The Effect of Clonidine Premedication on Hemodynamic Changes Following Tracheal Intubation and Co2 Gas Insufflation and Postoperative Shivering In Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy; a Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a proper treatment for cholecystitis but the Carbon dioxide gas which is used in surgery stimulates the sympathetic system and causes hemodynamic changes and postoperative shivering in patients undergoing operations. This study was conducted to evaluate the effects of clonidine on reducing hemodynamic changes during tracheal intubation and Carbon dioxide gas insufflation and postoperative shivering in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This prospective, randomized, triple-blind clinical trial was conducted on 60 patients between the 18-70 years-old age group, who were candidates of laparoscopic cholecystectomy surgery. The patients randomized into two groups (30 patients received 150 µg oral clonidine) and 30 patients received 100 mg oral Vitamin C). Heart rate and mean arterial pressure of patients were recorded before anesthesia, before and after laryngoscopy, before and after Carbon dioxide gas insufflation. Data were analyzed using Chi-2, student t-test, and analysis of variance by repeated measure considering at a significant level less than 0.05. RESULTS: The findings of this study showed that both heart rate and mean arterial pressure in clonidine group after tracheal intubation and Carbon dioxide gas insufflation were lower than patients in the placebo group, but there was not any statistically significant difference between the two groups (p>0.05) and also postoperative shivering was not different in groups. There was no significant statistical difference in postoperative shivering between the two groups (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: Using 150 µg oral clonidine as a cheap and affordable premedication in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy improves hemodynamic stability during operation.

Evaluation of the analgesic effects of diclofenac as a premedication drug in dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy.

Pre-emptive analgesia consists of administering drugs such as opioids and nonsteroid anti-inflammatory drugs. This study aims to evaluate the intraoperative antinociceptive effects of diclofenac administered alone in premedication or combined with morphine along with its potential influence on recovery of dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy. A total of 34 dogs (ASA I or II) admitted for ovariohysterectomy were randomly allocated into three groups according to the drugs given in premedication: Diclofenac (D) (n = 11), Morphine (M) (n = 13) and Diclofenac-Morphine (DM) (n = 10) groups. Induction and maintenance of anesthesia were standardized in all dogs. To assess intraoperative nociception, the heart rate (HR) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) were recorded during the surgery and at predefined time points: St (steady-state), Cut (cutaneous incision), P1 (first ovarian manipulation), P2 (second ovarian manipulation) and Cerv (cervical manipulation). The dynamic variation of HR (ΔHR) and MAP (ΔMAP) over 2 min was calculated at each time point. After extubation, early quality of recovery was assessed. Compared to St, a significant increase in HR and MAP at P1, P2 and Cerv was shown in all groups. MAP in the M group was lower at St than in the other groups. The dynamic variation of HR (ΔHR) and MAP (ΔMAP) was significantly less important at P2 and Cerv compared to P1 only in the DM group. Also, a better quality of recovery was shown in the D group compared to the M and DM groups. Diclofenac may be considered a suitable premedication drug and a part of a multimodal anesthetic approach in dogs.

Beneficial Effects of Low-Dose Intravenous Dexmedetomidine Premedication in Patient Undergoing Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Under General Anesthesia: A Prospective, Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial.

Purpose: Dexmedetomidine (Dex) is a potent and highly selective α2-adrenergic receptor agonist. Within an appropriate dose range, Dex can effectively attenuate the surgical stress response, provide intraoperative hemodynamic stability, and improve the patient recovery quality. High-dose Dex can delay patient awakening from anesthesia and increase the incidence of bradycardia. This randomized controlled trial aimed to investigate the effects of low-dose intravenous Dex premedication in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Material and Methods: In total, 100 patients undergoing LC were equally randomized into Group C (premedication with saline) and Group D (premedication with 0.5 µg/kg Dex). The patients were premedicated with saline or Dex, depending on the group, before anesthesia induction. Following this, anesthesia induction and endotracheal intubation was performed, and anesthesia was maintained during surgery. Following the completion of the surgery, the patients were transferred the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) and stayed there until they met the PACU discharge criteria. The hemodynamic parameters, consumption of anesthetics, surgical duration, postoperative awakening time, extubation time, postoperative pain, and complications were recorded. Results: No significant differences were observed in the heart rate (HR) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) between the two groups before premedication (P>0.05). The MAP and HR immediately after endotracheal intubation and immediately after extubation were significantly lower in Group D than in Group C (P<0.05 for both). The incidence of bradycardia was significantly higher in Group D than in Group C (P<0.05), while atropine was used in neither group. Propofol and remifentanil consumption was significantly lower in Group D than in Group C (P<0.05). The postoperative awakening and extubation times were significantly shorter in Group D than in Group C (P<0.05). The postoperative visual analog scale scores for pain and incidence of nausea, vomiting, and cough were significantly lower in Group D than in Group C (P<0.05 for all). Conclusion: Our data suggest that premedication with dexmedetomidine (0.5 µg/kg) before general anesthesia induction can effectively attenuate intraoperative stress response and postoperative pain, maintain perioperative hemodynamic stability, and decrease the incidence of adverse events, which might be an effective and safe anesthetic protocol during LC worthy of further clinical application.

