Unsedated upper endoscopy in children

Pediatric unsedated transnasal endoscopy: applications, equipment, and future directions

Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy is a valuable tool to diagnose and treat GI conditions. Traditional pediatric GI endoscopy uses sedation or general anesthesia, with associated risks of cardiopulmonary compromise and social and economic costs like school or work absence. Unsedated, transnasal endoscopy is an approach that mitigates these disadvantages but provides similar diagnostic benefit to conventional endoscopy. Ongoing advances in the field of pediatric transnasal endoscopy will be driven by an enhanced understanding of current indications, available equipment, procedural comfort strategies, and recent developments in new diagnostic and therapeutic uses.

Use of intravenous lidocaine for dose reduction of propofol in paediatric colonoscopy patients: a randomised placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND

Propofol, a widely used sedative in endoscopic procedures, sometimes causes cardiopulmonary complications. Intravenous lidocaine can diminish visceral pain and decrease the dose of propofol. The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of intravenous lidocaine in reducing propofol dosage during paediatric colonoscopy.

METHODS

Forty children who underwent colonoscopy were divided into two groups. Lidocaine hydrochloride (1.5 mg/kg induction and 2 mg/kg/h maintenance) was given intravenously to the lidocaine group, and the same amount of saline was given to the control group after they received lidocaine induction. Propofol initial plasma concentration of 5 μg/mL was targeted, and the procedure was performed after the bispectral index value reached 55. The primary outcome was propofol requirement.

RESULTS

The propofol requirement in the lidocaine group was decreased by 35.5% (128.6 ± 30.4 mg vs. 199.4 ± 57.6 mg; p < 0.001; 95%CI: - 100.60, - 41.02). The incidence of involuntary body movements was significantly lower in the lidocaine group (p = 0.028; OR = 0.17; 95%CI: 0.03, 0.92). The awakening time (p < 0.001; 95%CI: - 7.67, - 5.13) and recovery times (p < 0.001; 95%CI: - 7.45, - 4.35) were significantly lower in the lidocaine group. Pain was significantly less at 30 min and 60 min after the procedure in the lidocaine group (0 [0-4] vs. 3 [0-5], p < 0. 001; 0 [0-2] vs. 1 [0-3], p = 0.001). There was no difference in the incidence of bradycardia, hypotension, or hypoxia between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

For colonoscopy procedures in paediatric patients, intravenous lidocaine reduces the amount of propofol needed, provides better sedation and postprocedural pain management, as well as a reduction in recovery time.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was registered on November 6, 2020 at China Clinical Trials Registration Center ( www.chictr.org.cn ) ref.: ChiCTR 2,000,039,706.

Effectiveness of oral phloroglucinol as a premedication for unsedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy: A prospective, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized trial

Background

Anti-spasmodic agents are commonly injected during esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) to improve visualization of the gastric mucosa by inhibiting gastrointestinal (GI) peristalsis. The availability of oral anti-spasmodic agents would increase convenience. In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness of oral phloroglucinol (Flospan^®) as a premedication for unsedated EGD.

Methods

A prospective, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized controlled trial was conducted in a tertiary hospital. Individuals scheduled to undergo unsedated EGD were randomly assigned to receive either oral phloroglucinol or matching placebo 15 min before EGD. The primary outcome was the rate of complete gastric peristalsis suppression. Outcomes were assessed by independent investigators according to the classification of gastric peristalsis and ease of intragastric observation at the beginning (Period A) and end (Period B) of EGD.

Results

Overall, 71 phloroglucinol-treated and 71 placebo-treated participants (n = 142 total) were included. The phloroglucinol group showed significantly higher proportions of participants with complete gastric peristalsis suppression than the placebo group (22.5% vs. 9.9%, P = 0.040). The ease of intragastric observation was significantly better in the phloroglucinol group than in the placebo group at Periods A (P < 0.001) and B (P = 0.005). Patients in both groups had comparable adverse events and showed willingness to take the premedication at their next examination.

Conclusions

Oral phloroglucinol significantly suppressed gastrointestinal peristalsis during unsedated EGD compared with placebo (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03342118).

Sedation and Monitoring in the Pediatric Patient during Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

Sedation is a fundamental component of pediatric gastrointestinal procedures. The 2 main types of sedation for pediatric endoscopy remain general anesthesia and procedural sedation. Although anesthesiologist-administered sedation protocols are more common, there is no ideal regimen for endoscopy in children. This article discusses specific levels of sedation for endoscopy as well as various regimens that can be used to achieve each. Risks and considerations that may be specific to performing gastrointestinal procedures in children are reviewed. Finally, potential future directions for sedation and monitoring that may change the practice of pediatric gastroenterology and ultimately patient outcomes are examined.

