Review of outpatient procedural sedation clinics in a tertiary paediatric hospital in South Australia.

AIM: Procedures, such as immunisation and venepuncture, can be distressing for paediatric patients, especially those with needle phobia and neurodevelopmental disorders. Procedural sedation helps provide access to equitable health care in this population. The aim of this study was to evaluate the pilot outpatient procedural sedation clinics at the Women's and Children's Hospital and the impact on patient care and outcomes. METHODS: A prospective review was undertaken between July 2021 and May 2022 on all patients who attended the procedural sedation clinics at the Women's and Children's Hospital. These clinics were the COVID Specialist Immunisation Sedation Clinic (SISC) and Paediatric Sedation Clinic (PSC). RESULTS: There were 182 visits in a total of 110 children with a 92% primary procedure success rate. Sixty-three per cent of patients had neurodevelopmental disorders with autism spectrum disorder being most common. There was a significant reduction in anxiety scores pre- and post-sedation and a reduction in anxiety scores if patients were to return without the use of sedation. CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient procedural sedation is beneficial for a specific cohort of the paediatric population. This can also have a significant positive impact on patient care and potentially, long-term outcomes.

Subcutaneous nodules following vaccination.

Five patients presented to surgical clinics at our institution with subcutaneous nodules of the upper arm or thigh present for 6-18 months. Excisional or fine-needle biopsy was performed due to diagnostic uncertainty and parental concern. Histopathological examination revealed these to be cutaneous lymphoid hyperplasia in reaction to vaccine components. Nodular reactions with this histopathological pattern are well recognised within vaccine-related literature, but less commonly recognised in patients presenting to general paediatric or surgical clinics. This article reviews literature on delayed-onset nodule formation after vaccination and recommends observation and reassurance as mainstays of management of this largely benign entity.

DNA barcoding continues to identify endangered species of shark sold as food in a globally significant shark fin trade hub.

Shark fins are a delicacy consumed throughout Southeast Asia. The life history characteristics of sharks and the challenges associated with regulating fisheries and the fin trade make sharks particularly susceptible to overfishing. Here, we used DNA barcoding techniques to investigate the composition of the shark fin trade in Singapore, a globally significant trade hub. We collected 505 shark fin samples from 25 different local seafood and Traditional Chinese Medicine shops. From this, we identified 27 species of shark, three species are listed as Critically Endangered, four as Endangered and ten as Vulnerable by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). Six species are listed on CITES Appendix II, meaning that trade must be controlled in order to avoid utilization incompatible with their survival. All dried fins collected in this study were sold under the generic term "shark fin"; this vague labelling prevents accurate monitoring of the species involved in the trade, the effective implementation of policy and conservation strategy, and could unwittingly expose consumers to unsafe concentrations of toxic metals. The top five most frequently encountered species in this study are Rhizoprionodon acutus, Carcharhinus falciformis, Galeorhinus galeus, Sphyrna lewini and Sphyrna zygaena. Accurate labelling that indicates the species of shark that a fin came from, along with details of where it was caught, allows consumers to make an informed choice on the products they are consuming. Doing this could facilitate the avoidance of species that are endangered, and similarly the consumer can choose not to purchase species that are documented to contain elevated concentrations of toxic metals.

Inborn Errors of Immunity in Children With Invasive Pneumococcal Disease: A Multicenter Prospective Study.

BACKGROUND: In settings with universal conjugate pneumococcal vaccination, invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) can be a marker of an underlying inborn error of immunity. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence and characterize the types of immunodeficiencies in children presenting with IPD. METHODS: Multicenter prospective audit following the introduction of routinely recommended immunological screening in children presenting with IPD. The minimum immunological evaluation comprised a full blood examination and film, serum immunoglobulins (IgG, IgA and IgM), complement levels and function. Included participants were children in whom Streptococcus pneumoniae was isolated from a normally sterile site (cerebrospinal fluid, pleura, peritoneum and synovium). If isolated from blood, features of sepsis needed to be present. Children with predisposing factors for IPD (nephrotic syndrome, anatomical defect or malignancy) were excluded. RESULTS: Overall, there were 379 episodes of IPD of which 313 (83%) were eligible for inclusion and 143/313 (46%) had an immunologic evaluation. Of these, 17/143 (12%) were diagnosed with a clinically significant abnormality: hypogammaglobulinemia (n = 4), IgA deficiency (n = 3), common variable immunodeficiency (n = 2), asplenia (n = 2), specific antibody deficiency (n = 2), incontinentia pigmenti with immunologic dysfunction (n = 1), alternative complement deficiency (n = 1), complement factor H deficiency (n = 1) and congenital disorder of glycosylation (n = 1). The number needed to investigate to identify 1 child presenting with IPD with an immunologic abnormality was 7 for children under 2 years and 9 for those 2 years old and over. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the routine immune evaluation of children presenting with IPD of any age, with consideration of referral to a pediatric immunologist.

Revaccination outcomes of children with vaccine proximate seizures.