Steroid Premedication and Monoclonal Antibody Therapy: Should We Reconsider?

OPINION STATEMENT: Monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapy is now considered a main component of cancer therapy in Australia. Although traditionally thought of as pure signalling inhibitors, a large proponent of these medications function through antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC). Currently, most protocols and institutional guidelines for ADCC-mediated mAbs promote the use of corticosteroids as premedication: this is implemented to reduce infusion-related reactions (IRRs) and antiemesis prophylaxis and combat concurrently administered chemotherapy-related syndromes. Concerningly, the inhibitory effects of ADCC by corticosteroids are well documented; henceforth, it is possible the current standard of care is misaligned to the literature surrounding ADCC. Subsequently, clinicians' decisions to act in contrast to this literature may be reducing the efficacy of mAbs. The literature suggests that the redundant use of corticosteroids should be cautioned against when used in conjunction with ADCC-mediated mAbs-this is due to the consequent reduction in anti-tumour activity. Owing to the fact IRRs typically occur upon initial infusion, the authors advocate for individual clinicians and institutional protocols to considering augmenting their practice to corticosteroid premedication at the first dose only, unless clinically indicated. Additionally, product information (PI) and consumer medicine information (CMI) documents distributed by Australian and international regulatory agencies should consider disclosing the risk of concurrent steroids with these medications. Moreover, the authors suggest considering alternative medications for the management of side effects.

Impact of institutional interventions on the rate of paclitaxel hypersensitivity reactions.

PURPOSE: Paclitaxel is associated with hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs). Intravenous premedication regimens have been devised to decrease the incidence and severity of HSRs. At our institution oral histamine 1 receptor antagonists (H1RA) and histamine 2 receptor antagonists (H2RA) were adopted as standard. Standardizations were implemented for consistent premedication use in all disease states. The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare the incidence and severity of HSRs before and after standardization. METHODS: Patients who received paclitaxel from 20 April 2018 to 8 December 2020 having an HSR were included in analysis. An infusion was flagged for review if a rescue medication was administered after the start of the paclitaxel infusion. The incidences of all HSR prior to and post-standardization were compared. A subgroup analysis of patients receiving paclitaxel for the first and second time was performed. RESULTS: There were 3499infusions in the pre-standardization group and 1159infusions in the post-standardization group. After review, 100 HSRs pre-standardization and 38 HSRs post-standardization were confirmed reactions. The rate of overall HSRs was 2.9% in the pre-standardization group and 3.3% in the post-standardization group (p = 0.48). HSRs, during the first and second doses of paclitaxel, occurred in 10.2% of the pre-standardization and 8.5% of the post-standardization group (p = 0.55). CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective interventional study demonstrated that same-day intravenous dexamethasone, oral H1RA, and oral H2RA are safe premedication regimens for paclitaxel. No change in the severity of reactions was seen. Overall, better adherence to premedication administration was seen post-standardization.

Overview of premedication prescription and intake in an oncology day hospital: What do we need to change to improve patient management?