Diagnostic Methods in Primary Ciliary Dyskinesia

Diagnosing primary ciliary dyskinesia is difficult. With no reference standard, a combination of tests is needed; most tests require expensive equipment and specialist scientists. We review the advances in diagnostic testing over the past hundred years, with emphasis on recent advances. We particularly focus on use of high-speed video analysis, transmission electron microscopy, nasal nitric oxide and genetic testing. We discuss the international efforts that are in place to advance the evidence base for diagnostic tests.

Unsedated transnasal esophagoscopy for monitoring therapy in pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Unsedated transnasal endoscopy (TNE) is safer and less costly than sedated EGD. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of TNE with biopsies in monitoring the esophageal mucosa of pediatric patients with eosinophilic esophagitis.

METHODS

Patients between 8 and 17 years of age with eosinophilic esophagitis and their parents were enrolled. Unsedated TNE was performed. A 2.8-mm (1.2-mm channel) or a 4-mm flexible bronchoscope (2-mm channel) was used, and esophageal biopsy specimens were obtained. Biopsy specimen analysis, duration, adverse events, and billing charges of TNE were assessed. Immediately after TNE and a minimum of 2 weeks later, a modified Group Health Association of America 9 survey and a preference questionnaire were completed, respectively.

RESULTS

Twenty-one of 22 enrolled patients underwent TNE. TNE was performed with no serious adverse events. Histopathological analysis revealed 0 eosinophils per high-power field (n = 12), fewer than 15 eosinophils per high-power field (n = 4), and more than 15 eosinophils per high-power field (n = 5). The total epithelial surface area of mucosal biopsy samples from either TNE Forceps (1.2 mm or 2 mm biopsy channel forceps) compared with those obtained during the subject's previous EGD by using standard endoscopic forceps was not statistically different (P = .308 [1.2 mm]/P = .492 [2 mm]). All parents and 76.2% of subjects would undergo the TNE again. TNE was preferred over EGD by 85.7% of parents and 52.4% of subjects. The modified Group Health Association of America 9 survey revealed a high degree of satisfaction (average, 43.19 ± 2.6; maximum score, 45). Charges associated with TNE were 60.1% lower than for previous EGDs.

CONCLUSIONS

Unsedated TNE is an effective, lower-cost procedure for monitoring the esophageal mucosa of children with eosinophilic esophagitis.

Informed Consent for Pediatric Endoscopy

Informed consent and refusal for pediatric procedures involves a process in which the provider, child, and parents/guardians participate. In pediatric gastroenterology, many procedures are considered elective and the process generally begins with an office visit and ends with the signing of the consent document. If the process is emergent then this occurs more expeditiously and a formal consent may not be required. Information about the procedure should be shared in a way that allows a decision-making process to occur for both the parent/guardian and the child, if of assenting age.

Immune Homeostasis of Human Gastric Mucosa in Helicobacter pylori Infection

We present the results of electron microscopic, microbiological, immunohistochemical, and molecular genetic studies of gastric biopsy specimens taken for diagnostic purposes according by clinical indications during examination of patients with gastrointestinal pathology. Immune homeostasis of the gastric mucosa against the background of infection with various pathogen strains of Helicobacter pylori was studied in patients of different age groups with peptic ulcer, gastritis, metaplasia, and cancer. Some peculiarities of Helicobacter pylori contamination in the gastric mucosa were demonstrated. Immune homeostasis of the gastric mucosa in different pathologies was analyzed depending on the Helicobacter pylori genotype.

Safe and effective procedural sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy in children

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to assess, by a review of published evidence, the safest and most effective way to provide procedural sedation (PS) in children undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy (GIE).

METHODS

The databases MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Embase were used. Search terms "endoscopy, gastrointestinal" or "endoscopy, digestive system" were combined with "sedation," "conscious sedation," "moderate sedation," "deep sedation," and "hypnotics and sedatives." The final review was restricted to studies reporting specifically on safety (incidences of adverse events) and/or effectiveness (time characteristics, need for supplemental sedation, need for restraint, procedural success, provider satisfaction, and patient comfort) of PS for GIE in children younger than 18 years.

