O₂ saturation <80 % with an FiO₂ of 1.0 and pH < 7.25 (Wen et al. 2004).

Clinical pharmacology of midazolam in neonates and children: effect of disease-a review

Midazolam is a benzodiazepine with rapid onset of action and short duration of effect. In healthy neonates the half-life (t_1/2) and the clearance (Cl) are 3.3-fold longer and 3.7-fold smaller, respectively, than in adults. The volume of distribution (Vd) is 1.1 L/kg both in neonates and adults. Midazolam is hydroxylated by CYP3A4 and CYP3A5; the activities of these enzymes surge in the liver in the first weeks of life and thus the metabolic rate of midazolam is lower in neonates than in adults. Midazolam acts as a sedative, as an antiepileptic, for those infants who are refractory to standard antiepileptic therapy, and as an anaesthetic. Information of midazolam as an anaesthetic in infants are very little. Midazolam is usually administered intravenously; when minimal sedation is required, intranasal administration of midazolam is employed. Disease affects the pharmacokinetics of midazolam in neonates; multiple organ failure reduces the Cl of midazolam and mechanical ventilation prolongs the t_1/2 of this drug. ECMO therapy increases t_1/2, Cl, and Vd of midazolam several times. The adverse effects of midazolam in neonates are scarce: pain, tenderness, and thrombophlebitis may occur. Respiratory depression and hypotension appear in a limited percentage of infants following intravenous infusion of midazolam. In conclusion, midazolam is a safe and effective drug which is employed as a sedative, as antiepileptic agent, for infants who are refractory to standard antiepileptic therapy, and as an anaesthetic.

Association of Fentanyl With Neurodevelopmental Outcomes in Very-Low-Birth-Weight Infants

Background: Opioids are commonly used in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Negative neurodevelopmental effects in the short-term setting have been associated with opioids ; however, long-term studies have been limited. Objective: The primary objective was to determine if there is a dose relationship between fentanyl and neurodevelopmental outcomes, as measured by Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (Bayley-III) composite scores for language, cognition, and motor skills. Secondary objectives included comparison of Bayley-III scores and neurodevelopmental impairment classification based on fentanyl exposure. Methods: A retrospective evaluation of 147 very-low-birth-weight infants with Bayley-III scores obtained at a chronological age of 6 months to 2 years at clinic follow-up was conducted. Univariate and multivariable linear regression analyses were used to determine if there was a dose-related association between fentanyl and neurodevelopmental outcomes. To evaluate secondary outcomes, patients were divided based on cumulative fentanyl dose (“high-dose” versus “low/no-dose”). Results: The univariate analysis found a statistically significant decrease in cognition ( P = .034) and motor skills scores ( P = .006). No association was found in the multi-variable regression between fentanyl cumulative dose and Bayley-III scores. There was a significant decrease in the motor skills score between the high-dose versus low/no-dose group, 94 ± 20 versus 102 ± 15, respectively ( P = .026); however, no statistical differences were noted for language or cognition scores or neurological impairment classification. Conclusions: When controlling for other variables, the cumulative fentanyl dose did not correlate with neurodevelopmental outcomes. Further evaluation of benefits and risks of opioids in premature infants are needed.

Premedication for neonatal intubation: Current practice in Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

Despite strong evidence of the benefits of rapid sequence intubation in neonates, it is still infrequently utilized in neonatal intensive care units (NICU), contributing to avoidable pain and secondary procedure-related physiological disturbances.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this cross-sectional survey was to assess the practice of premedication and regimens commonly used before elective endotracheal intubation in NICUs in Saudi Arabia. The secondary aim was to explore neonatal physicians' attitudes regarding this intervention in institutions across Saudi Arabia.

METHODS

A web-based, structured questionnaire was distributed by the Department of Pediatrics, Umm Al Qura University, Mecca, to neonatal physicians and consultants of 10 NICUs across the country by E-mail. Responses were tabulated and descriptive statistics were conducted on the variables extracted.

RESULTS

85% responded to the survey. Although 70% believed it was essential to routinely use premedication for all elective intubations, only 41% implemented this strategy. 60% cited fear of potential side effects for avoiding premedication and 40% indicated that the procedure could be executed more rapidly without drug therapy. Treatment regimens varied widely among respondents.