BACKGROUND: Premedication of cancer therapy against nausea and vomiting (NV) and hypersensitivity reaction (HS) is essential for good patient management. However, this prescription is not always optimal. Today, as a large part of cancer therapies are administered in day hospitals (DH), premedication taken on the day of the cancer treatment is injected as a 30-min infusion. OBJECTIVE: To assess compliance with recommendations for premedication prescription and intake; to analyse patient attitude about switching to exclusively oral forms taken at home. METHOD: The study is conducted in the medical oncology DH of a French Hospital from 17 January to 25 February 2022. The data collection is carried out as an individual interview, associated with the distribution of two questionnaires. Data are coupled with the premedication set up on our software and the last medical report. Intakes are considered optimal when recommendations, tolerance, background, and adherence of the patient are taken into account. RESULTS: Seventy patients were included for interviews. Regarding software prescriptions, our configuration was consistent with recommendations in 100% of cases for HS and 37% for NV. Intakes were compliant in 51.4% of cases, non-compliant in 17.1% and debatable in 31.5%. Disparities between the practices of different physicians were identified. Regarding the feasibility of oral substitution, it could concern 63.5% of patients. CONCLUSION: This work makes it possible to improve the management of all patients and to make the operation of the care unit more fluid.

The MAGIC trial: a pragmatic, multicentre, parallel, noninferiority, randomised trial of melatonin versus midazolam in the premedication of anxious children attending for elective surgery under general anaesthesia.

BACKGROUND: Child anxiety before general anaesthesia and surgery is common. Midazolam is a commonly used premedication to address this. Melatonin is an alternative anxiolytic, however trials evaluating its efficacy in children have delivered conflicting results. METHODS: This multicentre, double-blind randomised trial was performed in 20 UK NHS Trusts. A sample size of 624 was required to declare noninferiority of melatonin. Anxious children, awaiting day case elective surgery under general anaesthesia, were randomly assigned 1:1 to midazolam or melatonin premedication (0.5 mg kg-1, maximum 20 mg) 30 min before transfer to the operating room. The primary outcome was the modified Yale Preoperative Anxiety Scale-Short Form (mYPAS-SF). Secondary outcomes included safety. Results are presented as n (%) and adjusted mean differences with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: The trial was stopped prematurely (n=110; 55 per group) because of recruitment futility. Participants had a median age of 7 (6-10) yr, and 57 (52%) were female. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol modified Yale Preoperative Anxiety Scale-Short Form analyses showed adjusted mean differences of 13.1 (3.7-22.4) and 12.9 (3.1-22.6), respectively, in favour of midazolam. The upper 95% confidence interval limits exceeded the predefined margin of 4.3 in both cases, whereas the lower 95% confidence interval excluded zero, indicating that melatonin was inferior to midazolam, with a difference considered to be clinically relevant. No serious adverse events were seen in either arm. CONCLUSION: Melatonin was less effective than midazolam at reducing preoperative anxiety in children, although the early termination of the trial increases the likelihood of bias. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry: ISRCTN18296119.

Intranasal dexmedetomidine as premedication for magnetic resonance imaging examinations in dogs with neurological disorders mitigates hypotension and hypothermia.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of intranasal administration of dexmedetomidine as a premedication for preventing hypotension and hypothermia in canine patients undergoing MRI examinations. ANIMALS: Dogs undergoing MRI examinations for neurological disorders were enrolled in this study. The dogs were randomly assigned: 15 to the N-Dex group (without premedication) and 13 to the Dex group (125 µg/m2 of dexmedetomidine, intranasally, as a premedication). METHODS: During the examination, pulse rate, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and mean arterial blood pressure were recorded every 5 minutes for the first 30 minutes. Body temperature was measured before and after the examination. Any adverse events during the procedure were documented. RESULTS: Significant changes in pulse rate during the examination were not distinguishable. Although blood pressure and body temperature decreased in both groups under anesthesia, dogs in the Dex group had a significantly smaller drop in blood pressure and body temperature and fewer hypotension events than those in the N-Dex group MRI examinations of 1 hour's duration. Two dogs in the Dex group exhibited bradycardia at 45 and 60 minutes of MRI examination, which resolved after receiving atipamezole. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Our results indicate that intranasal administration of 125 µg/m2 of dexmedetomidine as premedication is safe and can potentially mitigate hypothermia and hypotension in dogs with neurological disorders during MRI examinations.

Exclusion of Ranitidine From Premedication Regimens During Paclitaxel Treatment.

This cohort study conducted in the Netherlands uses electronic medical records to assess incidence of hypersensitivity reactions with and without H2-receptor antagonist premedication before paclitaxel administration.