RESULTS

The search yielded 182 references and the final selection included 11 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 15 non-RCTs. Six sedation categories were identified: propofol, opioid/benzodiazepine, premedication, ketamine-, sevoflurane-, and midazolam-based. Only a few RCTs have compared different categories. Opioid/benzodiazepine- and propofol-based PS have a similar safety profile and a low incidence of major adverse events. Propofol-based sedation turned out to be the most effective regimen, with effectiveness comparable to general anesthesia. The addition of midazolam, fentanyl, remifentanil, and/or ketamine to propofol may increase the effectiveness without creating more adverse events. Data on midazolam-, ketamine- and sevoflurane-based sedation were generally too limited to draw conclusions.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a lack of RCTs containing all aspects of effectiveness and safety, the present evidence indicates propofol-based PS to be the best practice for PS in children undergoing GIE. Propofol can be safely administered by specifically trained nonanesthesiologists.

A systematic review of faces scales for the self-report of pain intensity in children

CONTEXT

Numerous faces scales have been developed for the measurement of pain intensity in children. It remains unclear whether any one of the faces scales is better for a particular purpose with regard to validity, reliability, feasibility, and preference.

OBJECTIVES

To summarize and systematically review faces pain scales most commonly used to obtain self-report of pain intensity in children for evaluation of reliability and validity and to compare the scales for preference and utility.

METHODS

Five major electronic databases were systematically searched for studies that used a faces scale for the self-report measurement of pain intensity in children. Fourteen faces pain scales were identified, of which 4 have undergone extensive psychometric testing: Faces Pain Scale (FPS) (scored 0-6); Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) (0-10); Oucher pain scale (0-10); and Wong-Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale (WBFPRS) (0-10). These 4 scales were included in the review. Studies were classified by using psychometric criteria, including construct validity, reliability, and responsiveness, that were established a priori.

RESULTS

From a total of 276 articles retrieved, 182 were screened for psychometric evaluation, and 127 were included. All 4 faces pain scales were found to be adequately supported by psychometric data. When given a choice between faces scales, children preferred the WBFPRS. Confounding of pain intensity with affect caused by use of smiling and crying anchor faces is a disadvantage of the WBFPRS.

CONCLUSIONS

For clinical use, we found no grounds to switch from 1 faces scale to another when 1 of the scales is in use. For research use, the FPS-R has been recommended on the basis of utility and psychometric features. Data are sparse for children below the age of 5 years, and future research should focus on simplified measures, instructions, and anchors for these younger children.

General considerations and updates in pediatric gastrointestinal diagnostic endoscopy

Gastrointestinal and colonic endoscopic examinations have been performed in pediatric patients in Korea for 3 decades. Endoscopic procedures are complex and may be unsafe if special concerns are not considered. Many things have to be kept in mind before, during, and after the procedure. Gastrointestinal endoscopy is one of the most frequently performed procedure in children nowadays, Since the dimension size of the endoscopy was modified for pediatric patients 15 years ago, endoscopic procedures are almost performed routinely in pediatric gastrointestinal patients. The smaller size of the scope let the physicians approach the diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopic procedures. But this is an invasive procedure, so the procedure itself may provoke an emergence state. The procedure-related complications can more easily occur in pediatric patients. Sedation-related or procedure-related respiratory, cardiovascular complications are mostly important and critical in the care. The endoscopists are required to consider diverse aspects of the procedure - patient preparation, indications and contraindications, infection controls, sedation methods, sedative medicines and the side effects of each medicine, monitoring during and after the procedure, and complications related with the procedure and medicines - to perform the procedure successfully and safely. This article presents some important guidelines and recommendations for gastrointestinal endoscopy through literature review.

Insufflation vs intubation during esophagogastroduodenoscopy in children

OBJECTIVES

We compared adverse airway events during esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in children managed with insufflation vs intubation.

BACKGROUND

Optimum airway management during EGD in children remains undecided.

METHODS/MATERIALS

Following IRB approval and written informed parental consent, children between 1 and 12 years of age presenting for EGD were randomized to airway management with insufflation (Group I), intubation/awake extubation (Group A), or intubation/deep extubation (Group D). All subjects received a standardized anesthetic with sevoflurane in oxygen. Using uniform definitions, airway adverse events during and after EGD recovery were recorded. Categorical data were analysed with Chi-square contingency tables or Fisher's exact test as appropriate.

RESULTS

Analyzable data were available for 415 subjects (Group I: 209; Group A: 101; Group D: 105). Desaturation, laryngospasm, any airway adverse event, and multiple airway adverse events during EGD were significantly more common in subjects in Group I compared to those in Groups A and D. Complaints of sore throat, hoarseness, stridor, and/or dysphagia were more common in subjects in Groups A and D. Analysis of confounders suggested that younger age, obesity, and midazolam premedication were independent predictors of airway adverse events during EGD.