CONCLUSION

Rates of premedication use prior to non-emergent neonatal intubation are suboptimal. Flawed information and lack of unified unit policies hampered effective implementation. Evidence-based guidelines may influence country-wide adoption of this practice.

The role of systematic reviews in pharmacovigilance planning and Clinical Trials Authorisation application: example from the SLEEPS trial

BACKGROUND

Adequate sedation is crucial to the management of children requiring assisted ventilation on Paediatric Intensive Care Units (PICU). The evidence-base of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in this area is small and a trial was planned to compare midazolam and clonidine, two sedatives widely used within PICUs neither of which being licensed for that use. The application to obtain a Clinical Trials Authorisation from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) required a dossier summarising the safety profiles of each drug and the pharmacovigilance plan for the trial needed to be determined by this information. A systematic review was undertaken to identify reports relating to the safety of each drug.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

The Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC) were obtained for each sedative. The MHRA were requested to provide reports relating to the use of each drug as a sedative in children under the age of 16. Medline was searched to identify RCTs, controlled clinical trials, observational studies, case reports and series. 288 abstracts were identified for midazolam and 16 for clonidine with full texts obtained for 80 and 6 articles respectively. Thirty-three studies provided data for midazolam and two for clonidine. The majority of data has come from observational studies and case reports. The MHRA provided details of 10 and 3 reports of suspected adverse drug reactions.

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE

No adverse reactions were identified in addition to those specified within the SmPC for the licensed use of the drugs. Based on this information and the wide spread use of both sedatives in routine practice the pharmacovigilance plan was restricted to adverse reactions. The Clinical Trials Authorisation was granted based on the data presented in the SmPC and the pharmacovigilance plan within the clinical trial protocol restricting collection and reporting to adverse reactions.

Premedication for intubation with morphine causes prolonged depression of electrocortical background activity in preterm infants

BACKGROUND

Sedative and analgesic medications are used in critically ill newborns, but little is known about their effects on electrocortical activity in preterm infants. We hypothesized that morphine might induce prolonged neurodepression, independent of blood pressure, as compared with rapid sequence induction/intubation(RSI).

METHODS

Of 34 infants enrolled in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing RSI (including thiopental 2-3 mg/kg and remifentantil 1 mcg/kg) with morphine (0.3 mg/kg) as premedication for intubation, 28 infants (n = 14 + 14; median gestational age 26.1 wk and postnatal age 138 h) had continuous two-channel amplitude-integrated electroencephalogram (aEEG/EEG) and blood pressure monitoring during 24 h after the intubation. Thirteen infants not receiving any additional medication constituted the primary study group. Visual and quantitative analyses of aEEG/EEG and blood pressure were performed in 3-h epochs.

RESULTS

RSI was associated with aEEG/EEG depression lasting <3 h. Morphine premedication resulted in aEEG/EEG depression with more discontinuous background and less developed cyclicity for 24 h, and during the first 9 h, interburst intervals (IBI) were significantly increased as compared with those of RSI treatment. The difference was not related to blood pressure.

CONCLUSION

Premedication with morphine is associated with prolonged aEEG/EEG depression independent of blood pressure changes and may not be optimal for short procedures.

Premedication for endotracheal intubation in the newborn infant

Endotracheal intubation, a common procedure in newborn care, is associated with pain and cardiorespiratory instability. The use of premedication reduces the adverse physiological responses of bradycardia, systemic hypertension, intracranial hypertension and hypoxia. Perhaps more importantly, premedication decreases the pain and discomfort associated with the procedure. All newborn infants, therefore, should receive analgesic premedication for endotracheal intubation except in emergency situations. Based on current evidence, an optimal protocol for premedication is to administer a vagolytic (intravenous [IV] atropine 20 μg/kg), a rapid-acting analgesic (IV fentanyl 3 μg/kg to 5 μg/kg; slow infusion) and a short-duration muscle relaxant (IV succinylcholine 2 mg/kg). Intubations should be performed or supervised by trained staff, with close monitoring of the infant throughout.

