Pediatric Procedural Sedation Using the Combination of Ketamine and Propofol Outside of the Emergency Department: A Report From the Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium

Regional Anesthesia as an Alternative to Procedural Sedation for Forearm Fracture Reductions in the Pediatric Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

Pediatric forearm fractures are common injuries in the pediatric emergency department (PED). Pediatric procedural sedation (PPS) is often required for forearm fracture reductions and pain control for casting. Bier blocks and hematoma blocks are types of regional anesthesia (RA) procedures that can be performed as a potential alternative to PPS.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to compare the safety of RA with that of PPS. We hypothesized that RA has a safety profile that is equal or superior to PPS as well as a shorter duration of treatment in the PED.

METHODS

Pediatric emergency department encounters in patients presenting with a diagnosis of radius fracture, ulna fracture, distal "both-bone" fracture, Monteggia fracture, and/or Galeazzi fracture were included. Outcomes of interest included patient adverse events (AEs), sedation medications used, PED duration of treatment (arrival time to disposition time), sedation failures, and reduction failures.

RESULTS

Propensity matching was performed resulting in 632 well-matched RA-PPS pairs. The PPS cohort had 13% of encounters with at least 1 AE compared with 0.2% in the RA cohort, P < 0.001. The most common AE in the PPS group was hypoxia (9.8%), and the only AE in the RA group was an intravenous infiltrate (0.16%). Within the matched cohorts, PPS required more medications than RA (100% vs 60%, P < 0.001). Ketamine alone was more commonly used in the PPS group than the RA group (86% vs 0.2%, P < 0.001). Propofol was used only in the PPS group. The average duration of treatment was 205 (SD, 81) minutes in the PPS group and 178 (SD, 75) minutes in the RA group ( P < 0.001). There were no reduction failures in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

Bier blocks and hematoma blocks are an acceptable alternative to PPS for children requiring forearm reductions. The AE rate is low and the reduction success rate is high. Duration of treatment in the PED is shorter for patients receiving RA compared with PPS.

[Anaesthesia and Sedation for Diagnostic Procedures in Children]

Constant medical progress leads to an increasing range of indications and consequently increasing number of diagnostic procedures in (early) childhood. To prevent lasting traumatization of children (and parents) and to ensure proper examination conditions, adequate (analgo-)sedation or general anesthesia is usually required for the appropriate management of diagnostic procedures in childhood, whether painful or not. The safety of young patients is the first priority. Administrations, hospitals, and each individual anesthesiologist are responsible for establishing structures, experience, and knowledge in this area so that children of all ages receive optimum care. In this article, the authors provide an overview of basic principles (structures, requirements, recommendations), currently used drugs, and procedure-specific examples for providing procedural analgosedation/anesthesia in children.

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.

Safety and quality in paediatric procedural sedation: what really matters?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review gives an overview of the safety aspects for paediatric procedural sedation and a discussion of possibilities for optimizing structure, processes and outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Procedural sedation in paediatric patients is performed by providers of different specialties and compliance with safety standards is a basic requirement regardless of provider specialty. This includes preprocedural evaluation, monitoring, equipment and profound expertise of sedation teams. The choice of sedative medications and the possibility of incorporating nonpharmacological methods play an important role for optimal outcome. In addition, an ideal outcome from the patient's perspective includes optimized processes and clear and empathetic communication.

SUMMARY

Institutions providing paediatric procedural sedation must ensure the comprehensive training of sedations teams. Furthermore, institutional standards for equipment, processes and optimal choice of medication depending on performed procedure and comorbidities of the patient must be established. At the same time, organizational and communication aspects should be considered.

The efficacy and safety of midazolam with fentanyl versus midazolam with ketamine for bedside invasive procedural sedation in pediatric oncology patients: A randomized, double-blinded, crossover trial

Children with cancer often require sedation before undergoing invasive procedures. Fentanyl, ketamine, and midazolam are effective drugs widely used for procedural sedation. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of midazolam-fentanyl (M-F) compared with midazolam-ketamine (M-K) for bedside procedural sedation among pediatric oncology patients. A randomized, double-blinded, crossover trial was conducted among children with cancer requiring procedural sedation for invasive procedures. Patients were randomly assigned either intravenous M-F or M-K and subsequently received the alternate regimens following the crossover design of the study. The efficacy and safety of the sedations including sedation time intervals, nausea score, vomiting episodes, pain score, adverse effects, and parent's satisfaction were evaluated. In all, 58 patients with 116 procedural sedations were enrolled. M-K provided a shorter induction time (0:58 vs. 1:23 min) (p = 0.005), but longer sedation (9:02 vs. 5:50 min) (p = 0.019) and emergence time (4:26 vs. 0:56 min) (p = 0.011) compared with M-F. Sedation routes affected the sedation time intervals. Patients had higher rates of vomiting (0, range 0-8 vs. 0, range 0-2) (p = 0.033) but experienced less pain (0 vs. 2) (p = 0.008) in the M-K group. Overall satisfaction and other adverse effects were comparable among both sedation regimens. Combined sedative drugs are recommended to improve the effectiveness of bedside procedural sedation. M-K provided shorter induction, but longer sedation and emergence time compared with M-F. These findings correlated with sedative routes. Patients receiving M-K experienced a higher rate of vomiting, but less painfulness compared with M-F. Overall satisfaction and tolerable side effects were comparable among both sedative regimens.

