Dexmedetomidine for Prolonged Sedation in the PICU: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Development and Preliminary Testing of the Withdrawal Assessment Tool-Alpha 2 Agonist: An Assessment Instrument for Monitoring Iatrogenic Withdrawal Symptoms in Children Receiving an Alpha-2 Agonist

OBJECTIVES

To develop and conduct preliminary testing of the Withdrawal Assessment Tool-Alpha 2 Agonist (WAT-A2A) to monitor dexmedetomidine and clonidine withdrawal symptoms in acutely ill children.

DESIGN

Three-phase instrument development study. Phase 1: retrospective chart review of symptoms exhibited by children with documented dexmedetomidine withdrawal; phase 2: WAT-A2A instrument construction based on phase 1 data; and phase 3: prospective testing of the WAT-A2A in children weaning from alpha 2 agonists (A2As).

SETTING

Academic free-standing children's hospital.

PATIENTS

Acutely ill children weaning from at least 5 days of dexmedetomidine. Excluded were children concurrently weaning other sedatives.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Phase 1: In 83 of 303 children weaning from at least 5 days of dexmedetomidine who had clinician documentation and were managed for A2A withdrawal, 88% ( n = 72) exhibited at least a 20% increase in heart rate (HR), 83% ( n = 69) exhibited agitation or change in usual state behavior, 46% ( n = 38) exhibited at least a 20% increase in diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and when documented, 56% (27/48) exhibited tremors during their A2A withdrawal episode. Phase 2: The WAT-A2A was constructed, based on phase 1 data, and includes four items: HR, state behavior, DBP, and tremors. Phase 3: The WAT-A2A was tested and performed well in 82 children weaning from A2A. The total WAT-A2A score correlated with clinician subjective assessment of A2A withdrawal (Spearman correlation = 0.5; p < 0.001). Inter-rater agreement, comparing paired ratings of prospectively collected WAT-A2A data, indicated moderate inter-rater reliability.

CONCLUSIONS

Acutely ill children receiving sedation with an A2A for more than 5 days may develop physiologic dependence, requiring gradual dosing reductions. While further psychometric testing is advised, the WAT-A2A provides an objective instrument to help clinicians quantify dexmedetomidine withdrawal symptoms in acutely ill children may facilitate A2A weaning and limit unnecessary variation in practice.

Sinus Arrest Related to Dexmedetomidine Infusion in an Infant; a Case Report and Review of Current Literature

Background: Dexmedetomidine, an alpha 2 agonist, has emerged as a desirable sedative agent in the pediatric intensive care unit due to its minimal effect on respiratory status and reduction in delirium. Bradycardia and hypotension are common side effects, however there are emerging reports of more serious cardiovascular events, including sinus arrest and asystole. These case reports have been attributed to high vagal tone or underlying cardiac conduction dysfunction. Objectives: To describe the development of sinus arrest during sedation with dexmedetomidine in a patient without clinical features of high vagal tone, underlying cardiac conduction dysfunction, or intervening episodes of bradycardia. Case Presentation: An 11 month-old patient requiring sedation during mechanical ventilation for acute respiratory failure secondary to Adenovirus. To facilitate sedation, a dexmedetomidine infusion was initiated at .5 mcg/kg/hr and increased to maximum 1 mcg/kg/hr. Within 8 hours of initiating therapy, the patient had three episodes of sinus arrest. There was no intervening bradycardia between episodes and no further episodes occurred following discontinuation of dexmedetomidine. The patient did not have any clinical features associated with high vagal tone or underlying cardiac conduction dysfunction. Conclusions: As result of these findings, understanding risk factors for bradycardia, or more serious hemodynamic instability with dexmedetomidine infusions, is important to help identify high risk patients and weigh the associated risks and benefits of its administration.

Adverse cardiovascular events are common during dexmedetomidine administration in neonates and infants during intensive care

AIM

This study aimed to assess the safety of a commonly used sedative, dexmedetomidine in neonates and infants during intensive care.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted in the paediatric intensive care unit at Oulu University Hospital. The study population consisted of all children from birth up to 6 months of age who received dexmedetomidine during 2010-2016. Adverse cardiovascular outcomes were defined as abnormal heart rates or blood pressure values according to the Paediatric Early Warning Score.

RESULTS

Of the 172 infants, 56% had congenital malformation, and 48% had undergone surgery. Neonates and 1-3-month-olds experienced bradycardia (86% vs. 73% in 1-3-month-olds and 50% in 3-6-month-olds, p = 0.001) and severe bradycardia (17% vs. 14% in 1-3-month-olds and 0% in 3-6-month-olds, p = 0.005) more often than older patients. The median maximum rate of dexmedetomidine infusion was 0.86 μg/kg/h (IQR = 0.60-1.71 μg/kg/h). A dose-dependent increase in bradycardia and severe hypotension was found. Adverse cardiovascular events were managed with additional fluid boluses and discontinuation of the infusion.