Dexmedetomidine versus standard therapy with fentanyl for sedation in mechanically ventilated premature neonates

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine and fentanyl for sedation in mechanically ventilated premature neonates.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, observational case-control study in a level III neonatal intensive care unit. Forty-eight premature neonates requiring mechanical ventilation were included. Patients received fentanyl (n=24) or dexmedetomidine (n=24) for pain or sedation. Each group also received fentanyl and lorazepam boluses as needed for agitation. The primary outcomes were efficacy and frequency of acute adverse events associated with each drug. Days on mechanical ventilation, stooling patterns, feeding tolerance, and neurologic outcomes were also evaluated.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in baseline demographics between the dexmedetomidine and fentanyl patients. Patients in the dexmedetomidine group required less adjunctive sedation and had more days free of additional sedation in comparison to fentanyl (54.1% vs. 16.5%, p<0.0001). There were no differences in hemodynamic parameters between the 2 groups. Duration of mechanical ventilation was shorter in the dexmedetomidine group (14.4 vs. 28.4 days, p<0.001). Meconium passage (7.5 vs. 22.4 days, p<0.0002) and time from initiation to achievement of full enteral feeds (26.8 vs. 50.8 days, p<0.0001) were shorter in the dexmedetomidine group. Incidence of culture-positive sepsis was lower in the dexmedetomidine group (48% vs. 88%). The incidence of either severe intraventricular hemorrhage or periventricular leukomalacia was not statistically significantly reduced (2% vs. 7%).

CONCLUSIONS

Dexmedetomidine was safe and effective for sedation in the premature neonates included in this study. Prospective randomized-controlled trials are needed before routine use of dexmedetomidine can be recommended.

Intravenous midazolam infusion for sedation of infants in the neonatal intensive care unit

BACKGROUND

Proper sedation for neonates undergoing uncomfortable procedures may reduce stress and avoid complications. Midazolam is a short-acting benzodiazepine that is increasingly used in neonatal intensive care units (NICU). However, its effectiveness as a sedative in neonates has not been systematically evaluated.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether intravenous midazolam infusion is an effective sedative, as evaluated by behavioural or physiological measurements, or both, for critically ill neonates undergoing intensive care and to assess clinically significant short- and long-term adverse effects associated with its use.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a literature search according to the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group search strategy. Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of intravenous midazolam use in neonates were identified by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2012), MEDLINE (1985 to 2012), EMBASE (1980 to 2012), CINAHL (1981 to 2012), reference lists of published studies, personal files, and abstracts published in The Pediatric Academic Societies Meeting Abstract Archives from 1990 to 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of intravenous midazolam infusion in infants aged 28 days or less for sedation were selected for review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data regarding the primary outcome of level of sedation were abstracted. Secondary outcomes such as intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH), periventricular leukomalacia (PVL), death, length of NICU stay, and adverse effects associated with midazolam were assessed. When appropriate, meta-analyses were performed using risk ratio (RR), risk difference (RD), along with their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for categorical variables and weighted mean difference (WMD) for continuous variables.

MAIN RESULTS

Three trials were included in the review. Using different sedation scales, each study showed a statistically significantly higher sedation level in the midazolam group compared to the placebo group. However, since none of the sedation scales used have been validated in preterm infants, the effectiveness of midazolam in this population could not be ascertained. One study showed a statistically significant higher incidence of adverse neurological events (death, grade III or IV IVH, PVL), and meta-analysis of data from two studies showed a statistically significant longer duration of NICU stay in the midazolam group compared to the placebo group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There are insufficient data to promote the use of intravenous midazolam infusion as a sedative for neonates undergoing intensive care. This review raises concerns about the safety of midazolam in neonates. Further research on the effectiveness and safety of midazolam in neonates is needed.

Anesthesia and analgesia in the NICU

Painful procedures in the neonatal intensive care unit are common, undertreated, and lead to adverse consequences. A stepwise approach to treatment should include pain recognition, assessment, and treatment, starting with nonpharmacologic and progressing to pharmacologic methods for increasing pain. The most common nonpharmacologic techniques include nonnutritive sucking with and without sucrose, kangaroo care, swaddling, and massage therapy. Drugs used to treat neonatal pain include the opiates, benzodiazepines, barbiturates, ketamine, propofol, acetaminophen, and local and topical anesthetics. The indications, advantages, and disadvantages of the commonly used analgesic drugs are discussed. Guidance and references for drugs and dosing for specific neonatal procedures are provided.

