Sedation methods for transthoracic echocardiography in children with Trisomy 21-a retrospective study

Scoping review finds insufficient evidence on potential risks of procedural sedation with dexmedetomidine in children

AIM

Dexmedetomidine is commonly used in hospitals for sedation during procedurals. It has been considered safe even though studies have shown that it may cause bradycardia and hypotension. The aim of this study was to map the current evidence regarding potential risks of sedation of children with dexmedetomidine.

METHODS

Two database searches were conducted to gather all articles published through 30 January 2024 that matched the inclusion criteria. PubMed and Embase were chosen for the initial search. Search terms were chosen to create a broad systematic search that would include articles reporting adverse events during procedural sedation on children. From the included articles, data on type of sedation, administration, patient characteristics, endpoints and number of adverse events were collected.

RESULTS

After the initial search, 357 individual papers were screened and 41 papers were included. The most common adverse event reported was bradycardia. In almost 40% of the articles that measured oxygen saturation, one or more incidents of desaturation occurred. 27% reported that interventions to prevent further harm were preformed, most of the interventions were to improve oxygenation.

CONCLUSION

There is a need for further investigation regarding adverse events, especially respiratory adverse events during sedation with dexmedetomidine.

Evaluation of the Efficacy of Nasal Sedation Midazolam Compared with Dexmedetomidine in the Management of Uncooperative Children with Down Syndrome during Dental Treatment

Objective

This study aimed to compare the intranasal administration of midazolam and dexmedetomidine in uncooperative children with Down syndrome.

Materials and Methods

The sample consisted of 20 children with Down syndrome aged 5 to 11 years who were divided equally into two groups: Group 1 (experimental) nasal dexmedetomidine and Group 2 (control) nasal midazolam. The efficacy of both the drugs was evaluated according to Ohio State University Behavioral Rating Scale (OSUBRS), University of Michigan scale (UMSS), and Houpt general behavior scale.

Results

Both substances have been effective in the management of children with Down syndrome. There were no statistically significant differences for Ohio State University Behavioral Rating Scale (OSUBRS) (P value = 0.631), University of Michigan scale (UMSS) (P value = 0.739), and Houpt general behavior scale (P value = 0.481).

Conclusion

Both midazolam and dexmedetomidine nasal can be used to sedate children with Down syndrome.

Incidence and risk factors of bradycardia in pediatric patients undergoing intranasal dexmedetomidine sedation

BACKGROUND

Dexmedetomidine is widely used for non-invasive pediatric procedural sedation. However, the hemodynamic effects of intravenous dexmedetomidine are a concern. There has been a growing interest in the application of intranasal dexmedetomidine as a sedative in children.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the incidence of bradycardia in children undergoing intranasal dexmedetomidine sedation and to identify the associated risk factors.

METHODS

Data pertaining to pediatric patients who underwent intranasal dexmedetomidine sedation for non-invasive investigations at the Kunming Children's Hospital between October 2017 and August 2018 were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

Out of 9984 children who qualified for inclusion, 228 children (2.3%) developed bradycardia. The incidence of bradycardia in the group that received additional dose of dexmedetomidine was higher than that in the group that did not receive additional dose (9.2% vs 16.7%; P = .003). The incidence of bradycardia in males was higher than that in females (2.6% vs 1.8%; P = .007). On multivariate logistic regression, only male gender showed an independent association with the occurrence of bradycardia (odds ratio 1.48; 95% confidence interval 1.11-1.97; P = .008).

CONCLUSIONS

The overall incidence of bradycardia in children after sole use of intranasal dexmedetomidine sedation was 2.3%. Male children showed a 1.48-fold higher risk of bradycardia. However, the blood pressure of the children who developed bradycardia was within the normal range. Simple wake-up can effectively manage bradycardia induced by intranasal dexmedetomidine sedation.

