Clinical Outcomes Associated With Intranasal Dexmedetomidine Sedation in Children.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to describe the quality of sedation and additional clinically-meaningful outcomes associated with different intranasal dexmedetomidine-based regimens in children undergoing nonpainful procedures. METHODS: A multicenter prospective observational study of children aged 2 months to 17 years undergoing intranasal dexmedetomidine sedation for MRI, auditory brainstem response testing, echocardiogram, EEG, or computed tomography scan. Regimens varied by dose of dexmedetomidine and use of adjunct sedatives. Quality of sedation was assessed using the Pediatric Sedation State Scale and by determining proportion of children who achieved an acceptable sedation state. Procedure completion, time-based outcomes, and adverse events were assessed. RESULTS: We enrolled 578 children across 7 sites. Median age was 2.5 years (interquartile range 1.6-3) and 37.5% were female. The most common procedures were auditory brainstem response testing (54.3%) and MRI (22.8%). The most common dose was 3 to 3.9 mcg/kg (55%), with 25.1% and 14.2% of children receiving oral or intranasal midazolam, respectively. Acceptable sedation state and procedure completion was achieved in 81.1% and 91.3% of children, and mean time to onset of sedation and total sedation time were 32.3 and 114.8 minutes, respectively. Twelve interventions were performed in 10 patients in response to an event; no patients required a serious airway, breathing, or cardiovascular intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Intranasal dexmedetomidine-based regimens can achieve acceptable sedation states and high rates of procedure completion in children undergoing sedation for nonpainful procedures. Our findings delineate clinical outcomes associated with intranasal dexmedetomidine-based sedation that can be used to guide the implementation and optimization of such regimens.

Chloral Hydrate Sedation in a Dexmedetomidine Era.

Brief Overview: The use of chloral hydrate as the primary sedation agent has declined across the nation after commercial production of the liquid formulation ceased. Although alternative sedatives have gained popularity, some pharmacies have continued to provide oral chloral hydrate by compounding it from raw ingredients. Thus, oral chloral hydrate use has continued in children despite the availability of alternative effective agents. Objective: The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate institutional chloral hydrate utilization as the primary agent for procedural sedation. Design/Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of patients given chloral hydrate for procedural sedation from October 2010 to December 2016. The hospital pharmacy database of chloral hydrate use at our 2 free-standing children's hospitals was reviewed and matched to procedure billing data. Results: There were 5874 chloral hydrate administrations for procedural sedation during the study period. The highest rates of use occurred in 2014, when there were 1420 chloral hydrate orders within our hospital. The large majority of sedations were for cardiac studies/procedures (n = 4250, 72.4%). Conclusions: Despite significant declines in use of chloral hydrate for procedural sedation across the country, local utilization of oral chloral hydrate remains high. Recent declines may be due to high-use clinical sites transitioning to alternative sedatives such as intranasal dexmedetomidine.

Outcomes of Non-anesthesiologist-Administered Propofol in Pediatric Gastroenterology Procedures.

Background and Aims: Non-anesthesiologist-administered propofol (NAAP) has been found to have an acceptable safety profile in adult endoscopy, but its use remains controversial and pediatric data is limited. Our aim was to examine the safety and efficacy of NAAP provided by pediatric hospitalists in pediatric endoscopy. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 929 esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), colonoscopy, and combined EGD/colonoscopy cases in children aged 5-20 years between April 2015 and December 2016 at a large children's hospital. We analyzed the data for adverse events in relation to demographics and anthropometrics, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical classification score, presence of a trainee, comorbid conditions, and procedure time. Results: A total of 929 cases were included of which 496 (53%) were completed with NAAP. Seventeen (3.4%) of NAAP cases had an adverse event including the following: 12 cases of hypoxia, 2 cardiac, and 3 gastrointestinal adverse events. General anesthesia cases had 62 (14.3%) adverse events including the following: 54 cases of hypoxia, 1 cardiac, 7 gastrointestinal, and 1 urologic adverse event. No adverse events in either group required major resuscitation. NAAP vs. general anesthesia had a lower overall adverse event rate (3.4 vs. 14.3%, p < 0.0004) and respiratory adverse event rate (2.4% vs. 12.5%, p < 0.0004). Overall, cardiac and gastrointestinal adverse event rates between the two groups were comparable. When accounting for all captured factors via logistic regression, both younger age (P < 0.001) and general anesthesia (P < 0.0001) remained risk factors for an adverse event. Conclusion: The overall adverse event rate of NAAP was low (3.4%) with none requiring major resuscitation or hospitalization. This is comparable to studies of NAAP in adult endoscopy and suggests that NAAP provided by pediatric hospitalists has an acceptable safety profile.