Risk factors associated with acute kidney injury in extremely low birth weight (ELBW) infants

The aim of this study was to determine the incidence, risk factors, and outcome of acute kidney injury (AKI) in extremely low birth weight (ELBW) infants. In a case-control study, medical records of all ELBW infants who were admitted to our Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) between 1 January 2000 and 31 January 2008 were reviewed. During the study period, 12.5% (59/472) of all ELBW infants developed AKI. Forty-six infants with available medical records were matched to 46 controls. The mean gestational age and birth weight of infants with AKI and their controls were 24.7 ± 1.8 vs. 24.9 ± 1.9 weeks (p = 0.61) and 614 ± 128 vs. 616 ± 127 g (p = 0.93), respectively. Infants with AKI had a higher mean airway pressure, a lower mean arterial blood pressure, and higher exposure to cefotaxime than their controls. Infants with AKI also had an increased mortality in comparison to their controls [33/46 (70%) vs. 10/46 (22%), respectively; p < 0.0001), and oliguric patients had a higher mortality than nonoliguric patients [31/38 (81%) vs. 2/8 (25%), respectively, p = 0.003]. Based on our results, we conclude that a high mean airway pressure, low blood pressure, and the use of cefotaxime are associated with renal failure in ELBW infants. AKI in ELBW infants is also associated with an increased mortality, especially in the presence of oliguria.

Rapid sequence induction is superior to morphine for intubation of preterm infants: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To compare rapid sequence intubation (RSI) premedication with morphine for intubation of preterm infants.

STUDY DESIGN

Preterm infants needing semi-urgent intubation were enrolled to either RSI (glycopyrrolate, thiopental, suxamethonium, and remifentanil, n = 17) or atropine and morphine (n = 17) in a randomized trial. The main outcome was "good intubation conditions" (score ≤10 assessed with intubation scoring), and secondary outcomes were procedural duration, physiological and biochemical variables, amplitude-integrated electroencephalogram, and pain scores.

RESULTS

Infants receiving RSI had superior intubation conditions (16/17 versus 1/17, P < .001), the median (IQR) intubation score was 5 (5-6) compared with 12 (10.0-13.5, P < .001), and a shorter procedure duration of 45 seconds (35-154) compared with 97 seconds (49-365, P = .031). The morphine group had prolonged heart rate decrease (area under the curve, P < .009) and mean arterial blood pressure increase (area under the curve, P < .005 and %change: mean ± SD 21% ± 23% versus -2% ± 22%, P < .007) during the intubation, and a subsequent lower mean arterial blood pressure 3 hours after the intubation compared with baseline (P = .033), concomitant with neurophysiologic depression (P < .001) for 6 hours after. Plasma cortisol and stress/pain scores were similar.

CONCLUSION

RSI with the drugs used can be implemented as medication for semi-urgent intubation in preterm infants. Because of circulatory changes and neurophysiological depression found during and after the intubation in infants given morphine, premedication with morphine should be avoided.

Anesthesia and neurotoxicity to the developing brain: the clinical relevance

Laboratory work has confirmed that general anesthetics cause increased neuronal apoptosis and changes to the morphology of dendritic spines in the developing brains of animals. It is an effect seen with most volatile anesthetics as well as with ketamine and propofol. The effects are dose dependent and seen over particular periods of early development. There is some evidence that rodents exposed to anesthesia during infancy have delayed neurobehavioral development. There are inherent limitations in translating the preclinical data to human practice but the data cannot be ignored. Some human clinical studies have found evidence for an association between major surgery and changes in neurobehavioral outcome, although the evidence is less clear for minor surgery. These associations are certainly at least partly because of factors apart from anesthesia, such as coexisting pathology or the effect of surgery itself. Other clinical studies have found no evidence for an association between surgery and outcome. These studies are also not without limitations. Thus it remains unclear what role anesthesia exposure in infancy actually plays in determining neurobehavioral outcome. To date studies can neither confirm that anesthesia plays a role nor rule it out.

Evidence and consensus-based German guidelines for the management of analgesia, sedation and delirium in intensive care--short version

