Comparison of the effects of ketamine via nebulization versus different pharmacological approaches in pediatric sedation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Nebulized drug delivery is commonly used in pediatric clinical practice. The growing number of literatures have reported the application of nebulized ketamine in pediatric sedation in recent years. This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy and safety of nebulized ketamine versus different pharmacological approaches was conducted to estimate the effects of this technique in pediatric sedation. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from inception to Feb 2023. All randomized controlled trials used nebulized ketamine as presurgical and pre-procedural sedatives in children were included. Sedative effects and various adverse events were considered as the outcomes. RESULTS: Ten studies with 727 pediatric patients were enrolled. Compared to nebulized dexmedetomidine, using of ketamine via nebulization showed similar sedation satisfaction (54.79% vs. 60.69%, RR = 0.88, with 95%CI [0.61, 1.27]), success rate of parental separation (57.27% vs. 73.64%, RR = 0.81, with 95%CI [0.61, 1.08]), and mask acceptability (37.27% vs. 52.73%, RR = 0.71, with 95%CI [0.45, 1.10]). However, the using of combination of two medications (nebulized ketamine plus nebulized dexmedetomidine) was associated with better sedative satisfaction (33.82% vs. 68.11%, RR = 0.50, with 95%CI [0.27, 0.92]) and more satisfactory mask acceptance (45.59% vs. 71.01%, RR = 0.69, with 95%CI [0.56, 0.86]). Compared with nebulized ketamine, using of nebulized dexmedetomidine was associated with less incidence of emergence agitation (18.18% vs. 3.33%, RR = 4.98, with 95%CI [1.88, 13.16]). CONCLUSIONS: Based on current evidences, compared to nebulized dexmedetomidine, nebulized ketamine provides inconspicuous advantages in pediatric sedation, and it has a relatively high incidence of emergence agitation. Combination of nebulized ketamine and dexmedetomidine might be considered as one preferred option in pediatric sedation as it can provide more satisfactory sedative effects. However, there is insufficient evidence regarding nebulized ketamine versus ketamine administered through other routes and nebulized ketamine versus other sedatives. The overall low or moderate quality of evidence evaluated by the GRADE system also calls for more high-quality studies with larger sample sizes in future. RESEARCH REGISTRATION: The protocol of present study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023403226).

Incidence and risk factors of drug-induced kidney injury in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To comprehensively summarize the incidence and risk factors of drug-induced kidney injury (DIKI) in children. METHODS: We systematically searched seven databases from inception to November 2022. Two independent reviewers selected studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. Meta-analyses were conducted to quantify the incidence and risk factors of DIKI in children. RESULTS: A total of 69 studies comprising 195,894 pediatric patients were included. Overall, the incidence of DIKI in children was 18.2% (95%CI: 16.4%-20.1%). The incidence of DIKI in critically ill children (19.6%, 95%CI: 15.9%-23.3%) was higher than that in non-critically ill children (16.1%, 95%CI: 12.9%-19.4%). Moreover, the risk factors for DIKI in children were intensive care unit (ICU) admission (OR = 1.59, 95% CI: 1.42-1.78, P = 0.000), treatment days (OR = 1.04, 95% CI: 1.03-1.05, P = 0.000), surgical intervention (OR = 1.43, 95% CI: 1.00-2.02, P = 0.048), infection (OR = 2.30, 95% CI: 1.44-3.66, P = 0.000), patent ductus arteriosus (OR = 4.78, 95% CI: 1.82-12.57, P = 0.002), chronic kidney disease (OR = 2.78, 95% CI: 1.92-4.02, P = 0.000), combination with antibacterial agents (OR = 1.98, 95% CI: 1.54-2.55, P = 0.000), diuretics (OR = 1.97, 95% CI: 1.51-2.56, P = 0.000), combination with antiviral agents (OR = 1.50, 95% CI: 1.11-2.04, P = 0.008), combination with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (OR = 1.79, 95% CI: 1.40-2.28, P = 0.000), and combination with immunosuppressive agents (OR = 2.84, 95% CI: 1.47-5.47, P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: The incidence of DIKI in children is high, especially in critically ill children. Identifying high-risk groups and determining safer treatments is critical to reducing the incidence of DIKI in children. In clinical practice, clinicians should adjust medication regimens for high-risk pediatric groups, such as ICU admission, some underlying diseases, combination with nephrotoxic drugs, etc., and regularly evaluate kidney function throughout treatment.