BACKGROUND: Seizures, whether febrile or afebrile, occurring within 14 days following vaccination can be considered as vaccine proximate seizures (VPSs). While the attributable risk and clinical severity of first febrile VPS is well known, the risk and clinical outcomes of VPS recurrence is less well defined. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of revaccination management and outcomes in children who experienced a VPS as their first seizure seen in Australian Specialist Immunisation Clinics between 2013 and 2017. Vaccination outcomes were compared between children who had a VPS as their only seizure (VPS only) and children who had further non-vaccine proximate seizures following their initial VPS (VPS+) prior to review at the clinic. RESULTS: We identified 119 children with a VPS as their first seizure, of which 61 (51%) went on to have other seizures (VPS+). Children with VPS+ were more likely to present at a younger age (6.2 vs 12.5 months, P = 0.03), with afebrile seizures (42.6% vs 15.5%, P = 0.002) compared to VPS only children. VPS recurrence on revaccination was uncommon in both groups, but more common in VPS+ children (12.5% vs 2.4%, P = 0.07). Having an epilepsy diagnosis, specifically Dravet syndrome, was associated with VPS recurrence (P < 0.001). Of the four children with Dravet syndrome who had VPS recurrence, all had status epilepticus following revaccination. CONCLUSION: In children who presented with a single VPS as their only seizure, VPS recurrence on revaccination was uncommon. Children who had multiple non-vaccine proximate seizures following their initial VPS (VPS+) were more likely to present with afebrile VPS, at a younger age and have a VPS recurrence with vaccination. In these children, particularly those aged < 12 months, assessment and investigation for diagnosis of Dravet syndrome should be considered and additional precautions for revaccination undertaken as they are at highest risk of VPS recurrence.

Immunisation and allergy in children and adults: A case-based approach.

BACKGROUND: Adverse events following immunisation (AEFIs) are often attributed to vaccine hypersensitivity. However, many of these possible allergic reactions are unlikely to be confirmed as true vaccine allergies but rather coincidental symptoms that may mimic an allergic reaction. OBJECTIVE: By using case studies, the authors show the variation of presentations of potential hypersensitivity AEFIs. Case studies are used to illustrate a general approach to investigation and management of these reactions. DISCUSSION: AEFIs are commonly seen in general practice, and it can often be difficult to differentiate between the underlying mechanisms. It is important to be able to identify a potential hypersensitivity reaction so that it can be reported to the appropriate local pharmacovigilance system and patients can be reviewed by immunisation specialists to evaluate, investigate and manage future immunisations where required.

Changing Epidemiology and Predisposing Factors for Invasive Pneumococcal Disease at Two Australian Tertiary Hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality in children. Universal pneumococcal conjugate vaccination has changed the epidemiology of IPD. In vaccinated children, IPD can be a marker of an underlying immunodeficiency. METHODS: This is a retrospective audit of children younger than 18 years with IPD admitted to 2 tertiary pediatric hospitals in Australia between 2011 and 2017. Data on predisposing conditions, immunologic evaluation, pneumococcal serotype, antibiotic susceptibility and treatment were collected. RESULTS: During the 7-year period, there were 131 presentations with IPD in 127 children; 3 children had recurrent IPD. Patients presented with sepsis (41%), empyema (29%), meningitis (18%), mastoiditis (12%), pneumonia (10%) and septic arthritis (4%). In 19 (15%) presentations, risk factors for IPD were present, including malignancy, hematologic disorder, chronic liver disease, chronic kidney disease and cochlear implant. Pneumococcal serotypes were determined in 78/131 (60%) of presentations: the most frequent serotypes were 19A (19%), 3 (13%), 7F (10%) and 19F (8%) and non-vaccine serotypes 22F (8%), 35B (6%), 15A (4%) and 38 (4%). Overall, 11% of isolates were non-susceptible to ceftriaxone. Only 36 patients (32%) had an immunologic evaluation, and 4 patients had proven or probable immunodeficiency. CONCLUSION: Although pneumococcal conjugate vaccine serotypes 19A, 3, 19F and 7F remain frequent causes of IPD, non-vaccine serotypes are emerging. Our data support vancomycin treatment for children with pneumococcal meningitis given 11% of our isolates were not susceptible to ceftriaxone. It is important to consider underlying conditions predisposing to IPD in a population with high rates of pneumococcal vaccination.

Vaccine Allergy? Skin Testing and Challenge at a Tertiary Pediatric Hospital in Melbourne, Australia.

BACKGROUND: The rate of true vaccine allergy is unknown. Children with potential IgE-mediated adverse events following immunization (AEFI) should undergo allergy investigation that may include skin testing or challenge. Previous protocols tend to be highly conservative and often suggest invasive testing for all, a practice not evidence based, technically difficult, and unpleasant in children. It has more recently been suggested that skin testing may be restricted to those with allergic-like events within the first hour and those with a history of anaphylaxis. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to describe the outcome of vaccine skin testing and challenge in children referred to a tertiary pediatric hospital with a potential IgE-mediated AEFI. The secondary aim was to identify any significant risk factors for vaccine allergy. METHODS: A retrospective review of all children (<18 years) who underwent vaccine skin testing (skin prick testing or intradermal testing [IDT]) or challenge over a 5-year period (May 1, 2011, to April 30, 2016) at the Royal Children's Hospital Melbourne is presented. RESULTS: There were 95 admissions in 73 children. Eight percent (6 of 73) of children had confirmed vaccine allergy (positive skin testing or challenge to the index vaccination). Two had positive IDT to a suspect vaccine but challenge negative to an alternative brand vaccine. Two had negative IDT but subsequent positive challenge and two had immediate urticaria on challenge without prior skin testing. All children in the positive group either had index reaction within 15 minutes of vaccination or had history consistent with anaphylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: The vast majority of children (92%) presenting with a potential IgE-mediated AEFI are able to tolerate challenge to a suspect vaccine without reaction. We present our investigation protocol recommending skin testing in all children with anaphylaxis and challenge with a suspect vaccine if negative testing or previous nonanaphylactic potential IgE-mediated AEFI.