Targeted monitoring of analgesia, sedation and delirium, as well as their appropriate management in critically ill patients is a standard of care in intensive care medicine. With the undisputed advantages of goal-oriented therapy established, there was a need to develop our own guidelines on analgesia and sedation in intensive care in Germany and these were published as 2(nd) Generation Guidelines in 2005. Through the dissemination of these guidelines in 2006, use of monitoring was shown to have improved from 8 to 51% and the use of protocol-based approaches increased to 46% (from 21%). Between 2006-2009, the existing guidelines from the DGAI (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Anästhesiologie und Intensivmedizin) and DIVI (Deutsche Interdisziplinäre Vereinigung für Intensiv- und Notfallmedizin) were developed into 3(rd) Generation Guidelines for the securing and optimization of quality of analgesia, sedation and delirium management in the intensive care unit (ICU). In collaboration with another 10 professional societies, the literature has been reviewed using the criteria of the Oxford Center of Evidence Based Medicine. Using data from 671 reference works, text, diagrams and recommendations were drawn up. In the recommendations, Grade "A" (very strong recommendation), Grade "B" (strong recommendation) and Grade "0" (open recommendation) were agreed. As a result of this process we now have an interdisciplinary and consensus-based set of 3(rd) Generation Guidelines that take into account all critically illness patient populations. The use of protocols for analgesia, sedation and treatment of delirium are repeatedly demonstrated. These guidelines offer treatment recommendations for the ICU team. The implementation of scores and protocols into routine ICU practice is necessary for their success.

Use of premedication for intubation in tertiary neonatal units in the United Kingdom

BACKGROUND

Endotracheal intubation and laryngoscopy are frequently performed procedures in neonatal intensive care. These procedures represent profoundly painful stimuli and have been associated with laryngospasm, bronchospasm, hemodynamic changes, raised intracranial pressure and an increased risk of intracranial hemorrhage. These adverse changes can cause significant neonatal morbidity but may be attenuated by the use of suitable premedication.

AIMS

To evaluate current practices for premedication use prior to elective intubation in UK tertiary neonatal units.

METHODS

Telephone questionnaire survey of all 50 tertiary neonatal units in the UK.

RESULTS

Ninety percent of units report the routine use of sedation prior to intubation and 82% of units routinely use a muscle relaxant. Morphine was the most commonly used sedative and suxamethonium was the most commonly used muscle relaxant. Approximately half of the units also used atropine during intubation. Seventy seven percent of units had a written policy for premedication. Ten percent of the units did not routinely use any sedatives or muscle relaxants for elective intubation.

CONCLUSIONS

In comparison with data from a 1998 survey, our study demonstrated an increase in the number of units that have adopted a written policy for premedication use, and in the number routinely using premedication drugs for elective intubation. There remains little consensus as to which drugs should be used and in what dose.

Do ventilated neonates require pain management?

Mechanical ventilation is a stressful experience in neonates resulting in changes in neuroendocrine parameters, pain scores, and physiologic responses. Assisted ventilation in neonates is presumed to be associated with chronic repetitive pain, which in turn is associated with adverse long-term sequelae. Reasons to routinely sedate ventilated neonates include improved ventilator synchrony, improved pulmonary function, and decreased neuroendocrine responses, including cortisol, beta-endorphine, and catecholamines. Reasons not to treat include the well-known adverse side effects of pain medication, especially the opiates, including hypotension from morphine, chest wall rigidity from fentanyl, and tolerance, dependence, and withdrawal from both opiates and benzodiazepines. Additionally, adverse effects such as death and IVH are not improved with preemptive treatment. Chronic pain assessment is poorly validated and difficult to assess in this population, and most studies have evaluated only acute pain scores. If patients are treated, opiates are the most common class of drugs, with morphine the most well studied. Fentanyl may be advantageous in hypotensive, younger neonates because it has fewer cardiovascular effects. The benzodiazepines, midazolam and lorazepam, have been used in ventilated neonates, but midazolam has been associated with adverse effects in one small study so concern remains regarding its use. Significant gaps in our knowledge exist, especially in regard to long-term effects of treatment, or lack thereof, and in the assessment of the chronic pain associated with assisted ventilation.

A cluster-randomized trial of benchmarking and multimodal quality improvement to improve rates of survival free of bronchopulmonary dysplasia for infants with birth weights of less than 1250 grams

OBJECTIVE

We tested whether NICU teams trained in benchmarking and quality improvement would change practices and improve rates of survival without bronchopulmonary dysplasia in inborn neonates with birth weights of <1250 g.

METHODS

A cluster-randomized trial enrolled 4093 inborn neonates with birth weights of <1250 g at 17 centers of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Neonatal Research Network. Three centers were selected as best performers, and the remaining 14 centers were randomized to intervention or control. Changes in rates of survival free of bronchopulmonary dysplasia were compared between study year 1 and year 3.

