Chloral hydrate as a sedating agent for neurodiagnostic procedures in children.

BACKGROUND: Paediatric neurodiagnostic investigations, including brain neuroimaging and electroencephalography (EEG), play an important role in the assessment of neurodevelopmental disorders. The use of an appropriate sedative agent is important to ensure the successful completion of the neurodiagnostic procedures, particularly in children, who are usually unable to remain still throughout the procedure. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and adverse effects of chloral hydrate as a sedative agent for non-invasive neurodiagnostic procedures in children. SEARCH METHODS: We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Epilepsy Group. We searched MEDLINE (OVID SP) (1950 to July 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, Issue 7, 2017), Embase (1980 to July 2017), and the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register (via CENTRAL) using a combination of keywords and MeSH headings. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials that assessed chloral hydrate agent against other sedative agent(s), non-drug agent(s), or placebo for children undergoing non-invasive neurodiagnostic procedures. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the studies for their eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Results were expressed in terms of risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data, mean difference (MD) for continuous data, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). MAIN RESULTS: We included 13 studies with a total of 2390 children. The studies were all conducted in hospitals that provided neurodiagnostic services. Most studies assessed the proportion of sedation failure during the neurodiagnostic procedure, time for adequate sedation, and potential adverse effects associated with the sedative agent.The methodological quality of the included studies was mixed, as reflected by a wide variation in their 'Risk of bias' profiles. Blinding of the participants and personnel was not achieved in most of the included studies, and three of the 13 studies had high risk of bias for selective reporting. Evaluation of the efficacy of the sedative agents was also underpowered, with all the comparisons performed in single small studies.Children who received oral chloral hydrate had lower sedation failure when compared with oral promethazine (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.82; 1 study, moderate-quality evidence). Children who received oral chloral hydrate had a higher risk of sedation failure after one dose compared to those who received intravenous pentobarbital (RR 4.33, 95% CI 1.35 to 13.89; 1 study, low-quality evidence), but after two doses there was no evidence of a significant difference between the two groups (RR 3.00, 95% CI 0.33 to 27.46; 1 study, very low-quality evidence). Children who received oral chloral hydrate appeared to have more sedation failure when compared with music therapy, but the quality of evidence was very low for this outcome (RR 17.00, 95% CI 2.37 to 122.14; 1 study). Sedation failure rates were similar between oral chloral hydrate, oral dexmedetomidine, oral hydroxyzine hydrochloride, and oral midazolam.Children who received oral chloral hydrate had a shorter time to achieve adequate sedation when compared with those who received oral dexmedetomidine (MD -3.86, 95% CI -5.12 to -2.6; 1 study, moderate-quality evidence), oral hydroxyzine hydrochloride (MD -7.5, 95% CI -7.85 to -7.15; 1 study, moderate-quality evidence), oral promethazine (MD -12.11, 95% CI -18.48 to -5.74; 1 study, moderate-quality evidence), and rectal midazolam (MD -95.70, 95% CI -114.51 to -76.89; 1 study). However, children with oral chloral hydrate took longer to achieve adequate sedation when compared with intravenous pentobarbital (MD 19, 95% CI 16.61 to 21.39; 1 study, low-quality evidence) and intranasal midazolam (MD 12.83, 95% CI 7.22 to 18.44; 1 study, moderate-quality evidence).No data were available to assess the proportion of children with successful completion of neurodiagnostic procedure without interruption by the child awakening. Most trials did not assess adequate sedation as measured by specific validated scales, except in the comparison of chloral hydrate versus intranasal midazolam and oral promethazine.Compared to dexmedetomidine, chloral hydrate was associated with a higher risk of nausea and vomiting (RR 12.04 95% CI 1.58 to 91.96). No other adverse events were significantly associated with chloral hydrate (including behavioural change, oxygen desaturation) although there was an increased risk of adverse events overall (RR 7.66, 95% CI 1.78 to 32.91; 1 study, low-quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The quality of evidence for the comparisons of oral chloral hydrate against several other methods of sedation was very variable. Oral chloral hydrate appears to have a lower sedation failure rate when compared with oral promethazine for children undergoing paediatric neurodiagnostic procedures. The sedation failure was similar for other comparisons such as oral dexmedetomidine, oral hydroxyzine hydrochloride, and oral midazolam. When compared with intravenous pentobarbital and music therapy, oral chloral hydrate had a higher sedation failure rate. However, it must be noted that the evidence for the outcomes for the comparisons of oral chloral hydrate against intravenous pentobarbital and music therapy was of very low to low quality, therefore the corresponding findings should be interpreted with caution.Further research should determine the effects of oral chloral hydrate on major clinical outcomes such as successful completion of procedures, requirements for additional sedative agent, and degree of sedation measured using validated scales, which were rarely assessed in the studies included in this review. The safety profile of chloral hydrate should be studied further, especially the risk of major adverse effects such as bradycardia, hypotension, and oxygen desaturation.