Pediatric Neuroanesthesia — a Review of the Recent Literature

Purpose of Review

Pediatric neuroanesthesia is a growing and still challenging subspecialty. The purpose of this review is to summarize the available knowledge and highlight the most recent findings of the literature on non-traumatic pediatric neuroanesthesia care.

Recent Findings

Several human studies have confirmed the negative effects of early life anesthetic exposure. According to non-human studies, volatile anesthetics and opioids contribute to tumor progression. Tranexamic acid effectively reduces perioperative blood loss; it is used in several different doses without standard guidelines on optimal dosing. The widespread use of neuromonitoring has necessitated the development of anesthetic methods that do not affect neuromuscular transmission.

Summary

Pediatric anesthetic neurotoxicity, management of intraoperative bleeding, and the effect of anesthesia on tumor growth are among the most debated and researched topics in pediatric neuroanesthesia. The lack of evidence and clinical guidelines underlines the need for further large prospective studies in this subspecialty.

The Impact of a Dedicated Sedation Team on the Incidence of Complications in Pediatric Procedural Analgosedation

The number of pediatric procedural sedations for diagnostic and minor therapeutic procedures performed outside the operating room has increased. Therefore, we established a specialized interdisciplinary team of pediatric anesthesiologists and intensivists (Children’s Analgosedation Team, CAST) at our tertiary-care university hospital and retrospectively analyzed the first year after implementation of the CAST. Within one year, 784 procedural sedations were performed by the CAST; 12.2% of the patients were infants <1 year, 41.9% of the patients were classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade III or IV. Most children received propofol (79%) and, for painful procedures, additional esketamine (48%). Adverse events occurred in 51 patients (6.5%), with a lack of professional experience (OR 0.60; 95% CI 0.42−0.81) and increased propofol dosage (OR 1.33; 95% CI 1.17−1.55) being significant predictors. Overall, the CAST enabled safe and effective procedural sedation in children outside the operating room.

Adverse events during sedation for oro-dental trauma in an Israeli paediatric emergency department

There is a paucity of data regarding the safety of the practice of sedation for oro-dental trauma in paediatric emergency departments (ED). A previous study reported the safety of intramuscular ketamine administered as a single agent. In the paediatric ED of a tertiary trauma centre in Israel, one of two ketamine-based regimens is used for sedating children with intraoral injuries according to the physician's discretion: a single dose of intramuscular ketamine or a combination of ketamine and propofol (KP) intravenously. The aim of this study was to assess the safety of KP sedation in children undergoing emergency treatment of oro-dental injuries in this paediatric ED. The primary outcome was sedation adverse events that required intervention (SAERI): prolonged oxygen desaturation and apnoea, laryngospasm, hypotension, bradycardia, partial or complete airway obstruction, and pulmonary aspiration. During the 2 years study period, 17 children were sedated with KP, 20 with intramuscular ketamine and 29 with nitrous oxide. Patients who were treated with ketamine-based sedation or with nitrous oxide sedation had a median (interquartile range, IQR) age of 3 (2-4) years and 7 (5-9) years, respectively. No SAERI occurred in patients who were sedated with intramuscular ketamine. One (3.4%) SAERI was reported in a patient who was sedated with N₂ O. Six/17 (35%) SAERI occurred in patients who were sedated with KP. These findings suggest that caution should be used when young children with oro-dental injuries are sedated with KP in the ED.

Trends in Pediatric MRI sedation/anesthesia at a tertiary medical center over time

BACKGROUND

Each year, hundreds of thousands of children require sedation/anesthesia to facilitate MRI scans. Anesthetic techniques for accomplishing sedation/anesthesia vary widely between institutions and providers, with unclear implications for patient safety.