Availability of essential medicines, progress and regional distribution in China: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Essential medicines are the backbone of healthcare and meet the priority healthcare needs of the population. However, approximately one-third of the global population does not have access to essential medicines. Although China formulated essential medicine policies in 2009, the progress of availability of essential medicines and regional variations remains unknown. Therefore, this study was conducted to evaluate the availability of essential medicines, their progress, and regional distribution in China in the last decade. Methods: We searched eight databases from their inception to February 2022, relevant websites, and reference lists of included studies. Two reviewers selected studies, extracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias independently. Meta-analyses were performed to quantify the availability of essential medicines, their progress, and regional distribution. Results: Overall 36 cross-sectional studies conducted from 2009 to 2019 were included, with regional data for 14 provinces. The availability of essential medicines in 2015-2019 [28.1%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 26.4-29.9%] was similar to that in 2009-2014 (29.4%, 95% CI: 27.5-31.3%); lower in the Western region (19.8%, 95% CI: 18.1-21.5%) than Eastern (33.8%, 95% CI: 31.6-36.1%) and Central region (34.5%, 95% CI: 30.6-38.5%); very low for 8 Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) categories (57.1%), and low for 5 categories (35.7%) among all ATC groups. Conclusion: The availability of essential medicines in China is low compared with the World Health Organization goal, has not changed much in the last decade, is unequal across regions, and lacks data for half of provinces. For policy-making, the monitoring system of the availability of essential medicines is to be strengthened to enable long-term surveillance, especially in provinces where the data has been missing. Meanwhile, Joint efforts from all stakeholders are warranted to improve the availability of essential medicines in China toward the universal health coverage target. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=315267, identifier: PROSPERO CRD42022315267.

The price and affordability of essential medicines, progress and regional distribution in China: a systematic review.

Background: Essential medicine is a vital component to assure universal access to quality healthcare. However, the trend of affordability to essential medicines in China and its regional differences were not yet fully understood. This study aimed to systematically evaluate the price and affordability of essential medicines, their progress, and regional distribution in China in the last decades. Methods: We searched seven databases and three websites for potentially eligible studies from inception until March 2022. Studies on the price and affordability of essential medicines investigated in China were included. Median and interquartile range (IQR) was used to describe the price and affordability of essential medicines, and compared in three periods, before 2009, from 2009 to 2014, and from 2015 to 2019. Subgroup analysis was performed to examine the price and affordability by regions, health facilities, and ATC categories of medicines. The study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022310173). Results: A total of 65 studies including 11,639 health facilities investigated between 2006 and 2019 were included in this review. Median price ratios (MPR) and affordability of essential medicines were reported in 44 studies and 50 studies, respectively. The median MPRs of essential medicines in China was 1.59 (IQR: 5.39), with a tendency to rise first and then fall from 2006 to 2019. And the median affordability was equal to 0.88 (IQR: 2.58) days' wage of the lowest paid unskilled government worker, but steadily rose from 2006 to 2019. Subgroup analysis showed that the affordability in the western region (1.40, IQR: 2.88), urban area (0.95, IQR: 2.80), private sector (0.90, IQR: 2.30), of originator brands (OB) (2.90, IQR: 6.68), and antineoplastic and immunomodulating agents (5.68, IQR: 56.47) were worse than their counterparts. Conclusion: The prices of essential medicine were higher than international level, the overall affordability of essential medicines in China is acceptable but poor in the western region, for OB drugs and anti-cancer medicines. Further national essential medicine policies are needed to reduce regional disparities and improve the affordability of expensive drugs. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails.