RESULTS

Intervention centers implemented potentially better practices successfully; changes included reduced oxygen saturation targets and reduced exposure to mechanical ventilation. Five of 7 intervention centers and 2 of 7 control centers implemented use of high-saturation alarms to reduce oxygen exposure. Lower oxygen saturation targets reduced oxygen levels in the first week of life. Despite these changes, rates of survival free of bronchopulmonary dysplasia were all similar between intervention and control groups and remained significantly less than the rate achieved in the best-performing centers (73.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

In this cluster-randomized trial, benchmarking and multimodal quality improvement changed practices but did not reduce bronchopulmonary dysplasia rates.

Evidence-based use of adjunctive therapies to ventilation

Respiratory distress is the most common reason for admission to newborn intensive care units. Over the past two decades, we have witnessed a revolution in the therapies that are used to manage neonates who have pulmonary disorders. Multiple adjunctive agents have also been used in an attempt to mitigate the course of neonatal lung disease. The disorders we discuss include respiratory distress syndrome, chronic lung disease/bronchopulmonary dysplasia, persistent pulmonary hypertension of the newborn, meconium aspiration syndrome, and transient tachypnea of the newborn. We review the evidence that either supports or refutes the use of adjunctive therapies for these disorders.

Efficacy and tolerance of high-dose inhaled ipratropium bromide vs. terbutaline in intubated premature human neonates

BACKGROUND

There is insufficient data to reliably assess the benefit of bronchodilators in ventilated premature neonates.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy/tolerance of inhaled ipratropium bromide (IB) vs. terbutaline (T) and to describe factors associated with their efficacy.

METHODS

A cross-over randomized controlled double-blind trial including intubated neonates with respiratory distress syndrome. Two puffs of IB or T were administered at 0, 20, 40 min. Passive respiratory system resistance (Rrs) and compliance (Crs) were measured at 0, 20, 40, 60 min. A positive response was defined as a >2 individual coefficients of variation decrease in Rrs or increase in Crs.

RESULTS

Twenty-one infants (gestational age (mean +/- SD): 27.3 +/- 1.6 weeks; birth weight: 947 +/- 250 g; postnatal age: 20 +/- 9 days) were included. At 60 min, no treatment effect for Rrs and Crs could be identified (cross-over analysis). Overall data (irrespective of order of administration) showed that after 6 puffs, the decrease in Rrs was greater in the IB vs. T group (-17.0 +/- 22.2% vs. -11.3 +/- 26.7%, respectively (NS)). Thirty-eight percent of infants responded to IB vs. 43% to T. However, in 19% of patients, decreased Crs was observed after 6 puffs of T. No marker of a positive or paradoxical response could be identified. Treatment was well-tolerated.

CONCLUSION

High doses of bronchodilators are required in ventilated neonates, but the positive response rate was <50%. Their long-term benefit remains to be proven.

Pharmacological therapy for analgesia and sedation in the newborn

Rapid advances have been made in the use of pharmacological analgesia and sedation for newborns requiring neonatal intensive care. Practical considerations for the use of systemic analgesics (opioids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents, other drugs), local and topical anaesthetics, and sedative or anaesthetic agents (benzodiazepines, barbiturates, other drugs) are summarised using an evidence-based medicine approach, while avoiding mention of the underlying basic physiology or pharmacology. These developments have inspired more humane approaches to neonatal intensive care. Despite these advances, little is known about the clinical effectiveness, immediate toxicity, effects on special patient populations, or long-term effects after neonatal exposure to analgesics or sedatives. The desired or adverse effects of drug combinations, interactions with non-pharmacological interventions or use for specific conditions also remain unknown. Despite the huge gaps in our knowledge, preliminary evidence for the use of neonatal analgesia and sedation is available, but must be combined with a clear definition of clinical goals, continuous physiological monitoring, evaluation of side effects or tolerance, and consideration of long-term clinical outcomes.

Analgesia and sedation during mechanical ventilation in neonates

BACKGROUND

Endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation are major components of routine intensive care for very low birth weight newborns and sick full-term newborns. These procedures are associated with physiologic, biochemical, and clinical responses indicating pain and stress in the newborn. Most neonates receive some form of analgesia and sedation during mechanical ventilation, although there are marked variations in clinical practice. Clinical guidelines for pharmacologic analgesia and sedation in newborns based on robust scientific data are lacking, as are measures of clinical efficacy.