AIMS

We sought to establish trends in anesthetic practice for pediatric MRI sedation/anesthesia across a 7-year period and determine rates of adverse events, considering technique used, age, and ASA physical classification status (ASA-PS).

METHODS

Using established data resources, we analyzed 24 052 anesthetics performed by anesthesiologists for MRI scans between 5/1/2013 and 12/31/2019 on patients less than 18 years old, focusing on medications used, trends of use, and associated adverse events. Adverse events (hypoxia, hypotension, bradycardia) were defined by deviation from age norms and accessed via the electronic anesthetic record database. The Cochran-Armitage test was used to assess trends over time in categorical data, and one-way ANOVA was used to analyze continuous data. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was implemented to determine the independent associations between anesthetic technique and adverse events while adjusting for age, ASA-PS, and weight.

RESULTS

The most significant trends noted were a decrease in "propofol-only" anesthetic techniques and an increase in propofol and dexmedetomidine combination techniques. Mild desaturation (80-89% SpO₂ ) occurred in 4.22% of cases with more significant hypoxia much rarer (0.44% of cases having desaturation <70% SpO₂ ). Bradycardia occurred in 2.39% of cases and hypotension in 1.75% of cases. Major adverse events were rare.

CONCLUSIONS

We provide the largest report of the nature of MRI sedation/anesthesia as practiced by anesthesiologists in a large children's hospital. We demonstrate that, even in a large system, anesthetic techniques are pliable and shift significantly over time. Our data also support a high level of safety within our system, despite a case mix likely higher in risk than those in most of the previously published studies.

Evaluation of pediatric procedural sedation education in pediatric emergency medicine fellowships

ABSTRACT

Pediatric procedural sedation (PPS) is often performed outside of the operating room, and by various sub-specialty providers. There is no consistency in how pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) fellows are trained in PPS. The objective of this study was to survey PEM program directors (PDs) and PEM fellows about their current sedation teaching practices via a direct survey. While many fellowship programs train PEM fellows in PPS, we hypothesize that there is no consistent method of developing and measuring this skill.A 12-question survey was sent to PEM PDs directly via email. A separate 17-question survey was sent to current PEM fellows via their program coordinators by email. Each survey had multiple choice, yes-no and select-all program questions. Responses were collected in an online (REDCap) database and summarized as frequencies and percentages.Based on identifiable email, 67 programs were contacted, with a PD response rate of 46 (59%). Sixty-two program coordinators were contacted based on identifiable email with 78 fellow responses. We noted that 11/46 PD respondents offer a formal PPS rotation. Thirty programs report using propofol in the emergency department and 93% of PD respondents (28/30) actively train fellows in the use of propofol. Approximately 62% of PEM fellow respondents (48/78) report sedating without any attending oversight. Twenty-eight percent of PEM fellow respondents report using simulation as a component of their sedation training.PPS is a critical skill. However, there is a lack of consistency in both education and evaluation of competency in this area. An organized PPS rotation would improve PPS case exposure and PPS skills.

Pediatric procedural sedation and analgesia in the emergency department: surveying the current European practice

Procedural sedation and analgesia outside the operating theater have become standard care in managing pain and anxiety in children undergoing diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. The objectives of this study are to describe the current pediatric procedural sedation and analgesia practice patterns in European emergency departments, to perform a needs assessment-like analysis, and to identify barriers to implementation. A survey study of European emergency departments treating children was conducted. Through a lead research coordinator identified through the Research in European Pediatric Emergency Medicine (REPEM) network for each of the participating countries, a 30-question questionnaire was sent, targeting senior physicians at each site. Descriptive statistics were performed. One hundred and seventy-one sites participated, treating approximately 5 million children/year and representing 19 countries, with a response rate of 89%. Of the procedural sedation and analgesia medications, midazolam (100%) and ketamine (91%) were available to most children, whereas propofol (67%), nitrous oxide (56%), intranasal fentanyl (47%), and chloral hydrate (42%) were less frequent. Children were sedated by general pediatricians in 82% of cases. Safety and monitoring guidelines were common (74%), but pre-procedural checklists (51%) and capnography (46%) less available. In 37% of the sites, the entire staff performing procedural sedation and analgesia were certified in pediatric advanced life support. Pediatric emergency medicine was a board-certified specialty in 3/19 countries. Physician (73%) and nursing (72%) shortages and lack of physical space (69%) were commonly reported as barriers to procedural sedation and analgesia. Nurse-directed triage protocols were in place in 52% of the sites, mostly for paracetamol (99%) and ibuprofen (91%). Tissue adhesive for laceration repair was available to 91% of children, while topical anesthetics for intravenous catheterization was available to 55%. Access to child life specialists (13%) and hypnosis (12%) was rare.Conclusion: Procedural sedation and analgesia are prevalent in European emergency departments, but some sedation agents and topical anesthetics are not widely available. Guidelines are common but further safety nets, nurse-directed triage analgesia, and nonpharmacologic support to procedural sedation and analgesia are lacking. Barriers to implementation include availability of sedation agents, staff shortage, and lack of space. What is Known: • Effective and prompt analgesia, anxiolysis, and sedation (PSA) outside the operating theatre have become standard in managing pain and anxiety in children undergoing painful or anxiogenic diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. • We searched PubMed up to September 15, 2020, without any date limits or language restrictions, using different combinations of the MeSH terms "pediatrics," "hypnotics and sedatives," "conscious sedation," and "ambulatory surgical procedures" and the non-MeSH term "procedural sedation" and found no reports describing the current practice of pediatric PSA in Europe. What is New: • This study is, to the best of our knowledge, the first to shed light on the pediatric PSA practice in European EDs and uncovers important gaps in several domains, notably availability of sedation medications and topical anesthetics, safety aspects such as PSA provider training, availability of nonpharmacologic support to PSA, and high impact interventions such as nurse-directed triage analgesia. • Other identified barriers to PSA implementation include staff shortage, control of sedation medications by specialists outside the emergency department, and lack of space.