Efficacy and safety of oral versus intranasal midazolam as premedication in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Midazolam hydrochloride is a widely accepted benzodiazepine for premedication in pediatric patients. However, there is no consistent conclusion regarding which route of administration is best. We performed a meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of oral versus intranasal midazolam premedication in children. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases were searched from inception to June 2022, for randomized controlled trials comparing oral versus intranasal midazolam. Primary outcomes included satisfactory mask acceptance for induction and satisfactory sedation at separation from parents. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, incidence of nasal irritation, postoperative recovery time, and hemodynamic changes. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Data from 14 studies involving a total of 901 children were obtained. The results indicated that intranasal and oral midazolam premedication in children provided similar satisfactory mask acceptance for induction (RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.93-1.13; P=0.64; I2=0%), satisfactory sedation at separation from parents (RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.89-1.10; P=0.90; I2=57%), and postoperative recovery time (WMD, -8.01; 95% CI, -20.16-4.14; P=0.20; I2=85%). Additionally, intranasal midazolam premedication was associated with lower incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (RR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.51-0.96; P=0.03; I2=0%) and shorter onset time. CONCLUSIONS: Differences between intranasal and oral midazolam in satisfactory mask acceptance for induction, satisfactory sedation at separation from parents, and postoperative recovery time were not significant. Intranasal midazolam premedication was associated with shorter onset time and higher incidence of nasal irritation.

A comparative evaluation of intranasal α2-adrenoceptor agonists and intranasal midazolam as premedication in pediatric sedation: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Midazolam and α2-adrenoceptor agonists have been widely used off-label as intranasal sedatives for children. The present meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of two interventions in pediatric sedation. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to April 2022. All randomized controlled trials used intranasal α2-adrenoceptor agonists and midazolam as sedatives in children were enrolled. Parental separation, anesthesia induction or facemask acceptance, sedation level, different hemodynamic parameters and adverse events were considered as outcomes. RESULTS: Totally 21 studies with 1,495 patients were included. Only one study reported comparison between midazolam and clonidine met the inclusion criteria, and patients in clonidine group had significantly better mask acceptance compared to midazolam group. Compared with midazolam, using of dexmedetomidine was associated with higher rate of satisfactory parental separation (52.88% vs 75.18%, RR = 0.70, with 95%CI [0.55, 0.90]), anesthesia induction or facemask acceptance (60.92% vs 81.47%, RR = 0.76, 95% CI [0.68, 0.84]) and less incidence of postoperative pain and nasal irritation. CONCLUSION: Compared with midazolam, dexmedetomidine should be considered as the preferred intranasal sedative option for pediatric patients, since it provides more satisfactory sedative level with less incidence of several side effects. But insufficient evidences about effects of intranasal clonidine and overall low and moderate quality evidences evaluated by GRADE system indicate that superiority of intranasal α2-adrenoceptor agonists in pediatric sedation needs to be validated by more studies with high quality and large sample size in future.

