Establishing a pediatric acute stroke protocol: experience of a new pediatric stroke program and predictors of acute stroke.

Introduction: Pediatric stroke is among the top 10 causes of death in pediatrics. Rapid recognition and treatment can improve outcomes in select patients, as evidenced by recent retrospective studies in pediatric thrombectomy. We established a collaborative protocol involving the vascular neurology and pediatric neurology division in our institution to rapidly diagnose and treat pediatric suspected stroke. We also prospectively collected data to attempt to identify predictors of acute stroke in pediatric patients. Methods: IRB approval was obtained to prospectively collect clinical data on pediatric code stroke activations based on timing metrics in resident-physician note templates. The protocol emphasized magnetic resonance imaging over computed tomography imaging when possible. We analyzed performance of the system with descriptive statistics. We then performed a Bayesian statistical analysis to search for predictors of pediatric stroke. Results: There were 40 pediatric code strokes over the 2.5-year study period with a median age of 10.8 years old. 12 (30%) of patients had stroke, and 28 (70%) of code stroke patients were diagnosed with a stroke mimic. Median time from code stroke activation to completion of imaging confirming or ruling out stroke was 1 h. In the Bayesian analysis, altered mental status, hemiparesis, and vasculopathy history were associated with increased odds of stroke, though credible intervals were wide due to the small sample size. Conclusion: A trainee developed and initiated pediatric acute stroke protocol quickly implemented a hospital wide change in management that led to rapid diagnosis and triage of pediatric stroke and suspected stroke. No additional personnel or resources were needed for this change, and we encourage other hospitals and emergency departments to implement similar systems. Additionally, hemiparesis and altered mental status were predictors of stroke for pediatric acute stroke activation in our Bayesian statistical analysis. However credible intervals were wide due to the small sample size. Further multicenter data collection could more definitively analyze predictors of stroke, as well as the help in the creation of diagnostic tools for clinicians in the emergency setting.

Early discharge after nonoperative management of intussusception is both safe and cost-effective.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: We implemented a quality improvement (QI) initiative to safely reduce post-reduction monitoring for pediatric patients with ileocolic intussusception. We hypothesized that there would be decreased length of stay (LOS) and hospital costs, with no change in intussusception recurrence rates. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted of pediatric ileocolic intussusception patients who underwent successful enema reduction at a tertiary-care pediatric hospital from January 2015 through June 2020. In September 2017, an intussusception management protocol was implemented, which allowed discharge within four hours of reduction. Pre- and post-QI outcomes were compared for index encounters and any additional encounter beginning within 24 h of discharge. An economic evaluation was performed with hospital costs inflation-adjusted to 2020 United States Dollars ($). Cost differences between groups were assessed using multivariable regression, adjusting for Medicaid and transfer status, P < 0.05 significant. RESULTS: Of 90 patients, 37(41%) were pre-QI and 53(59%) were post-QI. Patients were similar by age, sex, race, insurance status, and transfer status. Pre-QI patients had a median LOS of 23.4 h (IQR: 16.1-34.6) versus 9.3 h (IQR 7.4-14.2) for post-QI patients, P < 0.001. Mean total costs per patient in the pre-QI group were $3,231 (95% CI, $2,442-$4,020) versus $1,861 (95% CI, $1,481-$2,240) in the post-QI group. The mean absolute cost difference was $1,370 less per patient in the post-QI group (95% CI, [-$2,251]-[-$490]). Five patients had an additional encounter within 24 h of discharge [pre-QI: 1 (3%) versus post-QI: 4 (8%), p = 0.7] with four having intussusception recurrence [pre-QI: 1 (3%) versus post-QI: 3 (6%), p = 0.6]. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a quality improvement initiative for the treatment of pediatric intussusception reduced hospital length of stay and costs without negatively affecting post-discharge encounters or recurrence rates. Similar protocols can easily be adopted at other institutions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III. TYPE OF STUDY: Retrospective comparative treatment study.

An uncommon late complication of appendicitis.

A 10-year-old boy presented with a 2.5-week history of right leg pain and limp. A right flank mass was noted by a parent on the day of presentation. The child's past medical history was remarkable for perforated appendicitis treated with an interval laparoscopic appendectomy 2 years before this presentation. Abdominal and pelvic computed tomography revealed a retroperitoneal mass with calcifications, suggestive of a retained appendicolith with abscess formation. This case illustrates the importance of considering very late complications of appendicitis in patients presenting with fever and abdominal or flank pain or masses.

Effects on a Poison Center's (PC) triage and follow-up after implementing the no Ipecac use policy.

For years, The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) had supported home use of syrup of Ipecac. However, due to mounting evidence that Ipecac use did not improve outcome nor reduce Emergency Department (ED) referrals, the AAP in November of 2003 issued a statement that Ipecac not be used for the home management of poison ingestion. To determine if the cessation of the use of Ipecac for home ingestions is associated with an increased number of follow-up calls, an increased time of observation at home and an increase in the number of ED referrals for care by poison center staff were administered. Fifty randomly selected pediatric (<6 years) cases that received Ipecac ("Ipecac" group) from January 1, 2003 to October 31, 2003 were selected for study. Up to two controls ("no Ipecac" group) were matched by age, amount ingested, and by toxin. Controls were selected from the 2004-2006 time period (Ipecac no longer in use). Fifty "Ipecac" cases and 84 "no Ipecac" controls were analyzed. The groups had no significant differences with respect to percent symptomatic, median time post-ingestion, mean age, and distribution of toxin categories (e.g., antidepressants, beta blockers, etc.). The "no Ipecac" group had nearly ten times the odds of ED referral compared to the "Ipecac" group, (OR = 9.9, 95%CI 3.3-32.2). The mean total hours of follow-up was not significantly different between the groups (diff = -1.1, t = -1.8, p = 0.07). The mean number of follow-up calls was significantly less in the "no Ipecac" group (diff = -1.4 calls, t = -6.8, p < 0.001). Toxicology consults were greater in the "no Ipecac" group (chi (2 )= 4.05, p = 0.04); however, consults were not associated with ED referral. For the time period from 2004 to 2006, the "no Ipecac" policy resulted in an increase in ED referrals at our center. While prior studies have shown that not using Ipecac did not affect clinical outcome, our research suggested that it may have initially influenced triaging outcome. Since the use of Ipecac by centers was once a commonly used home remedy for some ingestions (albeit without rigorously established efficacy), poison center personnel had to transition to the "no Ipecac" policy. Although our referrals increased during a transitional period of time, referral rates have since stabilized and returned to baseline.

Activated charcoal for pediatric poisonings: the universal antidote?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: For decades, activated charcoal has been used as a 'universal antidote' for the majority of poisons because of its ability to prevent the absorption of most toxic agents from the gastrointestinal tract and enhance the elimination of some agents already absorbed. This manuscript will review the history of activated charcoal, its indications, contraindications, and the complications associated with its use as reported in the literature. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent randomized prospective studies, although with small numbers, have shown no difference in length of hospital stay, morbidity, and mortality between groups who received and did not receive activated charcoal. No study has had sufficient numbers to satisfactorily address clinical outcome in patients who received activated charcoal less than 1 h following ingestion. SUMMARY: If used appropriately, activated charcoal has relatively low morbidity. Due to the lack of definitive studies showing a benefit in clinical outcome, it should not be used routinely in ingestions. AC could be considered for patients with an intact airway who present soon after ingestion of a toxic or life-threatening dose of an adsorbable toxin. The appropriate use of activated charcoal should be determined by the analysis of the relative risks and benefits of its use in each specific clinical scenario.