CONCLUSIONS

Insufflation during EGD was associated with a higher incidence of airway adverse events, including desaturation and laryngospasm; intubation during EGD was associated with more frequent complaints related to sore throat. As our results show that insufflation during EGD offers no advantage in terms of operational efficiency and is associated with more airway adverse events, we recommend endotracheal intubation during EGD, especially in patients who are younger, obese, or have received midazolam premedication.

Professional skills and competence for safe and effective procedural sedation in children: recommendations based on a systematic review of the literature

Objectives. To investigate which skills and competence are imperative to assure optimal effectiveness and safety of procedural sedation (PS) in children and to analyze the underlying levels of evidence. Study Design and methods. Systematic review of literature published between 1993 and March 2009. Selected papers were classified according to their methodological quality and summarized in evidence-based conclusions. Next, conclusions were used to formulate recommendations. Results. Although the safety profiles vary among PS drugs, the possibility of potentially serious adverse events and the predictability of depth and duration of sedation define the imperative skills and competence necessary for a timely recognition and appropriate management. The level of effectiveness is mainly determined by the ability to apply titratable PS, including deep sedation using short-acting anesthetics for invasive procedures and nitrous oxide for minor painful procedures, and the implementation of non-pharmacological techniques. Conclusions. PS related safety and effectiveness are determined by the circumstances and professional skills rather than by specific pharmacologic characteristics. Evidence based recommendations regarding necessary skills and competence should be used to set up training programs and to define which professionals can and cannot be credentialed for PS in children.

Clinical effectiveness of an anesthesiologist-administered intravenous sedation outside of the main operating room for pediatric upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in Thailand

Objectives. To review our sedation practice and to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of an anesthesiologist-administered intravenous sedation outside of the main operating room for pediatric upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (UGIE) in Thailand. Subjects and Methods. We undertook a retrospective review of the sedation service records of pediatric patients who underwent UGIE. All endoscopies were performed by a pediatric gastroenterologist. All sedation was administered by staff anesthesiologist or anesthetic personnel. Results. A total of 168 patients (94 boys and 74 girls), with age from 4 months to 12 years, underwent 176 UGIE procedures. Of these, 142 UGIE procedures were performed with intravenous sedation (IVS). The mean sedation time was 23.2 +/- 10.0 minutes. Propofol was the most common sedative drugs used. Mean dose of propofol, midazolam and fentanyl was 10.0 +/- 7.5 mg/kg/hr, 0.2 +/- 0.2 mg/kg/hr, and 2.5 +/- 1.2 mcg/kg/hr, respectively. Complications relatively occurred frequently. All sedations were successful. However, two patients became more deeply than intended and required unplanned endotracheal intubation. Conclusion. The study shows the clinical effectiveness of an anesthesiologist-administered IVS outside of the main operating room for pediatric UGIE in Thailand. All complications are relatively high. We recommend the use of more sensitive equipments such as end tidal CO(2) and carefully select more appropriate patients.

Experience of intravenous sedation for pediatric gastrointestinal endoscopy in a large tertiary referral center in a developing country

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of intravenous sedation for pediatric gastrointestinal endoscopy (GIE) at a tertiary care teaching hospital in a developing country.

METHODS

We undertook a retrospective review of the sedation service records of pediatric patients who underwent GIE. All endoscopies were performed by a pediatric gastroenterologist. All of the sedation was administered by staff anesthesiologist or anesthetic personnel in the gastroenterology procedure room.

RESULTS

Sedation was provided for 222 procedures in 214 patients ranged in age from younger than 1 to 17 years and in weight from 2.7 to 80.0 kg. Intravenous sedation was provided in 176 patients (82.2%). Of these patients, 185 procedures were performed and reviewed, with 152 (82.2%) procedures were esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) alone, 14 (7.6%) procedures were colonoscopy alone, 18 (9.7%) procedures were EGD and colonoscopy, and one procedure was endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS). Most common indications of the procedure were screening for esophageal varices (25.2%), abdominal pain (15.9%), history of upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (13.6%), and unexplained anemia (10.3%). The majority of preanesthetic problems were hematologic disease, anemia (38.2%); liver disease, cirrhosis (13.5%); and electrolyte imbalance (13.5%). Propofol (94.0%), fentanyl (87.0%), and midazolam (67.8%) were frequently used. The mean dose of propofol was 7.8 +/- 4.1 mg.kg(-1).h(-1), fentanyl 2.3 +/- 1.1 mcg.kg(-1).h(-1), and midazolam 0.1 +/- 0.1 mg.kg(-1).h(-1). Most of them were used in combination. The combination of propofol, fentanyl, and midazolam was commonly employed (46.4%). The mean sedation time of all procedures was 28.2 min and was different according to procedure type. Complications occurred infrequently (13.5%) and were medication or airway related. All complications were easily treated, with no adverse sequelae. Intravenous sedation was successful except for one patient who required general anesthesia. However, all procedures were completed successfully.