The Effect of Using Premedication of Simethicone/Pronase With or Without Postural Change on Visualization of the Mucosa Before Endoscopy: A Prospective, Double Blinded, Randomized Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: To investigate the efficacy and safety of preprocedural simethicone (S) and pronase (P) for optimal mucosal visualization during esophagogastroduodenoscopy with sedation. The effect of postural change combined with premedication on mucosal visibility was also examined. METHODS: The study randomized 496 patients into 8 groups based on the type of premedication provided and whether a postural change occurred. The premedication in the control group was 100 mL of normal saline solution (NS). The remaining 3 intervention groups were administered 100 mL of simethicone alone (S), pronase solution alone (P), and simethicone plus pronase solution (S + P). Each group was classified into subgroups according to whether there was a postural change (PC). The mucosal visibility score (MVS), total mucosal visibility score (TVS), procedure time, water consumption for mucosal cleansing, and proportion of patients with diminutive lesions <5 mm were recorded. RESULTS: The P and S groups had a significantly better TVS than the NS group (11.86 ± 3.36 in group P vs 14.52 ± 2.57 in group NS, P < 0.001; 12.36 ± 2.93 in group S vs 14.52 ± 2.57 in group NS, P = 0.006). The TVS was better in the P group than in the S group (11.86 ± 3.36 vs 12.36 ± 2.93, P = 0.037). The MVS was significantly better in the esophagus and duodenum and worse in the upper and lower gastric body in the S group than in the P group. The P + S group had a significantly better TVS than the P and S groups (9.81 ± 2.90 in group P + S vs 11.86 ± 3.36 in group P and 12.36 ± 2.93 in group S, respectively, P < 0.001),\ and had a reduced amount of flushing water during the procedure (0 [interquartile range [IQR]: 0-33] mL in group P + S vs 40 [IQR: 0-70] mL in group P, P < 0.01; 0 [IQR: 0-33] mL in group P + S vs 50 [IQR: 20-98] mL in group S, P < 0.001). The TVS was significantly better in the P + S + PC group than in the P + S group (8.44 ± 2.10 vs 9.81 ± 2.90, P = 0.003). The MVS was significantly better in the gastric antrum, fundus, and upper and lower gastric body in the P + S + PC group than in the P + S group. There was no significant difference in the detection rate of diminutive lesions among the different groups during an endoscopic examination ( P > 0.05). DISCUSSION: The combination of preprocedural administration with simethicone and pronase achieved superior mucosal visualization compared with saline, simethicone, or pronase alone in patients receiving upper endoscopy. Postural change maneuvers performed before endoscopy further improved the mucosal visibility in most parts of the stomach when used with preprocedural simethicone and pronase.

Comparison of the efficacy of intranasal atomised dexmedetomidine versus intranasal atomised ketamine as a premedication for sedation and anxiolysis in children undergoing spinal dysraphism surgery: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative anxiety leads to adverse clinical outcomes and long-term maladaptive behavioural changes. The role of intranasal atomised dexmedetomidine and atomised ketamine as premedication to produce sedation and anxiolysis in paediatric neurosurgical patients has not been extensively studied. OBJECTIVE: To study the efficacy of intranasal atomised dexmedetomidine and intranasal atomised ketamine as premedication in producing sedation and facilitating smooth induction in children undergoing spinal dysraphism surgery. DESIGN: A prospective randomised double-blind trial. SETTING: A tertiary teaching hospital. PATIENTS: Sixty-four children aged 1 to 10 years undergoing spinal dysraphism surgery. METHODS: Children were randomised to receive intranasal atomised dexmedetomidine 2.5 µg kg -1 (Group D, n  = 32) and intranasal atomised ketamine 5 mg kg -1 (Group K, n  = 32) 30 min before surgery. OUTCOMES MEASURED: The primary outcome was to compare the level of sedation in both groups using the University of Michigan Sedation Score (UMSS). The secondary outcomes included an assessment of the ease of parental separation, intravenous cannulation and satisfactory mask acceptance along with perioperative vitals (heart rate, blood pressure and oxygen saturation). The incidence of emergence agitation and time to discharge were also noted. RESULTS: The degree of sedation was significantly better in Group D as compared to Group K at 20 min (UMSS, 1.55 ±â€Š0.51 versus 1.13 ±â€Š0.34, difference, -0.406; 95% CI, -0.621 to -0.191; P  = 0.0001) and 30 min (2.32 ±â€Š0.6 versus 1.94 ±â€Š0.50, difference, -0.374; 95% CI, -0.650 to -0.100; P  = 0.007). The ease of parental separation, venous cannulation and mask acceptance ( P  = 0.83, 0.418 and 0.100 respectively) were comparable in both groups. The heart rate was lower in group D at 10, 20 and 30 min post-drug administration but was clinically insignificant. The incidence of emergence agitation and time to discharge was also similar with no adverse events reported. CONCLUSION: Intranasal atomised dexmedetomidine produces greater sedation as compared to intranasal atomised ketamine with comparable ease of parental separation, venous cannulation and mask acceptance with no adverse effects.

