Total cerebrovascular blood flow and whole brain perfusion in children sedated using propofol with or without ketamine at induction: An investigation with 2D-Cine PC and ASL.

BACKGROUND: Multiple sedation regimes may be used to facilitate pediatric MRI scans. These regimes might affect cerebral blood flow and hemodynamics to varying degrees, particularly in children who may be vulnerable to anesthetic side effects. PURPOSE: To compare the effects of propofol monosedation solely (Pm group) vs. a combination of propofol and ketamine (KP group) on brain hemodynamics and perfusion. STUDY TYPE: Prospective double-blind randomized trial. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCES: 1.5T and 3T. 2D-Cine phase contrast (2D-Cine PC) and pseudocontinuous arterial spin labeling (ASL). POPULATION: Children aged from 3 months to 10 years referred for MRI with deep sedation were randomized into either the KP or the Pm group. Perfusion images were acquired with ASL followed by single-slice 2D-Cine PC acquired between the cervical vertebra C2 and C3. ASSESSMENT: Average whole-brain perfusion (WBP ml.min-1 .100 ml-1 ) was extracted from the ASL perfusion maps and total cerebrovascular blood flow (CVF) was quantified by bilaterally summing the flow in the vertebral and the internal carotid arteries. The CVF values were converted to units of ml.min-1 .100 g-1 to calculate the tissue CVF100g (ml.min-1 .100 g-1 ). Images were assessed by a neuroradiologist and data from n = 81 (ASL) and n = 55 (PC) cases with no apparent pathology were entered into the analysis. STATISTICAL TESTS: Multivariate analysis of covariance was performed to compare drug sedation effects on WBP, CVF, and CVF100g . RESULTS: No significant difference in arterial flow was observed (P = 0.57), but the KP group showed significantly higher WBP than the Pm group, covarying for scanner and age (P = 0.003). A correlation analysis showed a significant positive correlation between mean WBP (ml.min-1 .100 g-1 ) and mean CVF100g . DATA CONCLUSION: The KP group showed higher perfusion but no significant difference in vascular flow compared with the Pm group. WBP and CVF100g correlated significantly, but ASL appeared to have more susceptibility to perfusion differences arising from the different sedation regimes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 4 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;50:1433-1440.

Sedation for magnetic resonance imaging using propofol with or without ketamine at induction in pediatrics-A prospective randomized double-blinded study.

INTRODUCTION: Deep sedation using propofol has become a standard technique in children. This double-blinded randomized clinical trial aims to compare the clinical effects of propofol-mono-sedation vs a combination of propofol and ketamine at induction and a reduced propofol infusion rate for maintenance in children undergoing diagnostic magnetic resonance imaging. METHODS: Children aged from 3 months to 10 years scheduled as outpatients for elective magnetic resonance imaging with deep sedation were included. They were randomized into 2 groups, receiving either 1 mg/kg ketamine at induction, then a propofol infusion rate of 5 mg/kg/h or a propofol infusion rate of 10 mg/kg/h without prior ketamine. Time to full recovery (modified Aldrete score = 10) was the primary outcome. Further outcomes were quality of induction, immobilization during image acquisition, recovery, postoperative nausea and vomiting, emergence delirium using the Pediatric Anesthesia Emergence Delirium scale, vital signs and adverse cardiorespiratory events. All patients and parents as well as anesthetists, imaging technicians, and postsedation personnel were blinded. Data are given as median (range). RESULTS: In total, 347 children aged 4.0 (0.25-10.9) years, weighing 15.6 (5.3-54) kg, ASA classification I, II, or III (141/188/18) were included. The ketamine-propofol group showed significantly shorter recovery times (38 (22-65) vs 54 (37-77) minutes; median difference 14 (95% CI: 8, 20) minutes; P < .001), better quality of induction, and higher blood pressure, but higher incidence of movement requiring additional sedative drugs. There were no significant differences in respiratory side effects, cardiovascular compromise, emergence delirium, or postoperative nausea and vomiting. CONCLUSION: Both sedation concepts proved to be reliable with a low incidence of side effects. Ketamine at induction with a reduced propofol infusion rate leads to faster postanesthetic recovery.