Efficacy and safety of intranasal midazolam versus intranasal ketamine as sedative premedication in pediatric patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Intranasal midazolam and ketamine have been widely used as sedative premedication in children. It is difficult to determine which one yields better sedative effects for clinical practice. We conducted the present meta-analysis by summarizing the evidences to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intranasal midazolam versus intranasal ketamine as sedative premedication in pediatric patients. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from inception to April 2022. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) used intranasal midazolam and ketamine as sedatives in children were enrolled. The risk of bias in RCTs was assessed by Cochrane risk of bias tool. Condition of parental separation, anesthesia induction or facemask acceptance, sedation level, different hemodynamic parameters and adverse events were considered as the outcomes in our study. RESULTS: A total of 16 studies with 1066 patients were enrolled. Compared with midazolam, administration of intranasal ketamine might be associated with severer changes in hemodynamics parameters including mean blood pressure (SMD = -0.53, with 95% CI [-0.93, -0.13]) and heart rate (HR) (SMD = -1.39, with 95% CI [-2.84, 0.06]). Meanwhile, administration of intranasal midazolam was associated with more satisfactory sedation level (61.76% vs 40.74%, RR = 1.53, with 95%CI [1.28, 1.83]), more rapid onset of sedation (SMD = -0.59, with 95%CI [-0.90, -0.28]) and more rapid recovery (SMD = -1.06, with 95%CI [-1.83, -0.28]). Current evidences also indicated that the differences of various adverse effects between two groups were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Given that administration of midazolam via intranasal route provides more satisfactory sedative level with less fluctuation of hemodynamics parameters and more rapid onset and recovery, it might be considered as the preferred sedative premedication for pediatric patients compared to ketamine. However, the widespread evidences with low or moderate quality indicated that superiority of intranasal midazolam in pediatric sedation needs to be confirmed by more studies with high quality and large sample size in future. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol of present study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022321348).

Efficacy and safety of sugammadex for neuromuscular blockade reversal in pediatric patients: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with trial sequential analysis.

BACKGROUND: A recent survey revealed that extensive off-label use of sugammadex in pediatric anesthesia deserved particular attention. The present study with trial sequential analysis (TSA) aimed to evaluate the effects of sugammadex for antagonizing neuromuscular blockade (NMB) in pediatric patients, and to investigate whether the findings achieved the required information size to draw conclusions. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) were searched from inception to April 2021. All randomized controlled trials used sugammadex as reversal agent in pediatric patients were enrolled. Time from NMB reversal to recovery of the train-of-four ratio (TOFr) to 0.9 and extubation time were considered as co-primary outcomes, and incidences of adverse events were considered as secondary outcomes. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system was used to rate the quality of evidences. RESULTS: Data from 18 studies involving 1,065 pediatric patients were acquired. The results revealed that use of sugammadex was associated with shorter duration from administration of reversal agents to TOFr > 0.9 (MD = -14.42, with 95% CI [-17.08, -11.75]) and shorter interval from reversal from NMB to extubation (MD = -13.98, with 95% CI [-16.70, -11.26]) compared to control groups. TSA also indicated that the current sample sizes were sufficient with unnecessary further trials. Analysis of secondary outcomes indicated that administration of sugammadex was associated with less incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), bradycardia, and dry mouth compared to control groups. CONCLUSION: Considering of satisfactory and rapid neuromuscular blockade reversal with low incidences of adverse events, sugammadex might be considered as the preferred option for children in clinical anesthesia practice compared to acetylcholinesterase inhibitors. However, overall low-quality evidences in present study rated by GRADE system indicated that superiority of sugammadex employed in pediatric patients needs to be confirmed by more studies with high quality and large sample size in future.

Evaluation of analgesic effects and safety of quadratus lumborum block in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: Recent years have witnessed the rapid expansion of quadratus lumborum block (QLB) technique in laparoscopic surgeries. However, inconsistent conclusions from latest studies prompted us to conduct present study to evaluate comprehensively the effects of QLB in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Databases including PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to March 2021 by us. Randomized controlled trials comparing QLB versus placebo or different block techniques were involved. Co-primary outcomes included number of patients requiring additional analgesia, opioids consumption and incidence of postoperative nausea/vomiting (PONV). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Data from 20 studies involving a total of 1,332 patients were acquired. Based on the current evidences, the results indicated that application of QLB was associated with less number of patients requiring additional analgesia (RR=0.67, with 95% CI [0.49, 0.91]), reduced intraoperative opioid consumption (SMD -0.97 with 95% CI [-1.48, -0.45]) and postoperative opioid consumption (SMD -19.12 with 95% CI [-34.83, -3.41]), and less incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (RR=0.71, with 95% CI [0.58, 0.87]) compared to placebo. In addition, no significant intergroup (QLB vs. different regional block techniques) differences were observed for most outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence exhibited several superiorities of QLB for patients in laparoscopic surgeries. Differences between QLB and some other block techniques in analgesic effects and PONV controlling effects were not significant. However, it calls for more high-quality evidence with large samples and trials with consistent evaluation scales for pain evaluation to draw more reliable conclusions.