CONCLUSIONS

In the setting of the developing country, intravenous sedation for pediatric GIE by trained anesthetic personnel with appropriate monitoring was safe and effective. Serious adverse events were rare in our population.

Sedation of the pediatric and adolescent patient for GI procedures

There remains no ideal sedative for pediatric and adolescent patients undergoing gastrointestinal procedures. Instead, pediatric gastroenterologists must consider many factors, including patient age, medical history, clinical status, anxiety level, as well as targeted sedation level, to select the appropriate methods and agents to achieve optimal sedation for endoscopy. The two primary types of sedation are endoscopist-administered intravenous (IV) sedation and anesthesiologist-administered general anesthesia. If IV sedation is used, pediatric endoscopists must be prepared for children to become agitated, adding to stress for both patients and clinical staff. General anesthesia provides the advantage of complete patient immobility but also entails increased costs and utilization of hospital resources. Technical advances in electronic monitoring, both in the pediatric endoscopy suite and operating room settings, are contributing to increased patient safety. Nevertheless, sedation-related events, independent of type of sedation or regimen, represent the most common complications of pediatric endoscopy.

Safety of intravenous midazolam and fentanyl for pediatric GI endoscopy: prospective study of 1578 endoscopies

BACKGROUND

Data on safety of intravenous sedation in pediatric GI endoscopy are sparse.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate safety of intravenous sedation for GI endoscopy.

DESIGN/SETTING

Single-center prospective series of outpatient GI endoscopies performed from February 2003 to February 2004 at The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. The recorded information included demographic, medication, and adverse event data.

PATIENTS

A total of 1226 patients were studied.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Description of adverse events relating to intravenous sedation.

RESULTS

A total of 2635 endoscopies were performed, of which 1717 were outpatient procedures with the patient under intravenous sedation. Sedation data were available on 1578 procedures (92%, M/F 674/552): 758 esophagogastroduodenoscopies (EGD) alone, 116 colonoscopies (COL) alone, and 352 combined EGD and COL. The median dose of fentanyl was 2.77 microg/kg (SD 0.97, range 0-6.73), and of midazolam was 0.11 mg/kg (SD 0.06, range 0-0.39). The mean recovery time was 118 minutes (SD 47.3, range 31-375). Ten patients (0.8%) failed intravenous sedation. Serious adverse events (apnea) were noted in 2 patients (0.2%). Mild or moderate adverse events included desaturation below 92% for less than 20 seconds (100 patients, 9%), vomiting (64 patients, 5%), agitation (15 patients, 1%), desaturation below 92% for greater than 20 seconds (12 patients, 0.7%), and rash (8 patients, 0.7%). No cardiopulmonary resuscitation or sedation reversal was necessary. No patients required hospitalization. Patients younger than 6 years were more likely to develop respiratory adverse event (P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous sedation with midazolam and fentanyl is safe for pediatric GI endoscopy. Serious adverse events are rare and no patient required hospitalization.

Propofol sedation with fentanyl or midazolam during oesophagogastroduodenoscopy in children

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Sedation is commonly used to facilitate diagnostic procedures in children. The aim of our study was to investigate sedation in children using propofol alone or combined with fentanyl or midazolam with regard to efficacy, adverse reactions or side-effects related to the drugs, ease of operation for the endoscopist, and time to discharge from the post-anaesthesia care unit.

METHODS

We prospectively studied 240 children, aged 1-12 yr of age, undergoing endoscopic procedures of the upper gastrointestinal tract. The patients were given an oral premedication with midazolam (0.5 mg kg(-1)) and were then randomly allocated to one of the three study groups: propofol alone (Group P), propofol with fentanyl 1 mug kg-1 (Group PF) or propofol with midazolam 0.1 mg kg(-1) (Group PM). Additional doses of propofol given during the procedure were recorded. Adequacy of sedation and ease of procedure (easy, adequate, impossible) were evaluated by the endoscopist, who was blinded as to the drugs used.

RESULTS

The duration of the procedure and the recovery period were similar in the three groups. The number of patients requiring supplemental doses of propofol to permit safe completion of gastroscopy was 31 in Group P (=39%; eight of these required two additional doses), 14 in Group PM (=18%), and 11 in Group PF (=13%) (P < 0.05). There was a lower incidence of adverse events in Group PM and in Group PF than in Group P (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Propofol in combination with fentanyl or midazolam gives better sedation and ease of endoscopy than propofol alone.