Literature DB >> 32107813

Intramuscular dexmedetomidine and oral chloral hydrate for pediatric sedation for electroencephalography: A propensity score-matched analysis.

Eun-Young Joo1, Yeon Ju Kim1, Yong-Seok Park1, Jihoon Park1, Myung Hee Song1, Kyung-Don Hahm1, In-Cheol Choi1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Intramuscular dexmedetomidine can be used for pediatric sedation without requiring intravenous access and has advantages for electroencephalography by inducing natural sleep pathway, but only a limited number of studies compared the efficacy of intramuscular dexmedetomidine with oral chloral hydrate. AIMS: To compare the efficacy and safety of intramuscular dexmedetomidine and oral chloral hydrate used for sedation during electroencephalography in pediatric patients.
METHODS: We reviewed the medical records of pediatric patients who underwent sedation for electroencephalography between January 2015 and December 2016. Initial doses of dexmedetomidine and chloral hydrate were 3 mcg/kg and 50 mg/kg, respectively; second doses (1 mcg/kg and 50 mg/kg, respectively) were administered if adequate sedation was not achieved. Demographic data, time of sedative administration, time of sedation and awakening, and time of arrival at recovery room and discharge were analyzed.
RESULTS: Out of a total of 1239 patients, 125 patients had received dexmedetomidine and 1114 had received chloral hydrate. After 1:1 propensity score matching, the dexmedetomidine and chloral hydrate groups each had 118 patients. Testing completion rate with a single dose of medication was higher in the dexmedetomidine group (91.5% vs 71.2%; mean difference [95% CI] 20.3 [10.8-29.9]; P < .0001; Pearson chi-square value = 16.09). Sedation onset time was shorter in the dexmedetomidine group as well (16.6 ± 13.0 minutes vs 41.5 ± 26.8 minutes; mean difference [95% CI] 24.8 [19.1-30.6]; P < .0001; T = 8.27). On the contrary, the duration of recovery was longer in the dexmedetomidine group (35.5 ± 40.2 minutes vs 18.5 ± 30.7 minutes; mean difference [95% CI] 18.6 [8.8-28.5]; P = .0002; T = -2.82). Total residence time was not significantly different between the two groups (125.8 ± 40.6 minutes vs 122.1 ± 42.2 minutes, mean difference [95% CI] 5.21 [6.1-16.5], P = .3665 T = 0.04).
CONCLUSIONS: Intramuscular dexmedetomidine showed higher sedation success rate and shorter time to achieving the desired sedation level compared with oral chloral hydrate and thus may be an effective alternative for oral chloral hydrate in pediatric patients requiring sedation for electroencephalography.
© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  chloral hydrate; dexmedetomidine; electroencephalography; intramuscular; moderate sedation; pediatrics

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32107813     DOI: 10.1111/pan.13844

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


  3 in total

1.  Analysis of Risk Factors for Chloral Hydrate Sedative Failure with Initial Dose in Pediatric Patients: a Retrospective Analysis.

Authors:  Yu Cui; Langtao Guo; Qixia Mu; Lu Kang; Qin Chen; Qunying Wu; Yani He; Min Tang
Journal:  Paediatr Drugs       Date:  2022-05-21       Impact factor: 3.022

2.  ED50 of Intranasal Dexmedetomidine Sedation for Transthoracic Echocardiography in Children with or without a History of Cardiac Surgery for Cyanotic Congenital Heart Disease.

Authors:  HongBin Gu; YunAn Song; Jie Bai
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2020-12-12       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 3.  Recent Advances in the Clinical Value and Potential of Dexmedetomidine.

Authors:  Xiaotian Liu; Yueqin Li; Li Kang; Qian Wang
Journal:  J Inflamm Res       Date:  2021-12-30
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.