A comparative evaluation of dexmedetomidine and midazolam in pediatric sedation: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with trial sequential analysis.

BACKGROUND: The present study with trial sequential analysis (TSA) was conducted to evaluate comprehensively the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine and midazolam in pediatric sedation, and to investigate whether the outcomes achieved the required information size to draw the conclusions. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to October 2019. All randomized controlled trials used dexmedetomidine and midazolam in pediatric sedation were enrolled. Sedative efficacy, postoperative analgesic effect, and incidence of emergence agitation were considered as the co-primary outcomes. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system was applied to rate the quality of evidences. RESULTS: We acquired data from 34 studies involving 2281 pediatric patients. The results indicated that administration of dexmedetomidine was associated with less incidence of emergence agitation (RR = 0.78, with 95% CI [0.65, 0.92]) and more satisfactory sedation at parental separation (RR = 0.31, with 95% CI [0.24, 0.41]) compared to midazolam, and the current sample sizes were sufficient with unnecessary further trials. Two groups did not differ significantly in sedation level at mask induction (RR = 0.86, with 95% CI [0.74, 1.00]). And using of dexmedetomidine was associated with less incidence of postoperative analgesic rescue (RR = 0.57, with 95% CI [0.35, 0.93]), but the number of patients was too few to achieve the required information size and to draw reliable conclusions. Premedication of dexmedetomidine was associated with significant less value of SBP, heart rate, increased incidence of bradycardia, and a lower rate of shivering. And there were no differences about onset of sedation and recovery time between two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Given that more satisfactory sedation at separation from parents and less incidence of emergence agitation, dexmedetomidine is preferred for pediatric sedation. However, compared with midazolam, the superiority of dexmedetomidine in providing adequate sedation at mask induction and postoperative analgesic effects has not yet been defined.

Comparison of effects and safety in providing controlled hypotension during surgery between dexmedetomidine and magnesium sulphate: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Effectiveness of controlled hypotension has been proven in alleviating intraoperative bleeding. Many recent studies emphasized the efficacy of dexmedetomidine and magnesium in providing controlled hypotension during various surgeries. The present meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed to evaluate comprehensively the effects and safety of these two medications. METHODS: Literature search was performed in four databases from inception to April 2019. All RCTs that used dexmedetomidine and magnesium as hypotensive agents were enrolled. The outcomes contained bleeding condition of surgical site, hemodynamic parameters, duration of surgeries, number of patients requiring opioid/analgesia administration, recovery period, and adverse events emerged during surgeries. RESULTS: Ten studies with 663 patients met with our inclusion criteria. The results indicated that both bleeding score and values of mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) were significantly lower in patients receiving dexmedetomidine (SMD 1.65 with 95% CI [0.90,2.41], P<0.00001) compared to the patients receiving magnesium. The effect in decreasing the necessity of using opioid/analgesia was affirmative in dexmedetomidine group (29.13% with magnesium vs 10.78% with dexmedetomidine), and the condition was more favorable in magnesium group in reducing recovery period (SMD -1.98 with 95% CI [-4.27,0.30], P = 0.09). Compared with magnesium, using of dexmedetomidine was associated with higher incidence of bradycardia but lower incidence of nausea and vomiting. CONCLUSION: Compared with magnesium, dexmedetomidine is more effective to provide promising surgical field condition, favorable controlled hypotension, and less necessity of opioid or analgesia administration. But long recovery period and high-probability bradycardia should be deliberated.

