Literature DB >> 30375140

A retrospective comparison of propofol to dexmedetomidine for pediatric magnetic resonance imaging sedation in patients with mucopolysaccharidosis type II.

RyungA Kang1, Young Hee Shin1, Nam-Su Gil1, Ye Na Oh1, Tae Soo Hahm1, Ji Seon Jeong1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Mucopolysaccharidosis type II patients are reported to have an elevated incidence of difficult airway. Propofol is a commonly used sedative for magnetic resonance imaging in pediatric patients, but patients who receive it may exhibit dose-dependent upper airway obstruction and respiratory depression. Dexmedetomidine also provides adequate procedural sedation with a relatively low risk of airway obstruction. Accordingly, we introduced the use of dexmedetomidine in our practice to reduce the risk of airway obstruction during magnetic resonance imaging procedures. AIMS: The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of artificial airway interventions in patients sedated with propofol and compare it to that in patients sedated with dexmedetomidine in patients with mucopolysaccharidosis type II during magnetic resonance imaging procedures.
METHODS: All mucopolysaccharidosis type II patients undergoing magnetic resonance imaging at our institution between April 2014 and February 2018 were included in this study. The patients were divided into two groups according to whether they were managed before and after the introduction of dexmedetomidine: those who were sedated with propofol (group P) and those who were sedated with dexmedetomidine (group D).
RESULTS: Forty-six sedations were performed in 27 patients. Artificial airway interventions were significantly more frequent during propofol-based than dexmedetomidine-based sedation: 14 of 32 (43.8%) in group P and 1 of 14 (7.1%) in group D (odds ratio, 10.11; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-86.85; P = 0.018). Time to awake and time to discharge were similar between groups. Changes in hemodynamic variables also did not significantly differ between groups.
CONCLUSION: Dexmedetomidine provides an adequate level of sedation and is associated with lower rates of artificial airway interventions compared to propofol. Therefore, dexmedetomidine may offer advantages for preserving the native airway compared to propofol when administered during magnetic resonance imaging scans in patients with mucopolysaccharidosis type II.
© 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  airway management; dexmedetomidine; magnetic resonance imaging; mucopolysaccharidosis; propofol; sedation

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30375140     DOI: 10.1111/pan.13514

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Paediatr Anaesth        ISSN: 1155-5645            Impact factor:   2.556


  2 in total

1.  Perioperative complications of pediatric otorhinolaryngological operations.

Authors:  Yu S Aleksandrovich; V V Rybianov; K V Pshenisnov; S A Razumov
Journal:  Saudi J Anaesth       Date:  2020-09-24

2.  Effectiveness of single loading dose of dexmedetomidine combined with propofol for deep sedation of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in elderly patients: a prospective randomized study.

Authors:  Mo Chen; Yi Sun; Xueyan Li; Chun Zhang; Xiaochen Huang; Yiming Xu; Chengyong Gu
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2022-03-28       Impact factor: 2.217

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.