CONCLUSION

Adverse cardiovascular events were common during dexmedetomidine administration in neonates and infants. Lower dexmedetomidine doses may be required in sedating neonates.

Analgesia and sedation in critically ill pediatric patients: an update from the recent guidelines and point of view

In the last decades, the advancement of knowledge in analgesia and sedation for critically ill pediatric patients has been conspicuous and relevant. Many recommendations have changed to ensure patients' comfort during their intensive care unit (ICU) stay and prevent and treat sedation-related complications, as well as improve functional recovery and clinical outcomes. The key aspects of the analgosedation management in pediatrics have been recently reviewed in two consensus-based documents. However, there remains a lot to be researched and understood. With this narrative review and authors' point of view, we aimed to summarize the new insights presented in these two documents to facilitate their interpretation and application in clinical practice, as well as to outline research priorities in the field.    Conclusion: With this narrative review and authors' point of view, we aimed to summarize the new insights presented in these two documents to facilitate their interpretation and application in clinical practice, as well as to outline research priorities in the field. What is Known: • Critically ill pediatric patients receiving intensive care required analgesia and sedation to attenuate painful and stressful stimuli. •Optimal management of analgosedation is a challenge often burdened with complications such as tolerance, iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome, delirium, and possible adverse outcomes. What is New: •The new insights on the analgosedation treatment for critically ill pediatric patients delineated in the recent guidelines are summarized to identify strategies for changes in clinical practice. •Research gaps and potential for quality improvement projects are also highlighted.

Perioperative dexmedetomidine compared to midazolam in children undergoing open-heart surgery: A pilot randomised controlled trial

Objective

There is a need for evidence on the best sedative agents in children undergoing open heart surgery for congenital heart disease. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of dexmedetomidine in this group compared with midazolam.

Design

Double blinded, pilot randomized controlled trial.

Setting

Cardiac operating theatre and paediatric intensive care unit in Brisbane, Australia.

Participants

Infants (≤12 months of age) undergoing their first surgical repair of a congenital heart defect.

Interventions

Dexmedetomidine (up to 1.0mcg/kg/hr) versus midazolam (up to 80mcg/kg/hr), commenced in the cardiac operating theatre prior to surgery.

Main outcome measures

The primary outcome was the time spent in light sedation (Sedation Behavior Scale [SBS] -1 to +1); Co-primary feasibility outcome was recruitment, retention and protocol adherence. Secondary outcomes were use of supplemental sedatives, ventilator free days, delirium, vasoactive drug support, and adverse events. Neurodevelopment and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were assessed at 12 months post-surgery.

Results

Sixty-six participants were recruited. The number of SBS scores in the light sedation range were greater in the dexmedetomidine group at 24 hours, 48 hours, and overall study duration (0-14 days) versus the midazolam group (24hr: 76/170 [45%] vs 60/178 [34%], aOR 4.14 [95% CI 0.48, 35.92]; 48hr: 154/298 [52%] vs 122/314 [39%], aOR 6.95 [95% CI 0.77, 63.13]; 0-14 days: 597/831 [72%] vs 527/939 [56%], aOR 3.93 [95% CI 0.62, 25.03]). Feasibility was established with no withdrawals or loss to follow-up at 14 days and minimal protocol deviations. There were no differences between the groups relating to clinical, safety, neurodevelopment or HRQoL outcomes.

Conclusions

The use of dexmedetomidine was associated with more time spent in light sedation when compared with midazolam. The feasibility of conducting a blinded RCT of midazolam and dexmedetomidine in children undergoing open heart surgery was also established. The findings justify further investigation in a larger trial.

Clinical trial registration

ACTRN12615001304527.

What Is the Role of Dexmedetomidine in Modern Anesthesia and Critical Care?

Dexmedetomidine's unique sedative properties have led to its widespread use. Dexmedetomidine has a beneficial pharmacologic profile including analgesic sparing effects, anxiolysis, sympatholysis, organ-protective effects against ischemic and hypoxic injury, and sedation which parallels natural sleep. An understanding of predictable side effects, effects of age-related physiologic changes, and pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic effects of dexmedetomidine is crucial to maximize its safe administration in adults and children. This review focuses on the growing body of literature examining advances in applications of dexmedetomidine in children and adults.