Team-based learning pedagogy enhances the quality of Chinese pharmacy education: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Recent years have witnessed the wide application of team-based learning(TBL) pedagogy in Chinese pharmacy education. However, the relevant systematic review evaluating the effects of such new pedagogical approach has not been established. The present study was designed to examine systematically the effect of using TBL approach in pharmacy education in China. METHODS: Six databases were searched from the inception to January 2019. The studies reporting the performance of pharmacy students in Chinese university or college receiving TBL pedagogy compared to those receiving traditional lecture-based learning (LBL) were enrolled to be analyzed. Scores of the objective theoretical test were considered as the primary outcome, and the results from questionnaires about the number of students who approved the effects of TBL pedagogy on improving their learning enthusiasm, self-study ability, thinking ability, and communication skills were considered as the secondary outcome. A meta-analysis was conducted following the guidelines of the Cochrane Reviewer's Handbook and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses statement. RESULTS: A total of 1271 students in 12 studies published from 2013 to 2018 were enrolled in present analysis. Compared with traditional LBL pedagogy, TBL pedagogy exhibited more effectiveness in developing the objective tests scores of pharmacy students from both universities (SMD = 1.69, 95% CI [1.10, 2.28], p < 0.00001) and colleges (SMD = 4.37, 95% CI [1.33, 7.40], p < 0.00001), and such pedagogy applied well in experiments-oriented courses (SMD = 2.14, 95% CI [0.86, 3.43], p < 0.00001) and theory-oriented courses (SMD = 2.77, 95% CI [1.41, 4.14], p < 0.00001). In addition, it developed students' learning enthusiasm, students' self-study ability, thinking ability, and enhanced students' communication skills. CONCLUSIONS: TBL pedagogy has developed rapidly and applied widely in Chinese pharmacy education during the last decade. The results indicated that such novel pedagogy is compatible with the present situation of Chinese pharmacy education. And it could be considered as an effective method to enhance both the theoretical test scores and various abilities of Chinese pharmacy students.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of remifentanil versus different pharmacological approaches on prevention of etomidate-induced myoclonus: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Objective: Myoclonus was considered as one conundrum in etomidate induction, which led to multiple risks during clinical anesthesia. The present study was conducted to compare the efficacy of pretreatment with remifentanil to different pharmacological approaches on reducing etomidate-induced myoclonus. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure from the inception to October 2018. Randomized controlled trials comparing remifentanil versus other pharmacological approaches in reducing etomidate-induced myoclonus were eligible to be analyzed. Results: Overall, 13 trials with 1,392 patients met with the inclusion criteria. 1) Pretreatment with remifentanil could reduce the incidence of etomidate-induced myoclonus compared to placebo and fentanyl; few differences were found between the use of remifentanil and the use of midazolam: (incidence of myoclonus: 5.56% with remifentanil vs 71.65% with saline, RR=0.08, with 95% CI [0.05, 0.12], P<0.0001; 3.80% with remifentanil vs 13.33% with fentanyl, RR with 95% 0.31 [0.11, 0.86], P=0.02; 46.00% with remifentanil vs 55.45% with midazolam, RR=0.82, with 95% CI [0.64, 1.06], P=0.13). 2) Compared with placebo, pretreatment with remifentanil could reduce the incidence of mild, moderate, and severe myoclonus; compared with midazolam, patients receiving remifentanil experienced lower occurrence of severe myoclonus; compared with fentanyl, pretreatment with remifentanil associated with significant low occurrence of moderate and severe myoclonus. 3) The outcomes also indicated that pretreatment with remifentanil could prevent excessive hemodynamic changes after endotracheal intubation compared to fentanyl. Conclusions: Pretreatment with remifentanil could be considered as one operative option to reduce both incidence and severity of etomidate-induced myoclonus. Compared with fentanyl, it also provides efficacy in preventing excessive hemodynamic changes after endotracheal intubation. However, the best treatment and the proper prophylactic dosage calls for more high quality evidence with large sample size.