A review of the clinical applications of ketamine in pediatric oncology

Ketamine is a dissociative anesthetic agent with excellent analgesic properties and a favorable safety profile. The feasibility and efficacy of various routes of administration have been established, including intravenous (IV), intramuscular (IM), oral, intranasal, rectal, and transdermal routes. The advent of newer anesthetic agents has led to a decline in the use of ketamine as an anesthetic, but its utility in short-term sedation and analgesia has expanded. Its value for chronic pain management in children with cancer is being increasingly recognized but requires more evidence. The use of topical ketamine is largely in investigational stages. Medical use of ketamine is, to a great extent, free from significant long-term neurological side effects. The objective of this review is to provide a brief account of the pharmacology of ketamine and primarily focus on the clinical applications of ketamine in pediatric oncology.

Adjuvant lidocaine to a propofol-ketamine-based sedation regimen for bone marrow aspirates and biopsy in the pediatric population

Pediatric patients with hematological malignancies repeatedly undergo painful bone marrow aspirates and biopsies (BMABs) in routine care. No standard sedation regimen has been established. This study evaluated the addition of injected local lidocaine to a propofol-ketamine sedation for BMAB and its effects on propofol dosing, safety, and efficacy. A retrospective analysis of children undergoing BMAB with propofol-ketamine with (PK+L) and without (PK-only) the injection of local lidocaine. Patients were matched through propensity probability scores. To measure efficacy, dosing, procedure length, and recovery time were evaluated. To assess safety, adverse and serious events were recorded. As an indirect measurement of analgesia, changes in heart rate and blood pressure were analyzed. Of the 420 encounters included, 188 matched pairs (376 patients) were analyzed. Patient demographics were comparable. The median dose of propofol was not significantly different between both groups. The incidence of adverse events was similar. There were no significant differences in the changes in heart rate and blood pressure with sedation between groups.Conclusion: This study suggests that the addition of local lidocaine injection to a propofol-ketamine sedation for BMAB pediatric patients does not affect the propofol dose, safety, or efficacy properties of the regimen. What is Known: •Although propofol is commonly used, there is no standard sedation regimen for pediatric patients undergoing bone marrow aspiration and biopsy. •Local lidocaine is used in analgesia in the adults undergoing the same procedure. What is New: •Local lidocaine adjuvant to propofol-ketamine sedation does not affect propofol dosing, the safety of efficacy properties of the regimen in the pediatric population.

Moderate and deep sedation for non-invasive paediatric procedures in tertiary maternity and children’s hospitals in China: a questionnaire survey from China

Background

Moderate and deep sedation are well-established techniques in many developed countries, and several guidelines have been published. However, they have received attention in China only in recent years. The aim of this study is to investigate current paediatric sedation practices in tertiary children’s hospitals and tertiary maternity and children hospitals in China.

Methods

All tertiary children’s hospitals and tertiary maternity and children hospitals registered with the National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China were invited to participate in an electronic survey, which included information on the sedation caseload, facility availability, staff structure, clinical skill requirements for sedation providers, fasting guidelines, patient-monitoring practices, and choice of sedatives.