OBJECTIVE

This article represents a preliminary attempt to develop a scientific rationale for analgesia sedation in mechanically ventilated newborns based on a systematic analysis of published clinical trials.

METHODS

The current literature was reviewed with regard to the use of opioids (fentanyl, morphine, diamorphine), sedative-hypnotics (midazolam), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (ibuprofen, indomethacin), and acetaminophen in ventilated neonates. Original meta-analyses were conducted that collated the data from randomized clinical comparisons of morphine or fentanyl with placebo, or morphine with fentanyl.

RESULTS

The results of randomized trials comparing fentanyl, morphine, or midazolam with placebo, and fentanyl with morphine were inconclusive because of small sample sizes. Meta-analyses of the randomized controlled trials indicated that morphine and fentanyl can reduce behavioral and physiologic measures of pain and stress in mechanically ventilated preterm neonates but may prolong the duration of ventilation or produce other adverse effects. Randomized trials of midazolam compared with placebo reported significant adverse effects (P < 0.05) and no apparent clinical benefit; the findings of a meta-analysis suggest that there are insufficient data to justify use of IV midazolam for sedation in ventilated neonates.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite ongoing research in this area, huge gaps in our knowledge remain. Well-designed and adequately powered clinical trials are needed to establish the safety, efficacy, and short- and long-term outcomes of analgesia and sedation in the mechanically ventilated newborn.

Summary proceedings from the neonatal pain-control group

Recent advances in neurobiology and clinical medicine have established that the fetus and newborn may experience acute, established, and chronic pain. They respond to such noxious stimuli by a series of complex biochemical, physiologic, and behavioral alterations. Studies have concluded that controlling pain experience is beneficial with respect to short-term and perhaps long-term outcomes. Yet, pain-control measures are adopted infrequently because of unresolved scientific issues and lack of appreciation for the need for control of pain and its long-term sequelae during the critical phases of neurologic maturation in the preterm and term newborn. The neonatal pain-control group, as part of the Newborn Drug Development Initiative (NDDI) Workshop I, addressed these concerns. The specific issues addressed were (1) management of pain associated with invasive procedures, (2) provision of sedation and analgesia during mechanical ventilation, and (3) mitigation of pain and stress responses during and after surgery in the newborn infant. The cross-cutting themes addressed within each category included (1) clinical-trial designs, (2) drug prioritization, (3) ethical constraints, (4) gaps in our knowledge, and (5) future research needs. This article provides a summary of the discussions and deliberations. Full-length articles on procedural pain, sedation and analgesia for ventilated infants, perioperative pain, and study designs for neonatal pain research were published in Clinical Therapeutics (June 2005).

Douleur du nouveau-né : traitement pharmacologique

Pain causes numerous physiological changes in neonates. All invasive procedures induce undesirable stress responses; theses responses can, however, be eliminated or reduced by a judicious use of analgesia. Even though a large number of analgesics and sedatives are currently available, most of them have not been studied in the neonate. At present, a precise understanding of the pharmacological mechanisms of analgesics is difficult because many interactions still remain unknown in the term and premature neonate. This article describes the main analgesics and sedative agents used in the neonate: morphine, fentanyl, sufentanil, alfentanil, nalbuphine, ketamine, midazolam, propofol, acetaminophen, and Emla cream. After a review of the literature regarding these drugs, some practical advices and suggestions for the treatment of procedure-induced pain, and background sedation/analgesia for ventilated neonates are given. It is also stated in this article that the best way to soothe pain in neonates is to combine non pharmacological and pharmacological strategies. At the national level, written guidelines should be prepared in order to improve pain management in the neonate.

Specific Newborn Individualized Developmental Care and Assessment Program movements are associated with acute pain in preterm infants in the neonatal intensive care unit

OBJECTIVE

The Newborn Individualized Developmental Care and Assessment Program (NIDCAP) is widely used in neonatal intensive care units and comprises 85 discrete infant behaviors, some of which may communicate infant distress. The objective of this study was to identify developmentally relevant movements indicative of pain in preterm infants.