Benefits and Harms of Mammography Screening for Women With Down Syndrome: a Collaborative Modeling Study

BACKGROUND

Women with Down syndrome have a lower breast cancer risk and significantly lower life expectancies than women without Down syndrome. Therefore, it is not clear whether mammography screening strategies used for women without Down syndrome would benefit women with Down syndrome in the same way.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the benefits and harms of various mammography screening strategies for women with Down syndrome using collaborative simulation modeling.

DESIGN

Two established Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) simulation models estimated the benefits and harms of various screening strategies for women with Down syndrome over a lifetime horizon.

PARTICIPANTS

We modeled a hypothetical cohort of US women with Down syndrome who were born in 1970.

INTERVENTIONS

Annual, biennial, triennial, and one-time digital mammography screenings during the ages 40-74.

MAIN MEASURES

The models estimated numbers of mammograms, false-positives, benign biopsies, breast cancer deaths prevented, and life-years gained per 1000 screened women when compared with no screening.

KEY RESULTS

In average-risk women 50-74, biennial screening incurred 122 mammograms, 10 false-positive mammograms, and 1.4 benign biopsies per one life-year gained compared with no screening. In women with Down syndrome, the same screening strategy incurred 2752 mammograms, 242 false-positive mammograms, and 34 benign biopsies per one life-year gained compared with no screening. The harm/benefit ratio varied for other screening strategies, and was most favorable for one-time screening at age 50, which incurred 1629 mammograms, 144 false-positive mammograms, and 20 benign biopsies per one life-year gained compared with no screening.

CONCLUSIONS

The harm/benefit ratios for various mammography screening strategies in women with Down syndrome are not as favorable as those for average-risk women. The benefit of screening mammography for women with Down syndrome is less pronounced due to lower breast cancer risk and shorter life expectancy.

Comparison of Intranasal Dexmedetomidine and Oral Pentobarbital Sedation for Transthoracic Echocardiography in Infants and Toddlers: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind Trial

BACKGROUND

Acquisition of transthoracic echocardiographic (TTEcho) images in children often requires sedation. The optimal sedative for TTEcho has not been determined. Children with congenital heart disease are repeatedly exposed to sedatives and anesthetics that may affect brain development. Dexmedetomidine, which in animals alters brain structure to a lesser degree, may offer advantages in this vulnerable population.

METHODS

A prospective, randomized, double-blind trial enrolled 280 children 3-24 months of age undergoing outpatient TTEcho, comparing 2.5 µg·kg intranasal dexmedetomidine to 5 mg·kg oral pentobarbital. Rescue sedation, for both groups, was intranasal dexmedetomidine 1 µg·kg. The primary outcome was adequate sedation within 30 minutes without rescue sedation, assessed by blinded personnel. Secondary outcomes included number of sonographer pauses, image quality in relation to motion artifacts, and parental satisfaction.

RESULTS

Success rates with a single dose were not different between sedation techniques; 85% in the pentobarbital group and 84% in the dexmedetomidine group (P = .8697). Median onset of adequate sedation was marginally faster with pentobarbital (16.5 [interquartile range, 13-21] vs 18 [16-23] minutes for dexmedetomidine [P = .0095]). Time from drug administration to discharge was not different (P = .8238) at 70.5 (64-83) minutes with pentobarbital and 70 (63-82) minutes with dexmedetomidine. Ninety-five percent of sedation failures with pentobarbital and 100% of dexmedetomidine failures had successful rescue sedation with intranasal dexmedetomidine.

CONCLUSIONS

Intranasal dexmedetomidine was comparable to oral pentobarbital sedation for TTEcho sedation in infants and did not increase the risk of clinically important adverse events. Intranasal dexmedetomidine appears to be an effective "rescue" sedative for both failed pentobarbital and dexmedetomidine sedation. Dexmedetomidine could be a safer option for repeated sedation in children, but further studies are needed to assess long-term consequence of repeated sedation in this high-risk population.