Results

Fifty-eight of the 63 hospitals that completed the survey (92.1%) provided moderate and deep sedation. Dedicated sedation rooms and post-sedation recovery rooms were found in 14 (24.1%) and 19 (32.8%) hospitals, respectively. Sedation for non-invasive procedures was primarily performed by anaesthesiologists (69.0%); however, 75.9% of the sedation providers had not received paediatric basic or advanced life-support training. Children were asked to fast from clear liquids for at least 2 h in 44.8% of hospitals and up to 6 h in 5.2% of hospitals; they were asked to fast from solid food/milk for at least 4 h in 27.6% of hospitals and more than 8 h in 1.7% of hospitals. The most commonly used sedative in all groups was chloral hydrate. For rescue, propofol was the most widely used sedative, particularly for children older than 4 years.

Conclusions

Moderate and deep sedation practices vary widely in tertiary children’s hospitals and tertiary maternity and children hospitals in China. Optimised practices should be established to improve the quality of moderate and deep sedation.

Propofol versus dexmedetomidine during drug-induced sleep endoscopy (DISE) for pediatric obstructive sleep apnea

PURPOSE

To test for differences in DISE findings in children sedated with propofol versus dexmedetomidine. We hypothesized that the frequency of ≥ 50% obstruction would be higher for the propofol than dexmedetomidine group at the dynamic levels of the airway (velum, lateral walls, tongue base, and supraglottis) but not at the more static adenoid level.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective review was performed on children age 1-18 years with a diagnosis of sleep disordered breathing or obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) who underwent DISE from July 2014 to Feb 2019 scored by the Chan-Parikh scale sedated with either propofol or dexmedetomidine (with or without ketamine). Logistic regression was used to test for a difference in the odds of ≥ 50% obstruction (Chan-Parikh score ≥ 2) at each airway level with the use of dexmedetomidine vs. propofol, adjusted for age, sex, previous tonsillectomy, surgeon, positional OSA, and ketamine co-administration.

RESULTS

Of 117 subjects, 57% were sedated with propofol and 43% with dexmedetomidine. Subjects were 60% male, 66% Caucasian, 31% obese, 38% syndromic, and on average 6.5 years old. Thirty-three percent had severe OSA and 41% had previous tonsillectomy. There was no statistically significant difference in the odds of ≥ 50% obstruction between the two anesthetic groups at any level of the airway with or without adjustment for potential confounders.

CONCLUSION

We did not find a significant difference in the degree of upper airway obstruction on DISE in children sedated with propofol versus dexmedetomidine. Prospective, randomized studies would be an important next step to confirm these findings.

Efficacy and safety of intravenous thiamylal in pediatric procedural sedation for magnetic resonance imaging

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous (i.v.) thiamylal in pediatric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sedation.

METHODS

Infants and children from 1 month up to 8 years of age who underwent MRI in our hospital between April 2017 and March 2019 were included in this prospective observational study. Initial dose of 2 mg/kg thiamylal was given intravenously; however, additional doses were administered as needed. MRI was performed after adequate sedation was achieved. The primary endpoint was the success rate of MRI, while secondary endpoints were adverse events related to sedation, time to sedate, recovery time, and the dose of thiamylal.

RESULTS

A total of 118 patients were included in the analysis with median age and weight of 31.5 months (14.0-56.8 months) and 12.6 kg (9.5-15.7 kg), respectively. The success rate of MRI was 96.6% (114/118), and the median dose of thiamylal per body weight was 3.6 (2.8-4.0) mg/kg. The median time from the first dose of thiamylal to MRI was 7 min (4-10 min) and that from the end of MRI scanning to the confirmation of emergence was 8 min (5-25 min). Adverse events encountered included respiratory arrests (n = 3) and reduction in oxygen saturation (SpO₂; n = 9). There were no significant differences in the age, dose of thiamylal, sex, body weight, the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status, and neurological abnormalities between the groups with and without respiratory complications.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated an adequate efficacy and safety of i.v. thiamylal, with rapid sedation and patient recovery.

Pediatric Anesthesia Outside the Operating Room: Safety and Systems

Anesthesia care performed outside the operating room is a growing area of pediatric anesthesia practice. The anesthesiology team expects to care for children in diverse locations, which include diagnostic and interventional radiology, gastroenterology and pulmonary endoscopy suites, radiation oncology sites, and the cardiac catheterization laboratory. To provide safe, high-quality care the anesthesiologist working in these environments must understand the unique environmental, logistical, and perioperative considerations and risks involved with each remote location. This 2-part review provides an overview of safety and system considerations in pediatric nonoperating room anesthesia before describing in more detail considerations for particular remote anesthetizing locations.