METHODS

Forty-four preterm infants were assessed at 32 weeks' gestational age (GA) during 3 phases (baseline, lance/squeeze, and recovery) of routine blood collection in the neonatal intensive care unit. The NIDCAP and Neonatal Facial Coding System (NFCS) were coded from separate continuous bedside video recordings; mean heart rate (mHR) was derived from digitally sampled continuous electrographic recordings. Analysis of variance (phase x gender) with Bonferroni corrections was used to compare differences in NIDCAP, NFCS, and mHR. Pearson correlations were used to examine relationships between the NIDCAP and infant background characteristics.

RESULTS

NFCS and mHR increased significantly to lance/squeeze. Eight NIDCAP behaviors also increased significantly to lance/squeeze. Another 5 NIDCAP behaviors decreased significantly to lance/squeeze. Infants who had lower GA at birth, had been sicker, had experienced more painful procedures, or had greater morphine exposure showed increased hand movements indicative of increased distress.

CONCLUSIONS

Of the 85 NIDCAP behaviors, a subset of 8 NIDCAP movements were associated with pain. Particularly for infants who are born at early GAs, addition of these movements to commonly used measures may improve the accuracy of pain assessment.

Intravenous midazolam infusion for sedation of infants in the neonatal intensive care unit

BACKGROUND

The need for sedation for neonates undergoing uncomfortable procedures in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) has often been overlooked. Proper sedation may reduce stress and avoid complications during procedures such as mechanical ventilation. Midazolam is a short acting benzodiazepine that has been increasingly used in the NICU. However, the effectiveness of intravenous midazolam as a sedative in neonates has not been systematically evaluated.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether intravenous midazolam infusion is an effective sedative, as evaluated by behavioural and/or physiologic measurements, for critically ill neonates undergoing intensive care, and to assess clinically significant short and long term adverse effects associated with its use.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Literature search according to the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group search strategy. Randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials of intravenous midazolam use in neonates were identified by searching the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2002), MEDLINE (1985-2002), EMBASE (1980-2002), reference lists of published studies, personal files, and abstracts published in Pediatric Research from 1990-2002.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials of intravenous midazolam infusion in infants </= 28 days of age for sedation during mechanical ventilation or radiologic investigations were selected for review. Studies on midazolam use as an anesthetic or an anticonvulsant were excluded. Studies involving neonates and older infants and children were excluded if data for neonates could not be extracted.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data regarding the primary outcome of level of sedation (as evaluated by behavioural scales or physiologic parameters) were abstracted. Secondary outcomes including intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH), periventricular leukomalacia (PVL), death within 28 days of age, adverse effects associated with midazolam (hemodynamic and neurologic), days of ventilation, days of supplemental oxygen use, pneumothorax, length of NICU stay, and long term neurodevelopmental outcome were assessed. When appropriate, meta-analyses were performed using relative risk (RR), risk difference (RD), along with their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for categorical variables and weighted mean difference (WMD) for continuous variables.

MAIN RESULTS

Three trials were eligible for inclusion in the review. Data on level of sedation from the three trials could not be combined for meta-analysis because of differences in tools used to measure sedation levels. Two studies (Jacqz-Aigrain 1994, Arya 2001) showed a statistically significantly higher level of sedation in the midazolam group compared to the placebo group. The third study (Anand 1999) comparing midazolam to morphine and placebo found no statistically significant difference in sedation level among the three groups, but a statistically significantly higher level of sedation was found in the midazolam group compared with the placebo group during the treatment infusion. However, since the sedation scales used in all three studies have not been validated in preterm infants, the effectiveness of midazolam as a sedative in this population could not be ascertained. In the study by Jacqz-Aigrain et al (Jacqz-Aigrain 1994), blood pressure was statistically significantly lower in the midazolam group than in the placebo group on days one and two, although there was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of hypotension requiring albumin or vasoactive drugs between groups. The study by Anand et al (Anand 1999) showed a statistically significant higher incidence of adverse neurologic events (death, grade III-IV IVH, PVL) in the midazolam group compared with the other groups. In addition, meta-analysis of available data from two studies (Jacqz-Aigrain 1994, Anand 1999) showed a statistically significantly longer duration of NICU stay in the midazolam group compared to the placebo group (WMD 5.4 days, 95%CI 0.4, 10.5). Meta-analyses of other secondary outcomes showed no statistically significant differences between the midazolam and placebo groups.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

There are insufficient data to promote the use of intravenous midazolam infusion as a sedative for neonates undergoing intensive care. This review raises concerns about the safety of midazolam in neonates. Further research on the effectiveness and safety of midazolam in neonates is needed.