Effect of Premedication With Pronase Before Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Multicenter Prospective Randomized Controlled Study.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to confirm whether premedication with pronase before endoscopy improves mucosal visualization and increases precancerous lesion and cancer lesion detection rates. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From June 2018 to April 2019, out-patients scheduled for endoscopy from 13 hospitals were screened to be randomly allocated in a 2:1 ratio to premedication with pronase (group A) and water (group B). The primary endpoint was mucosal visibility scores, and the secondary endpoint was precancerous and cancer lesion detection rates. This trial was registered at Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, and the registration number was ChiCTR1800016853. RESULTS: Group A showed significantly lower mucosal visibility scores (better mucosal visibility) of esophagus, stomach, and duodenum than group B, with all P -values <0.001. The overall cancer detection rates between group A and group B were 0.83 and 1.08%, and overall detection rates of precancerous and cancer lesion were 4.4 and 4.9%, both without significant difference ( P =1.000 and 0.824). In addition, the flushing volume (milliliter) of group A (10.52±23.41) was less than group B (36.30±52.11) ( P <0.001), and the flushing frequency of group A (0.46±1.01) was fewer than group B (1.62±2.12) ( P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Premedication with pronase could achieve better mucosal visibility and decrease flushing frequency and volume, but may not increase lesion detection rates.

The association between midazolam premedication and postoperative delirium - a retrospective cohort study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between midazolam premedication and postoperative delirium in a large retrospective cohort of patients ≥70 years. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A single tertiary academic medical center. PATIENTS: Patients ≥70 years having elective non-cardiac surgery under general anesthesia from 2020 to 2021. INTERVENTIONS: Midazolam premedication, defined as intravenous midazolam administration prior to induction of general anesthesia. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome, postoperative delirium, was a collapsed composite outcome including at least one of the following: a positive 4A's test during post-anesthesia care unit stay and/or the initial 2 postoperative days; physician or nursing records reporting new-onset confusion as captured by the CHART-DEL instrument; or a positive 3D-CAM test. The association between midazolam premedication and postoperative delirium was assessed using multivariable logistic regression, adjusting for potential confounding variables. As secondary analysis, we investigated the association between midazolam premedication and a composite of other postoperative complications. Several sensitivity analyses were performed using similar regression models. MAIN RESULTS: In total, 1973 patients were analyzed (median age 75 years, 47% women, 50% ASA score ≥ 3, 32% high risk surgery). The overall incidence of postoperative delirium was 15.3% (302/1973). Midazolam premedication was administered to 782 (40%) patients (median [IQR] dose 2 [1,2] mg). After adjustment for potential confounding variables, midazolam premedication was not associated with increased odds of postoperative delirium, with adjusted odds ratio of 1.09 (95% confidence interval 0.82-1.45; P = 0.538). Midazolam premedication was also not associated with the composite of other postoperative complications. Furthermore, no association was found between midazolam premedication and postoperative delirium in any of the sensitivity analyses preformed. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that low doses of midazolam can be safely used to pre-medicate elective surgical patients 70 years or older before non-cardiac surgery, without significant effect on the risk of developing postoperative delirium.

A quality improvement initiative standardizing premedication for blood product transfusions.

For children with cancer, blood product transfusions are crucial, but can be complicated by transfusion reactions. To prevent these complications, premedication is often given, although not always evidence-based. Herein, we describe a significant decrease in the use of premedication (72%-28%) at our institution after the implementation of standardized guidelines, without an increase in transfusion reactions (3.2% prior vs. 1.5% after standardization). Importantly, there were no severe transfusion reactions leading to hospitalization or death. Our results provide evidence in favor of more judicious use of premedication prior to transfusions in patients 21 years and younger being treated for cancer.

