Incidence and risk factors of unplanned intubation during pediatric sedation for MRI

Procedural sedation and analgesia in pediatric diagnostic and interventional radiology: An expert DELPHI consensus document developed by the ITALIAN scientific society of anesthesia, analgesia, resuscitation and intensive care (SIAARTI)

BACKGROUND

Children undergoing diagnostic and interventional radiology procedures often require sedation to achieve immobility and analgesia if the procedure is painful. In the past decades, leading scientific organizations have developed evidence-based guidelines for procedural sedation and analgesia in children outside of the operating room. Their recommendations are being applied to procedural sedation in radiology. However, some questions remain open regarding specific aspects contextualized to the radiology setting, such as elective prone sedation, the urgency of the procedure, when venous access or airway protection is required, and others.

AIMS

To address the unresolved issues of procedural sedation and analgesia in pediatric diagnostic and interventional radiology.

METHODS

An expert panel of pediatricians, pediatric anesthesiologists, intensivists, and neuroradiologists selected topics representative of current controversies and formulated research questions. Statements were developed by reviewing the literature for new evidence, comparing expertise and experience, and expressing opinions. Panelists' agreement with the statements was collected anonymously using the DELPHI method.

RESULTS

Twelve evidence-based or expert opinion incorporate are presented, considering risks, benefits, and applicability.

CONCLUSIONS

This consensus document, developed by a multidisciplinary panel of experts involved in the field, provides statements to improve the quality of decision-making practice in procedural sedation and analgesia in pediatric radiology.

Risks and benefits of anesthesia for combined pediatric procedures in the NIH undiagnosed diseases program

PURPOSE

The NIH Undiagnosed Diseases Program (UDP) aims to provide diagnoses to patients who have previously received exhaustive evaluations yet remain undiagnosed. Patients undergo procedural anesthesia for deep phenotyping for analysis with genomic testing.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed to determine the safety and benefit of procedural anesthesia in pediatric patients in the UDP. Adverse perioperative events were classified as anesthesia-related complications or peri-procedural complications. The contribution of procedures performed under anesthesia to arriving at a diagnosis was also determined.

RESULTS

From 2008 to 2020, 249 pediatric patients in the UDP underwent anesthesia for diagnostic procedures. The majority had a severe systemic disease (American Society for Anesthesiology status III, 79%) and/or a neurologic condition (91%). Perioperative events occurred in 45 patients; six of these were attributed to anesthesia. All patients recovered fully without sequelae. Nearly half of the 249 patients (49%) received a diagnosis, and almost all these diagnoses (88%) took advantage of information gleaned from procedures performed under anesthesia.

CONCLUSIONS

The benefits of anesthesia involving multiple diagnostic procedures in a well-coordinated, multidisciplinary, research setting, such as in the pediatric UDP, outweigh the risks.

Pediatric Sedation/Anesthesia for MRI: Results From the Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium

BACKGROUND

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the most common imaging procedure requiring sedation/anesthesia in children. Understanding adverse events associated with sedation/anesthesia is important in making decisions regarding MRI vs. other imaging modalities. No large studies have evaluated the practice of pediatric sedation/anesthesia for MRI by a variety of pediatric specialists.

PURPOSE

Utilize a large pediatric sedation database to characterize the patients and adverse events associated with sedation/anesthesia for pediatric MRI.

STUDY TYPE

Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data.

SUBJECTS

The Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium (PSRC) has 109,947 entries for sedations for MRI from November 10, 2011 through December 18, 2017.

ASSESSMENT

Patient demographics, sedative medications, interventions, and adverse events are described. Associations with adverse events were assessed. Trends in sedative medications used over time are examined.

STATISTICAL TESTS

Descriptive statistics, Chi-Squared and Fisher's Exact tests for categorical variables, logistic regression and assessment of trend using logistic regression and other method.

RESULTS

A total of 109,947 MRI-related sedations were examined. Most subjects (66.2%) were 5 years old or younger. Seizure or other neurologic issue prompted MRI in 63.7% of cases. Providers responsible for sedation/anesthesia included intensivists (49.3%), emergency medicine physicians (28.2%), hospitalists (10.2%), and anesthesiologists (9.8%). The most commonly used sedative agent was propofol (89.1%). The most common airway intervention was supplemental oxygen (71.7%), followed by head/airway repositioning (20.6%). Airway-related adverse events occurred in 8.4% of patients. Serious adverse events occurred in only 0.06% of patients, including three cases of cardiac arrest. No mortality was recorded. There was a statistically significant increase in the use of dexmedetomidine over time.

DATA CONCLUSIONS

Overall, adverse event rates were low. Sedation/anesthesia with propofol infusion and natural airway was the most common method used by this varied group of sedation providers. The use of dexmedetomidine increased over time.

EVIDENCE LEVEL

4 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 5.

The utility of the perfusion index as an indicator of anesthetic depth for repeated propofol sedation in children: An observational study

BACKGROUND

Children receiving proton therapy require repeated sedation. In this study, we aimed to investigate the utility of the perfusion index (PI) for evaluating consciousness level during repeated propofol sedation.

METHODS

In this prospective observational study, children aged from birth to 19 years old scheduled for proton therapy under repeated propofol sedation were enrolled. The primary outcome was the equivalence of PI values 5 min after anesthesia induction on consecutive sedation. Total consumption of propofol during sedation, time to reach the University of Michigan sedation scale (UMSS) score 1 after end of proton therapy, and duration of post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) stay were recorded.

RESULTS

The PI values measured 5 min after induction of anesthesia were not equivalent to each other in consecutive sedation except for the second versus third (1st vs. 2nd: 97.5% CI: -1.34, 0.91; p = 0.206, 0.034; 2nd vs. 3rd: 97.5% CI: -0.87, 0.94; p = 0.023, 0.036 3rd vs. 4th: 97.5% CI: -2.08, -0.26; p < 0.99, <0.001; 4th vs. 5th: 97.5% CI: 0.21, 2.28; p < 0.001, >0.99; respectively). In consecutive sedation, there was not a significantly different difference in the time to reach UMSS score 1 (p > 0.99, all) for total consumption of propofol, time to reach UMSS score 1 after the end of proton therapy, and duration of PACU stay.

CONCLUSIONS

During repeated propofol sedation in children, PI was insufficient to be used as an indicator of consciousness level assessment. However, we suggest that the information related to repeated sedation provided by this study may be helpful in clinical practice.