Pretreatment with lidocaine reduces both incidence and severity of etomidate-induced myoclonus: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: One conundrum that frequently occurs during clinical anesthesia is etomidate-induced myoclonus, which results in multiple risks. The aim of the study was to evaluate systematically the effect of pretreatment with lidocaine on preventing etomidate-induced myoclonus. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The literature search was performed from the inception to April 2018 in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure. All randomized controlled trials that used lidocaine to prevent etomidate-induced myoclonus were enrolled. The primary outcome included the incidence and severity of etomidate-induced myoclonus. The data were combined to calculate the risk ratio and relevant 95% CI. A meta-analysis was performed following the guidelines of the Cochrane Reviewer's Handbook and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses statement. RESULTS: A total of eight studies were enrolled, and the existing evidence indicated that 1) pretreatment with lidocaine can reduce the incidence of etomidate-induced myoclonus (the incidence of myoclonus: 37.6% in lidocaine vs 73.6% in saline, risk ratio =0.46, with 95% CI [0.34, 0.63], P<0.0001); 2) the pretreatment with lidocaine can reduce the incidence of mild, moderate, and severe myoclonus; 3) a dose of pretreatment with lidocaine cannot significantly decrease the duration of myoclonus compared to placebo; 4) the administration of lidocaine produced no effect on the stable hemodynamic parameters and no more additional adverse effects. CONCLUSION: Pretreatment with lidocaine could be served as one effective approach to decrease both the incidence and the severity of etomidate-induced myoclonus, with limited influence on the hemodynamic stability of patients. However, to confirm precise safety and efficacy of such intervention, more high-quality evidence is necessary.

Efficacy of lidocaine on preventing incidence and severity of pain associated with propofol using in pediatric patients: A PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Propofol injection pain was considered as one conundrum during clinical anesthesia. The systematic review about the effect of lidocaine in reducing injection pain among children has not been established. The aim of the study was to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of such intervention. METHODS: The literature search was performed from the inception to the May 31, 2016 in PubMed, Ovid EMBASE, and Cochrane database. All randomized controlled trials that using lidocaine for propofol injection pain in children were enrolled. The primary outcome included the incidence of injection pain and the incidence of propofol injection pain in different degrees. The data were combined to calculate the relative ratio and relevant 95% confidence interval. A meta-analysis was performed following the guidelines of the Cochrane Reviewer's Handbook and the PRISMA statement. RESULTS: Data from the included 11 studies indicated that the incidence of injection pain was lower in lidocaine group than the incidence in saline control group and in propofol lipuro (medium- and long-chain triglycerides) group (pain occurrence: 22.1% in lidocaine vs 66.8% in saline, RR with 95% 0.34 [0.26, 0.43], I = 38%; 30.5% in lidocaine vs 46.9% in propofol lipuro, RR with 95% 0.68 [0.46, 1.00], I = 9%). There was no difference between lidocaine and ketamine/alfentanil both in reducing pain occurrence and in reducing pain severity (pain occurrence: 29.7% in lidocaine vs 25.8% in ketamine, RR with 95% 1.47 [0.16, 13.43], I = 94%; 31.0% in lidocaine vs 30.7% in alfentanil, RR with 95% 1.01 [0.69, 1.46], I = 11%). And the reported side effects revealed that the safety of lidocaine in pediatric patients was acceptable. CONCLUSION: Compared with ketamine and alfentanil, lidocaine would be served as one more effective treatment in consideration of its well-matched efficacy, acceptable accessibility, and reasonable safety. However, more high-quality evidences in pediatric patients are necessary.

An improved design of water-soluble propofol prodrugs characterized by rapid onset of action.

