Hyoscine butylbromide versus acetaminophen for nonspecific colicky abdominal pain in children: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Less than two-thirds of children with abdominal pain in the emergency department receive analgesia. We sought to determine whether hyoscine butylbromide was superior to acetaminophen for children with nonspecific colicky abdominal pain. METHODS: We randomly allocated children aged 8-17 years with nonspecific colicky abdominal pain who presented to the pediatric emergency department of London Health Sciences Centre, London, Ontario to receive hyoscine butylbromide, 10 mg given orally, or acetaminophen, 15 mg/kg given orally (maximum 975 mg). We considered the minimal clinically important difference for the primary outcome (self-reported pain at 80 min) to be 13 mm on a 100 mm visual analogue scale. Secondary outcomes included administration of rescue analgesia, adverse effects and pain score less than 30 mm at 80 minutes. RESULTS: A total of 236 participants (120 in the hyoscine butylbromide group and 116 in the acetaminophen group) were included in the trial. The mean visual analogue scale scores at 80 minutes were 29 mm (standard deviation [SD] 26 mm) and 30 mm (SD 29 mm) with hyoscine butylbromide and acetaminophen, respectively (adjusted difference 1, 95% confidence interval -7 to 7). Rescue analgesia was administered to 4 participants (3.3%) in the hyoscine butylbromide group and 1 participant (0.9%) in the acetaminophen groups (p = 0.2). We found no significant differences in rates of adverse effects between hyoscine butylbromide (32/116 [27.6%]) and acetaminophen (28/115 [24.3]) (p = 0.5); no serious adverse effects were observed. The proportion with a pain score less than 30 mm at 80 minutes was 66 (55.0%) with hyoscine butylbromide and 63 (54.3%) with acetaminophen (p = 0.9). INTERPRETATION: Hyoscine butylbromide was not superior to acetaminophen in this setting. Both agents were associated with clinically important pain reduction, and either can be considered for children presenting to the emergency department with nonspecific colicky abdominal pain. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, no. NCT02582307.

Treatment of abdominal pseudocysts and associated ventricuoperitoneal shunt failure.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether drainage and revision are an effective treatment for abdominal pseudocyst associated ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunt failure by estimating the total rate of secondary shunt failure. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of children with hydrocephalus diagnosed with and treated for an abdominal pseudocyst at the Children's Hospital, London Health Sciences Centre (LHSC) between January 1, 2000 and May 31, 2016 (ethics approval # 108136). Patients with a VP shunt were included if (i) the development of an abdominal pseudocyst at age 2 to 18 years was identified, (ii) treatment of the pseudocyst by either interventional radiology (IR) or surgical drainage, and (iii) revision of the VP shunt. Demographic data and details of pseudocyst formation/ treatment as well as subsequent failures were identified. RESULTS: Twelve patients who had a VP shunt developed abdominal pseudocyst and met inclusion criteria. A 91% shunt failure rate after drainage and shunt revision was identified. Three patients had the pseudocyst drained in interventional radiology and then externalized due to shunt infection. Nine patients were treated by surgical revision. Ten patients experienced recurrent shunt failure following initial drainage of the pseudocyst: pseudocyst reoccurrence (n = 3), distal obstruction from adhesions (n = 1), and uncleared infection (n = 6). CONCLUSION: The results suggest that pseudocyst drainage and shunt revision is ineffective in providing long-term resolution of shunt problems.