Vitamin D deficiency and its risk factors in Malaysian children with epilepsy.

OBJECTIVE: Long-term use of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) is a significant risk factor for vitamin D deficiency in children with epilepsy. The aims of our study were to evaluate the prevalence and risk factors for vitamin D deficiency among Malaysian children with epilepsy. METHODS: Cross-sectional study of ambulant children with epilepsy on long-term AEDs for >1 year seen in three tertiary hospitals in Malaysia from April 2014 to April 2015. Detailed assessment of pubertal status, skin pigmentation, sunshine exposure behavior, physical activity, dietary vitamin D and calcium intake, anthropometric measurements and bone health blood tests (vitamin D, alkaline phosphatase, calcium, phosphate, and parathyroid hormone levels) were obtained on all patients. Vitamin D deficiency was defined as 25-hydroxy vitamin D [25(OH)D] levels ≤35 nmol/L and insufficiency as 25(OH)D levels of 36-50 nmol/L. RESULTS: A total of 244 children (146 male) participated in the study. Ages ranged between 3.7 and 18.8 years (mean 12.3 years). 25(OH)D levels ranged between 7.5 and 140.9 nmol/L (mean 53.9 nmol/L). Vitamin D deficiency was identified in 55 patients (22.5%), and a further 48 (19.7%) had vitamin D insufficiency. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified polytherapy >1 AED (odds ratio [OR] 2.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07-4.36), age >12 years (OR 4.16, 95% CI 1.13-15.30), Indian ethnicity (OR 6.97, 95% CI 2.48-19.55), sun exposure time 30-60 min/day (OR 2.44, 95% CI 1.05-5.67), sun exposure time <30 min/day (OR 3.83, 95% CI 1.61-9.09), and female (OR 2.61, 95% CI 1.31-5.20) as statistically significant (p < 0.05) risk factors for vitamin D deficiency. SIGNIFICANCE: Despite living in the tropics, a high proportion of Malaysian children with epilepsy are at risk of vitamin D deficiency. Targeted strategies including vitamin D supplementation and lifestyle advice of healthy sunlight exposure behavior should be implemented among children with epilepsy, particularly for those at high risk of having vitamin D deficiency.

Vitamin D deficiency among children with epilepsy in South Queensland.

This study evaluated prevalence and risk factors for vitamin D deficiency among children with epilepsy on long-term antiepileptic drugs treated in South Queensland, Australia. Children with epilepsy seen in a tertiary neurology clinic were contacted requesting bone health blood tests during winter of 2011. Vitamin D deficiency was defined as 25-hydroxy vitamin D levels <20 ng/mL, and insufficiency between 21 and 29 ng/mL. One hundred thirty letters were sent, with 111 (85%) subsequently having blood tests performed. Vitamin D deficiency was identified in 24 (22%) of 111 and an additional 45 (41%) of 111 had vitamin D insufficiency. Multiple logistic regression analysis identified children on >2 antiepileptic drugs or with underlying genetic etiologies were more likely to have vitamin D deficiency. High proportion of children on long-term antiepileptic drugs in Queensland risk vitamin D deficiency and insufficiency despite living in the subtropics. Vitamin D monitoring and supplementation is important in the management of children on long-term antiepileptic drugs requiring tertiary care in Queensland.

Evaluation and management of bone health in children with epilepsy on long-term antiepileptic drugs: United Kingdom survey of paediatric neurologists.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Current evidence indicates long-term use of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) is associated with impaired childhood bone health. The objective of this study was to ascertain the current clinical practice of paediatric neurologists managing children with epilepsy on long-term (>2 years) AED therapy, particularly against the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) current recommendation of vitamin D supplementation in patients on long-term AEDs at-risk of impaired bone health. METHODS: An internet-based survey of UK paediatric neurologists who routinely see children with epilepsy (n = 95) covered clinicians' epilepsy case-load and reflection on their current clinical practice with estimation of the frequency with which they considered various bone health issues. Responses were graded as 'frequent'(≥50%), 'sometimes'(25%-50%) and 'infrequent'(<25%). RESULTS: Overall response rate was 72/95 (76%). 3% frequently recommend prophylactic calcium and vitamin D supplementation, 6% frequently perform bone screening investigations, 7% frequently give bone health advice and 10% frequently enquire about skeletal risk factors. Clinical practices were not associated with epilepsy caseload (p-values 0.44-1). 84% infrequently performed bone health screening investigations. 54% of respondents indicated that, if performed, 100% would undertake bone profile, 64% 25(OH) Vitamin D, 18% PTH, 49% dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan and 13% bone X-ray. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of paediatric neurologists do not routinely consider bone health related issues in children on long-term AEDs. Greater emphasis should be placed on vitamin D supplementation in these children.