Melatonin or its analogs as premedication to prevent emergence agitation in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Emergence agitation (EA) is a prevalent complication in children following general anesthesia. Several studies have assessed the relationship between melatonin or its analogs and the incidence of pediatric EA, yielding conflicting results. This meta-analysis aims to assess the effects of premedication with melatonin or its analogs on preventing EA in children after general anesthesia. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang Data, clinicaltrials.gov, and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched until 25 November 2022. We included randomized controlled trials that assessed EA in patients less than 18 years old who underwent general anesthesia. We excluded studies that did not use a specific evaluation to assess EA. RESULTS: Nine studies (951 participants) were included in this systematic review. Melatonin significantly reduced the incidence of EA compared with placebos (risk ratio 0.40, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.61, P < 0.01) and midazolam (risk ratio 0.48, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.73, P < 0.01). Dexmedetomidine remarkably decreased the incidence of EA compared with melatonin (risk ratio 2.04, 95% CI 1.11 to 3.73, P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Melatonin premedication significantly decreases the incidence of EA compared with placebos and midazolam. Dexmedetomidine premedication has a stronger effect than melatonin in preventing EA. Nevertheless, further studies are warranted to reinforce and validate the conclusion on the efficacy of melatonin premedication in mitigating EA in pediatric patients.

The interest of intranasal clonidine in the prevention of perioperative children's anxiety: a prospective randomized trial.

Introduction: perioperative anxiety in children may lead to psychological and physiological side effects. Clonidine is in increasing use in the pediatric population as an anxiolytic, sedative, and analgesic because of its central alpha2-adrenergic agonist effect. Our study aimed to evaluate the effect of clonidine in the prevention of perioperative children´s anxiety. Methods: we conducted a prospective controlled randomized double-blinded clinical trial including children aged between 2 and 15 years undergoing tonsillectomy surgery. The patients were randomly allocated to receive either an intranasal dose of clonidine (4 µg/kg) (clonidine group) or an equal volume dose of saline solution (control group) 30 minutes before entering the operating room. The level of anxiety assessed using the m-YPAS score was recorded before premedication, at the time of parent-child separation, and at the time of installation in the operating room. Acceptance of premedication, degree of sedation on entering the operating room as well as agitation on awakening, and sedation on arrival post-anesthesia care unit were noted. Adverse effects were recorded during the surgical procedure and in the postoperative recovery room. Results: the number of patients analyzed was 78 with 39 patients in each group. There were no signification differences in demographic data and premedication acceptance between the two groups. Levels of anxiety before any premedication were similar in the two groups. However, the anxiety level 30 minutes after premedication and in the operating room was significantly lower in the clonidine group (p<0.001). Children who received clonidine showed better sedation on entering the operating room (p=0.002) as well as postoperatively on entering the post-anesthesia unit care (p=0.006). The hemodynamic and respiratory parameters recorded were statistically comparable. Conclusion: intranasal clonidine is an interesting premedication to prevent perioperative children´s anxiety with few side effects.

[Modified Premedication of Infusion Reaction with Obinutuzumab Therapy].

Obinutuzumab frequently triggers an infusion reaction(IR). In the GALLIUM study, despite the use of corticosteroids, antipyretic analgesics, and antihistamines to prevent IR, IR occurred at a high frequency of 68.2% for all Grades and 12.4% for Grades 3 or higher. The dose of methylprednisolone was increased from 80 mg administered in the GALLIUM study to 125 mg, and the development of IR was investigated in 30 patients with follicular lymphoma who received the initial dose of obinutuzumab. The incidence of IR was 43.3% for all Grades and 0% for Grades 3 or higher, and no serious IR was observed. It also had no effect on infectious diseases. Increased doses of corticosteroids were well tolerated and suggested as an effective method for reducing the frequency of IR.

Pharmacologic Adjuncts for Neonatal Tracheal Intubation: The Evidence Behind Premedication.