BACKGROUND: Phosphate ester prodrugs of propofol (fospropofol, HX0969W) were designed to avoid the unsatisfactory water solubility of the parent drug. However, in previous clinical trials, there were reported prodrug side effects such as paresthesia and pruritus. The accumulation of a phosphate ester component was found to be the main culprit. To exclude this potential risk, we designed 2 amino acid propofol prodrugs (HX0969-Gly-F3, HX0969-Ala-HCl) based on the lead compound (HX0969) by introducing the amino acid group into the structures of the propofol prodrugs. We hypothesized that the improved propofol prodrugs could not only eliminate those adverse effects but also retain their rapid action and good water solubility. METHODS: The lead compound HX0969 was synthesized by the sodium borohydride-iodine system. HX0969W, HX0969-Gly-F3, and HX0969-Ala-HCl were synthesized from HX0969. The solubility of fospropofol, HX0969W, HX0969-Gly-F3, and HX0969-Ala-HCl in normal saline was tested. The bioconversions from those prodrugs to propofol in different physiological media (rat plasma, rhesus monkey plasma, and rat hepatic microsomes) were determined in vitro. An in vivo test in the rats was performed to measure the 50% effective dose (ED50) of the 4 propofol prodrugs. Their action onset time and duration time were also measured after their equipotent doses were given. RESULTS: (1) The water solubility of fospropofol, HX0969W, HX0969-Gly-F3, and HX0969-Ala-HCl was 461.46 ± 26.40 mg/mL, 189.45 ± 5.02 mg/mL, 49.88 ± 0.58 mg/mL, and 245.99 ± 4.83 mg/mL, respectively; (2) The hydrolysis tests in both the rat plasma and the rhesus monkey plasma revealed that the 2 amino acid prodrugs released propofol to a greater extent at a more rapid rate than the 2 phosphate prodrugs during the testing period of 5 hours. All 4 prodrugs released propofol rapidly in the presence of rat hepatic enzymes; (3) Compared with the previous prodrugs (fospropofol, HX0969W), the 2 novel compounds (HX0969-Gly-F3, HX0969-Ala-HCl) had a much shorter onset time when a much lower dose was given. CONCLUSIONS: Application of the amino acid group to the propofol prodrug can make the prodrug have good water solubility and a more rapid onset of action. In rat plasma, the 2 improved amino acid prodrugs (HX0969-Ala-HCl, HX0969-Gly-F3) had a more rapid rate of propofol release than the 2 phosphate ester prodrugs (fospropofol, HX0969W). The in vivo tests showed that HX0969-Ala-HCl and HX0969-Gly-F3 given IV could have a more rapid onset of action in a smaller dose than fospropofol and HX0969W. This novel design can enhance the efficiency of prodrugs converting to propofol.

OECs transplantation results in neuropathic pain associated with BDNF regulating ERK activity in rats following cord hemisection.

BACKGROUND: The olfactory ensheathing cells (OECs) derived from olfactory bulb (OB) may improve motor function after transplantation in injured spinal cord. However, the effects of OEC transplantation on sensory function have not been reported yet. The purpose of this study is to investigate whether OEC transplantation could affect the sensory function and to analyze the underlying mechanism. RESULTS: OEC transplantation into the hemisected spinal cords can result in hyperalgesia, indicated by radiant and mechanical stimuli towards the plantar surface in rats. This could be associated with upregulation of Brain Derived Neurotrophic Factor (BDNF), indicated by RT-PCR. Immunofluorecent staining showed that BDNF was mainly located in the neurons of the laminas I and II of the dorsal horn. Moreover, a notable upregulation on the level of p-ERK (phosphorylation of extracellular signal-regulated kinase), the downstream molecule of BDNF, was detected by using Western Blot. These findings indicate that the increased BDNF level associated with the p-ERK was possibly involved in neuropathic pain in hemisected spinal cord subjected to OEC transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: The transplantation of OECs may induce the noticeable pain hypersensitivity in rats after hemisected spinal cord injury, and the possible mechanism may be associated with the phosphorylation of ERK and the activated BDNF overexpression.