Practice horizons in pediatric nonoperating room anesthesia

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Anesthesia outside the operating room is rapidly expanding for adult and pediatric patients. Anesthesia clinicians practicing in this area need a good understanding of the challenges of the NORA environment and the anesthetic risks and perioperative implications of practice so that they can deliver safe care to their patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent reports from large patient databases have afforded anesthesiologists a greater understanding of the risk of NORA when compared to anesthesia in the operating room. Descriptions of advances in team training with the use of simulation have allowed the development of organized procedural teams. With an emphasis on clear communication, an understanding of individual roles, and a patient-centered focus, these teams can reliably develop emergency response procedures, so that critical moments are not delayed in an environment remote from usual assistance.

SUMMARY

With appropriate attention to organizational concerns (i.e. team environment, safety protocols) and unrelenting focus on patient safety, anesthesiologists can assist in safely providing the benefit of cutting-edge technical advancements to pediatric patients in these challenging environments.

Trends in Outpatient Procedural Sedation: 2007-2018

BACKGROUND

Pediatric subspecialists routinely provide procedural sedation outside the operating room. No large study has reported trends in outpatient pediatric procedural sedation. Our purpose in this study was to identify significant trends in outpatient procedural sedation using the Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data from 2007 to 2018 were used for trending procedural sedation. Patient characteristics, medications, type of providers, serious adverse events, and interventions were reported. The Cochran-Armitage test for trend was used to explore the association between the year and a given characteristic.

RESULTS

A total of 432 842 sedation encounters were identified and divided into 3 4-year epochs (2007-2011, 2011-2014, and 2014-2018). There was a significant decrease in infants <3 months of age receiving procedural sedation (odds ratio = 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.96-0.98). A large increase was noticed in pediatric hospitalists providing procedural sedation (0.6%-9.5%; P < .001); there was a decreasing trend in sedation by other providers who were not in emergency medicine, critical care, or anesthesiology (13.9%-3.9%; P < .001). There was an increasing trend in the use of dexmedetomidine (6.3%-9.3%; P < .001) and a decreasing trend in the use of chloral hydrate (6.3%-0.01%; P < .001) and pentobarbital (7.3%-0.5%; P < .001). Serious adverse events showed a nonsignificant increase overall (1.35%-1.75%).

CONCLUSIONS

We report an increase in pediatric hospitalists providing sedation and a significant decrease in the use of chloral hydrate and pentobarbital by providers. Further studies are required to see if sedation services decrease costs and optimize resource use.

Propofol use in newborns and children: is it safe? A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To determine the main indications and assess the most common adverse events with the administration of hypnotic propofol in most pediatric clinical scenarios.

SOURCES

A systematic review of PubMed, SciELO, Cochrane, and EMBASE was performed, using filters such as a maximum of five years post-publication, and/or references or articles of importance, with emphasis on clinical trials using propofol. All articles of major relevance were blind-reviewed by both authors according to the PRISMA statement, looking for possible bias and limitations or the quality of the articles.

SUMMARY OF THE FINDINGS

Through the search criterion applied, 417 articles were found, and their abstracts evaluated. A total of 69 papers were thoroughly studied. Articles about propofol use in children are increasing, including in neonates, with the majority being cohort studies and clinical trials in two main scenarios: upper digestive endoscopy and magnetic resonance imaging. A huge list of adverse events has been published, but most articles considered them of low risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Propofol is a hypnotic drug with a safe profile of efficacy and adverse events. Indeed, when administered by non-anesthesiologists, quick access to emergency care must be provided, especially in airway events. The use of propofol in other scenarios must be better studied, aiming to reduce the limitations of its administration by general pediatricians.

Pediatric sedation in vascular malformations interventions by a non-anesthesiologist-feasibility and safety

OBJECTIVE

Sedation for pediatric patients undergoing interventional procedures in radiology is in increasing demand. Once only anesthesiology-performed, there is a demand for sedation services to perform sedations for these procedures. However, the safety of performing long sedations by non-anesthesiologists in interventional radiology has not been reported. This pilot study aimed at describing a single center's experience and outcome with sedation.

METHODS

This study reviews the sedations performed at a single center by a pediatric emergency physician who performed the sedation. The results regarding safety and satisfaction were reviewed.

RESULTS

A total of 52 sedations were documented. Four cases of significant adverse events and three adverse events occurred. In all cases, the procedures were completed. None of the patients required intubation or admission following the sedation. There was high satisfaction by the interventional radiologists.