Premedication such as analgesia, sedation, vagolytics, and paralytics may improve neonatal tracheal intubation success, reduce intubation-associated adverse events, and create optimal conditions for performing this high-risk and challenging procedure. Although rapid sequence induction including a paralytic agent has been adopted for intubations in pediatric and adult critical care, neonatal clinical practice varies. This review aims to summarize details of common classes of neonatal intubation premedication including indications for use, medication route, dosage, potential adverse effects in term and preterm infants, and reversal agents. In addition, this review shares the literature on national and international practice variations; explores evidence in support of establishing premedication guidelines; and discusses unique circumstances in which premedication use has not been established, such as during catheter-based or minimally invasive surfactant delivery. With increasing survival of extremely preterm infants, clear guidance for premedication use in this population will be necessary, particularly considering potential short- and long-term side effects of procedural sedation on the developing brain.

The utility of H2 receptor antagonists in preventing infusion-related reactions to paclitaxel chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Paclitaxel has a risk of infusion-related reactions (IRRs) and despite no prospective evidence, is often given with premedication including a corticosteroid, H1 antagonist, and H2 antagonist (H2RA). Backorders impacted the supply of intravenous H2RAs at our center, and it was removed as routine premedication. The authors compared the incidence of IRR in patients treated without H2RA to patients receiving standard H2RA premedication. METHODS: The authors reviewed outpatients starting paclitaxel at the Ottawa Hospital from December 2019 to October 2021. Two cohorts were created: patients treated without H2RA premedication (intervention), and those receiving standard H2RA (control). Demographics, treatment, and IRR information were collected retrospectively. Primary end point was rate of grade ≥2 IRRs during first two doses of paclitaxel. RESULTS: A total of 182 patients were treated without H2RA premedication, compared to 184 control patients treated during non-backorder periods. Baseline characteristics included: median age, 63 years; 86% female; and primary tumor 52% breast/24% gynecologic/10% gastric/esophageal/8% lung/6% other. There were no significant differences between cohorts in baseline characteristics. There was no difference in the rate of grade ≥2 IRR between cohorts; 12.1% (22 of 182; 95% confidence interval [CI], 7.7%-17.7%) for patients treated without H2RA, and 15.1% (28 of 185; 95% CI, 10.3%-21.1%) for control patients. The rate of grade ≥3 IRRs were also similar, 4.4% in intervention cohort versus 3.8% in control cohort. CONCLUSIONS: The removal of H2RAs from premedication for paclitaxel did not result in an increased incidence of IRRs. The use of H2RAs in preventing IRRs to paclitaxel should be re-evaluated.

Postoperative recovery in preschool-aged children: A secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial comparing premedication with midazolam, clonidine, and dexmedetomidine.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative anxiety in pediatric patients can worsen postoperative outcomes and delay discharge. Drugs aimed at reducing preoperative anxiety and facilitating postoperative recovery are available; however, their effects on postoperative recovery from propofol-remifentanil anesthesia have not been studied in preschool-aged children. Thus, we aimed to investigate the effects of three sedative premedications on postoperative recovery from total intravenous anesthesia in children aged 2-6 years. METHODS: In this prespecified secondary analysis of a double-blinded randomized trial, 90 children scheduled for ear, nose, and throat surgery were randomized (1:1:1) to receive sedative premedication: oral midazolam 0.5 mg/kg, oral clonidine 4 µg/kg, or intranasal dexmedetomidine 2 µg/kg. Using validated instruments, outcome measures including time for readiness to discharge from the postoperative care unit, postoperative sedation, emergence delirium, anxiety, pain, and nausea/vomiting were measured. RESULTS: After excluding eight children due to drug refusal or deviation from the protocol, 82 children were included in this study. No differences were found between the groups in terms of median time [interquartile range] to readiness for discharge (midazolam, 90 min [48]; clonidine, 80 min [46]; dexmedetomidine 100.5 min [42]). Compared to the midazolam group, logistic regression with a mixed model and repeated measures approach found no differences in sedation, less emergence delirium, and less pain in the dexmedetomidine group, and less anxiety in both clonidine and dexmedetomidine groups. CONCLUSIONS: No statistical difference was observed in the postoperative recovery times between the premedication regimens. Compared with midazolam, dexmedetomidine was favorable in reducing both emergence delirium and pain in the postoperative care unit, and both clonidine and dexmedetomidine reduced anxiety in the postoperative care unit. Our results indicated that premedication with α2 -agonists had a better recovery profile than short-acting benzodiazepines; although the overall recovery time in the postoperative care unit was not affected.