Endoscopic Versus Open Repair for Craniosynostosis in Infants Using Propensity Score Matching to Compare Outcomes: A Multicenter Study from the Pediatric Craniofacial Collaborative Group.

BACKGROUND: The North American Pediatric Craniofacial Collaborative Group (PCCG) established the Pediatric Craniofacial Surgery Perioperative Registry to evaluate outcomes in infants and children undergoing craniosynostosis repair. The goal of this multicenter study was to utilize this registry to assess differences in blood utilization, intensive care unit (ICU) utilization, duration of hospitalization, and perioperative complications between endoscopic-assisted (ESC) and open repair in infants with craniosynostosis. We hypothesized that advantages of ESC from single-center studies would be validated based on combined data from a large multicenter registry. METHODS: Thirty-one institutions contributed data from June 2012 to September 2015. We analyzed 1382 infants younger than 12 months undergoing open (anterior and/or posterior cranial vault reconstruction, modified-Pi procedure, or strip craniectomy) or endoscopic craniectomy. The primary outcomes included transfusion data, ICU utilization, hospital length of stay, and perioperative complications; secondary outcomes included anesthesia and surgical duration. Comparison of unmatched groups (ESC: N = 311, open repair: N = 1071) and propensity score 2:1 matched groups (ESC: N = 311, open repair: N = 622) were performed by conditional logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Imbalances in baseline age and weight are inherent due to surgical selection criteria for ESC. Quality of propensity score matching in balancing age and weight between ESC and open groups was assessed by quintiles of the propensity scores. Analysis of matched groups confirmed significantly reduced utilization of blood (26% vs 81%, P < .001) and coagulation (3% vs 16%, P < .001) products in the ESC group compared to the open group. Median blood donor exposure (0 vs 1), anesthesia (168 vs 248 minutes) and surgical duration (70 vs 130 minutes), days in ICU (0 vs 2), and hospital length of stay (2 vs 4) were all significantly lower in the ESC group (all P < .001). Median volume of red blood cell administered was significantly lower in ESC (19.6 vs 26.9 mL/kg, P = .035), with a difference of approximately 7 mL/kg less for the ESC (95% confidence interval for the difference, 3-12 mL/kg), whereas the median volume of coagulation products was not significantly different between the 2 groups (21.2 vs 24.6 mL/kg, P = .73). Incidence of complications including hypotension requiring treatment with vasoactive agents (3% vs 4%), venous air embolism (1%), and hypothermia, defined as <35°C (22% vs 26%), was similar between the 2 groups, whereas postoperative intubation was significantly higher in the open group (2% vs 10%, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: This multicenter study of ESC versus open craniosynostosis repair represents the largest comparison to date. It demonstrates striking advantages of ESC for young infants that may result in improved clinical outcomes, as well as increased safety.

Retrospective Comparison of Intranasal Dexmedetomidine and Oral Chloral Hydrate for Sedated Auditory Brainstem Response Exams.

OBJECTIVE: Satisfactory conditions for auditory brainstem responses (ABR) screening tests for pediatric hearing loss are usually achieved with oral chloral hydrate (CH) sedation. When the US manufacture of this drug was discontinued for business reasons, we developed an alternative sedation regimen using intranasal dexmedetomidine (IN DEX) 4 µg/kg. This institutional review board-approved retrospective study compared the efficacy and adverse effect profiles of these 2 sedative regimens. METHODS: Medical records of children receiving oral CH or IN DEX for ABR were surveyed for demographic data and times from sedative administration to start and completion of the ABR procedure and recovery times. We also noted if the examination was completed with or without interruptions, failed for inadequate sedation, and if predefined cardiorespiratory adverse events occurred. RESULTS: In the IN DEX cohort, the examination could be completed more frequently with a single dose of medication (P = .002). Satisfactory sedation in these patients permitted an earlier start of both the ABR examination and recovery to the awake status (P < .001 and < .045, respectively). Hypoxia requiring oxygen therapy was more frequent in the CH group. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective study found that IN DEX provides effective sedation for ABR examinations, with the benefits of an ability to begin the test sooner and complete the examination with a single dose, in addition to a decreased incidence of hypoxemia. A randomized controlled trial should test the hypothesis that the IN DEX technique is superior to the well-established standard oral CH regimen.

Treatment effects of dexmedetomidine and ketamine on postoperative analgesia after cleft palate repair.

Primary cleft palate repair may result in significant pain in the immediate postoperative period, which can lead to vigorous crying resulting in wound dehiscence and pulmonary complications. Effective pain control with opioids is the mainstay but administration on the floor has to be countered with the complications associated with their use, chiefly respiratory depression and sedation. We retrospectively examined the efficacies of intraoperative administration of intravenous (IV) dexmedetomidine (DEX) and ketamine (KET) to prevent early postoperative pain in children undergoing primary cleft palate repair and compared the results against relevant literature. The Texas Children's Hospital anesthesia database was queried to identify children undergoing a palatal surgery from December 2011 to December 2012. Inclusion criteria permitted completed primary palatal surgery without major complications and intraoperative administration of DEX or KET. The control group (CTRL) received no additional drug. A comprehensive literature review was performed. A total of 71 pediatric patients underwent palatal surgery during the study period with 46 patients qualifying for analysis. Although results were not significant, consistent trends were observed with regards to lower opioid requirements during the first 24 hours for both medications compared with the CTRL. KET also had shorter time to discharge. The literature review resulted in several studies supporting decreased postoperative pain end points for both DEX and KET. In our sample, DEX and KET reduced postoperative opioid requirements. KET seems to have the added benefit of a shorter hospital stay. These finding are supported in the literature. With further investigation, the addition of these drugs may serve to provide improved pain relief without over sedation in patients undergoing cleft palate repair.