CONCLUSION

This small pilot study shows that sedations for procedures in interventional radiology can be performed safely and successfully by dedicated non-anesthesiology sedation services. This may be considered as an alternative when anesthesiology service is not available.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

This small, single center pilot study examines the safety of sedation by a non-anesthesiologist for interventional radiology procedures. This may offer an additional method of performing procedures in the pediatric population while anesthesia is not readily available.

Incidence and risk factors for adverse events during monitored anaesthesia care for gastrointestinal endoscopy in children: A prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Better understanding of risk factors for adverse events during monitored anaesthesia care (MAC) for paediatric gastrointestinal endoscopy may improve outcome in children.

OBJECTIVES

To identify the prevalence and predictors of adverse events during MAC for paediatric endoscopy.

DESIGN

An observational study.

SETTING

Tertiary university hospital, single-centre cohort, from January 2010 to August 2016.

PATIENTS

The prospectively collected electronic anaesthetic records of 3435 children aged up to 16 years who underwent diagnostic gastrointestinal endoscopy under MAC were analysed retrospectively. Children with an American Society of Anesthesiologists' physical status at least 4, and those requiring mechanical ventilation and therapeutic or urgent endoscopy were excluded.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The prevalence and predictors of adverse events during MAC for paediatric gastrointestinal endoscopy, with particular reference to the use of different anaesthetic or sedative agents.

RESULTS

Mean ± SD age of the children was 8.5 ± 4.4 years. The incidences of adverse events and adverse respiratory events were 3.4 and 3.3%, respectively. Multivariate analysis identified 12 independent predictors: age [odds ratio (OR) 0.92, P = 0.002], children's size for example underweight (OR 1.78, P = 0.039), overweight (OR 2.20, P = 0.039), (morbid) obesity (OR 4.25, P = 0.006), presence of respiratory comorbidities (OR 8.18, P < 0.001), recent respiratory infection (OR 23.55, P < 0.001) or both (OR 17.46, P < 0.001), neurological comorbidities (OR 2.18, P = 0.007), upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (OR 5.66, P < 0.001), propofol co-administration with ketamine (OR 10.34, P < 0. 001) or after sevoflurane induction (OR 44.95, P < 0.001), and propofol induction dose (OR 18.97, P < 0.001). Posthoc secondary analyses revealed a significantly higher risk of adverse events (OR 3.9, P < 0.0001) and also significantly more respiratory comorbidities and respiratory infections (P < 0.0001) in children aged less than 2 years when compared with children aged at least 2 years. No cardiovascular events were observed and outcome was uneventful.

CONCLUSION

The present cohort demonstrated the feasibility and safety of MAC for paediatric gastrointestinal endoscopy by an experienced team. Although adverse events occurred rarely, their predictive factors were clinically identifiable. Applying this information in risk assessment and modifying anaesthetic management accordingly could improve outcome.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN70362666.

Results from the Adverse Event Sedation Reporting Tool: A Global Anthology of 7952 Records Derived from >160,000 Procedural Sedation Encounters

Background: The incidence of sedation-related adverse events, inclusive of both adults and children, administered by multiple specialty providers from different countries and venues, using standardized definitions, has never been reported on an international level. We are reporting the outcome data of the adverse event sedation reporting tool as an important step toward a more complete risk assessment of sedation-related morbidity, mortality, and etiology. The analysis of the AE sedation reporting data include descriptive measures to evaluate the characteristics of the provider, the patient, sedations performed, adverse events, interventions, and outcomes. The primary outcome was the rate and nature of adverse events. Between 12/14/2010 and 12/11/2018 there were 7952 sedations, from an estimated total of 164,114 sedations administered, of which 622 were reported as adverse events. The mean age of the entire patient population is 33.0 years (0.02–98.7). The providers represented 39 countries across six continents. Oxygen desaturation (75%–90%) for <60 s is the most prevalent adverse event with a rate of 7.8 per 10,000, followed by airway obstruction at a rate of 5.42 per 10,000. Apnea occurred at a rate of 4.75 per 10,000. Significant predictors of adverse events are ≥ ASA score III (p = 0.0003), procedure time (6:00 pm–12:00 am: p < 0.0001, 12:00–6:00 am: p = 0.0003), and non-hospital location (p < 0.0001). The AE sedation reporting tool has demonstrated that the majority of adverse events in children and adults who receive procedural sedation from multi-specialists internationally required minor interventions and had outcomes of minor risk.

Radiologic Imaging in Trauma Patients with Cervical Spine Immobilization at a Pediatric Trauma Center

BACKGROUND

Pediatric trauma patients with cervical spine (CS) immobilization using a cervical collar often require procedural sedation (PS) for radiologic imaging. The limited ability to perform airway maneuvers while CS immobilized with a cervical collar is a concern for emergency department (ED) staff providing PS.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the use of PS and analgesia for radiologic imaging acquisition in pediatric trauma patients with CS immobilization.

