Utilization of neonatal sedation and anesthesia: an SPR survey

"Feed-and-wrap" technique versus deep sedation for neonatal magnetic resonance imaging: a retrospective comparative study

OBJECTIVES

Neonatal MRI is usually performed under deep sedation, which is challenging-especially in low-weight premature patients. In addition, long-term side effects, such as neurotoxicity, are of concern. An alternative to sedation is to induce natural sleep by feeding and immobilising the child, the "feed-and-wrap" technique (FWT). The objective of this study was to evaluate differences in image quality between neonates examined under sedation and by using the FWT during the first four months of life.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively assessed image quality (based on a 4-point semiquantitative scale) of all MRI examinations in neonates performed at our institution between July 2009 and August 2022. Differences in image quality between examinations under sedation versus FWT were evaluated.

RESULTS

We included 432 consecutive patients, 243 (56%) using sedation and 189 (44%) using the FWT. Corrected age and body weight (mean ± SD: 3.7 ± 1.1 versus 4.5 ± 1.3 kg, p < 0.001) were significantly lower in the FWT group. The overall success rate in the FWT group was 95%. Image quality was slightly lower when using the FWT (mean ± SD: 3.7 ± 0.43 versus 3.96 ± 0.11, p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed a higher risk of acquiring sequences with diagnostic limitations in the FWT group (p < 0.001), increasing with corrected age (p = 0.048).

CONCLUSION

The FWT is a highly successful method to perform MRI scans in term and preterm neonates. Overall image quality is only slightly lower than under sedation. Especially in immature low-weight preterm patients, the FWT is a reliable option to perform MRI studies without exposing the child to risks associated with sedation.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

The "feed-and-wrap" technique enables high-quality MRI examinations in neonates, including low-weight premature patients. Deep sedation for diagnostic MRI procedures in this age group, which has the risk of short- and long-term complications, can often be avoided.

KEY POINTS

Deeply sedating neonates for MR examinations comes with risks. Image quality is only slightly lower when using the "feed-and-wrap" technique. The "feed-and-wrap" technique is feasible even in low-weight premature infants.

A survey of non-sedate practices when acquiring pediatric magnetic resonance imaging examinations

BACKGROUND

Improving access to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in childhood can be facilitated by making it faster and cheaper and reducing need for sedation or general anesthesia (GA) to mitigate motion. Some children achieve diagnostic quality MRI without GA through the use of non- practices fostering their cooperation and/or alleviating anxiety. Employed before and during MRI, these variably educate, distract, and/or desensitize patients to this environment.

OBJECTIVE

To assess current utilization of non-sedate practices in pediatric MRI, including variations in practice and outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A survey-based study was conducted with 1372 surveys emailed to the Society for Pediatric Radiology members in February 2021, inviting one response per institution.

RESULTS

Responses from 50 unique institutions in nine countries revealed 49/50 (98%) sites used ≥ 1 non-sedate practice, 48/50 (96%) sites in infants < 6 months, and 11/50 (22%) for children aged 6 months to 3 years. Non-sedate practices per site averaged 4.5 (range 0-10), feed and swaddle used at 47/49 (96%) sites, and child life specialists at 35/49 (71%). Average success rates were moderate (> 50-75%) across all sites and high (> 75-100%) for 20% of sites, varying with specific techniques. Commonest barriers to use were scheduling conflicts and limited knowledge.

CONCLUSION

Non-sedate practice utilization in pediatric MRI was near-universal but widely variable across sites, ages, and locales, with room for broader adoption. Although on average non-sedate practice success rates were similar, the range in use and outcomes suggest a need for standardized implementation guidelines, including patient selection and outcome metrics, to optimize utilization and inform educational initiatives.

French survey of sedation practices for pediatric magnetic resonance and computed tomography imaging

BACKGROUND

Pediatric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tompgraphy (CT) require patient immobility and therefore often require sedation or general anesthesia of patients. Consensus on these procedures is lacking in France.

OBJECTIVE

Thus, the aim of this study was to describe the current sedation practices for pediatric MRI and CT in France.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

From January 2019 to December 2019, an online questionnaire was delivered by electronic mail to a representative radiologist in 60 pediatric radiology centers registered by the French-speaking pediatric and prenatal imaging society. Questions included protocols, drugs used, monitoring and side effects.

RESULTS

Representatives of 40 of the 60 (67%) radiology centers responded to the survey. Among them, 31 performed sedation including 17 (55%) centers where radiologists performed sedation without anesthesiologists present during the procedure. The premedication drugs were hydroxyzine (n = 8, 80%) and melatonin (n = 2, 20%), Sedation drugs used for children ages 0 to 6 years old were pentobarbital (n = 9, 60%), midazolam (n = 2, 13%), chloral hydrate (n = 2, 13%), diazepam (n = 1, 6.5%) and chlorpromazine (n = 1, 6.5%). A written sedation protocol was available in 10/17 (59%) centers. In 6/17 (35%) centers, no monitoring was used during the procedures. Blood pressure monitoring and capnography were rarely used (< 10%) and post-sedation monitoring was heterogeneous. No life-threatening adverse effect was reported, but 6 centers reported at least one incident per year.

CONCLUSION

For half of the responding radiology centers, radiologists performed sedation alone in agreement with the local anesthesiology team. Sedation procedures and monitoring were heterogenous among centers. Adjustment and harmonization of the practices according to the capacity of each center may be useful.