METHODS

Retrospective medical record review of all trauma patients with CS immobilization at a high-volume pediatric trauma center was performed. Patient demographics, imaging modality, PS success, sedative and analgesia medications, and adverse events were analyzed. Patients intubated prior to arrival to the ED were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 1417 patients with 1898 imaging encounters met our inclusion criteria. A total of 398 patients required more than one radiographic imaging procedure. The median age was 8 years (range 3.8-12.75 years). Computed tomography of the head was used in 974 of the 1898 patients (51.3%). A total of 956 of the 1898 patients (50.4%) required sedatives or analgesics for their radiographic imaging, with 875 (91.5%) requiring a single sedative or analgesic agent, and 81 (8.5%) requiring more than one medication. Airway obstruction was the most common adverse event, occurring in 5 of 956 patients (0.3%). All imaging procedures were successfully completed.

CONCLUSION

Only 50% of CS immobilized, nonintubated patients required a single sedative or analgesic medication for their radiologic imaging. Procedural success was high, with few adverse events.

Safety and Efficacy of a Propofol and Ketamine Based Procedural Sedation Protocol in Children with Cerebral Palsy Undergoing Botulinum Toxin A Injections

BACKGROUND

Pediatric patients with cerebral palsy often undergo intramuscular botulinum toxin (BoNT-A) injections. These injections can be painful and may require procedural sedation. An ideal sedation protocol has yet to be elucidated.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the safety and efficacy of a propofol and ketamine based sedation protocol in pediatric patients with cerebral palsy requiring BoNT-A injections.

DESIGN

Retrospective chart review.

SETTING

The sedations took place in a procedural sedation suite at a tertiary children's hospital from February 2013 through September 2017.

PATIENTS

164 patients with diagnoses of cerebral palsy undergoing propofol and ketamine based sedation for injections with botulinum toxin A.

METHODS

An initial bolus of 0.5 mg/kg ketamine followed by a 2 mg/kg bolus of propofol was administered with supplemental boluses of propofol as needed to achieve deep sedation during the intramuscular BoNT-A injections.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Propofol dosages, adverse events, serious adverse events, and sedation time parameters were reviewed.

RESULTS

345 sedations were successfully performed on 164 patients. The median total dose of propofol was 4.7 mg/kg (interquartile range [IQR]: 3.5, 6.3). Adverse events were encountered in 10.1% of procedures including hypoxemia responsive to supplemental oxygen (9.6%) and transient apnea (1.4%). The mean procedure time, recovery time, and total sedation time were 10, 11 and 33 minutes, respectively. With regard to patient variables, including age, weight, dose of propofol, sedation time, and Gross Motor Function Classification System classification, there was no association with increased incidence of adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Our sedation protocol of propofol and ketamine is safe and effective in children with cerebral palsy undergoing procedural sedation for intramuscular injections with BoNT-A. The adverse events encountered appeared to be related to airway and respiratory complications secondary to musculoskeletal deformities, emphasizing the importance of airway monitoring and management in these patients.

LEVEL

IV.

Shortened preprocedural fasting in the pediatric emergency department

BACKGROUND

There is no evidence of an association between fasting time and the incidence of adverse events during procedural sedation and analgesia. Pediatric and adult emergency medicine guidelines support avoiding delaying procedures based on fasting time. General pediatric guidelines outside emergent care settings continue to be vague and do not support a set fasting period for urgent and emergent procedures.

OBJECTIVE

To describe shortened preprocedural fasting and vomiting event rates during the implementation of a shortened fasting protocol.

METHODS

This was a prospective study of patients undergoing procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) in an urban, tertiary care children's hospital emergency center from March 2010-February 2012. All consecutive patients had documentation of preprocedural fasting time and adverse events recorded on a standardized data collection form.

RESULTS

PSA occurred in 2426 patients with fasting data available for 2188 (90.2%); 1472 were fasted ≥6 h for solids and 716 patients were in the shortened fasting group (<6 h). There is no evidence of an association between emesis at any time and shortened fasting time unadjusted (OR = 1.18 (95% CI 0.75-1.84) or adjusted for known risk factors including age >12 years, initial ketamine dose >2.5 mg/kg or total dose >5.0 mg/kg (OR = 1.14 (95% CI 0.74-1.75).

CONCLUSION

Analysis of a large prospective cohort study failed to find evidence of an association between emesis and shortened fasting time upon implementation of a shortened fasting protocol for procedural sedation and analgesia.