Effect of Perioperative Dexmedetomidine Anesthesia on Prognosis of Elderly Patients with Gastrointestinal Tumor Surgery

It was to investigate the influence of perioperative dexmedetomidine (DEX) anesthesia on the prognosis of elderly patients with gastrointestinal tumor (GIT) surgery. 90 patients who underwent laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for GIT were included. They were randomly divided into the experimental group (45 cases) with DEX+general anesthesia, and the control group (45 cases) with epidural anesthesia+general anesthesia. The indicators after surgery were compared between the two groups. The mean arterial pressure (MAP) was 74.8 ± 3.5 mmHg and the heart rate (HR) was 52.7 ± 8.2 beats/min⁻¹ in the experimental group, significantly lower than those of the control group (P < 0.05). The Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores of both groups decreased greatly associated to those before surgery (P < 0.05). The levels of cortisol (COR) and immune adhesion inhibitor (FEIR) in the experimental group were significantly dissimilar from those in the control group (P < 0.05). The tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) was 96.4 ± 21.8 ng/L in the experimental group, observably lower than that in the control group (P < 0.05). The postoperative diamine oxidase (DAO) and D-lactate (D-lac) were 62.4 ± 9.3 μmol/mL and 33.8 ± 7.2 ng/L, respectively, in the experimental group, much lower than those in the control group (P < 0.05). There were also significant differences in the initial recovery of bowel sounds, defecation, and total length of hospital stay (LOHS) between the groups (P < 0.05). DEX anesthesia had ideal sedative and analgesic effects, improving the prognosis of patients during surgery, and shortening the LOHS. Thus, it deserved a clinical application value.

Weaning Dexmedetomidine in Non-ICU Areas: An Implementation Effort

OBJECTIVES

To develop and implement clinical practice guidelines for safely weaning dexmedetomidine infusions in non-ICU areas.

DESIGN

Development, implementation, and analysis of effectiveness of clinical practice guidelines.

SETTING

Quaternary care academic free-standing pediatric hospital.

PATIENTS

Children, otherwise medically ready for transfer to non-ICU areas, who were undergoing a planned wean of a dexmedetomidine infusion.

INTERVENTIONS

Subject matter experts developed evidence-based guidelines for weaning dexmedetomidine in patients whose critical phase of illness had resolved.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Searches identified no prospective studies of dexmedetomidine weaning. We identified two retrospective reviews of withdrawal symptoms and one on the use of clonidine. There were case studies on withdrawal symptoms. Guidelines were piloted on a cohort of 24 patients while in the ICU. The guidelines were then implemented in non-ICU areas for patients undergoing dexmedetomidine weaning after ICU transfer. Over a 2-year period (October 1, 2018, to September 30, 2020), 63 patients (1 mo to 18 yr old) successfully weaned dexmedetomidine in non-ICU areas. The median time to discontinuation of dexmedetomidine after transfer to non-ICU areas was 5.8 days (interquartile range, 4.75-15 d). Fifty-eight percent (n = 41) of all patients were considered high risk for dexmedetomidine withdrawal based on the dose, duration of exposure, and the risk of experiencing physiologic detriment with more than mild withdrawal. Twenty-nine patients (46%) exhibited no signs or symptoms of withdrawal while weaning per guidelines. For those with signs and symptoms of withdrawal, the most common were tachycardia (n = 26, 40%), agitation (n = 9, 14%), and hypertension (n = 9, 11%).

CONCLUSIONS

Weaning dexmedetomidine in non-ICU areas is feasible and can be accomplished safely even among pediatric patients at high risk for withdrawal using standardized weaning guidelines. At our institution, implementation was associated with reduced ICU length of stay for patients recovering from critical illness.

Pain and sedation management and monitoring in pediatric intensive care units across Europe: an ESPNIC survey

BACKGROUND

Management and monitoring of pain and sedation to reduce discomfort as well as side effects, such as over- and under-sedation, withdrawal syndrome and delirium, is an integral part of pediatric intensive care practice. However, the current state of management and monitoring of analgosedation across European pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) remains unknown. The aim of this survey was to describe current practices across European PICUs regarding the management and monitoring of pain and sedation.

METHODS

An online survey was distributed among 357 European PICUs assessing demographic features, drug choices and dosing, as well as usage of instruments for monitoring pain and sedation. We also compared low- and high-volume PICUs practices. Responses were collected from January to April 2021.

RESULTS

A total of 215 (60% response rate) PICUs from 27 European countries responded. Seventy-one percent of PICUs stated to use protocols for analgosedation management, more frequently in high-volume PICUs (77% vs 63%, p = 0.028). First-choice drug combination was an opioid with a benzodiazepine, namely fentanyl (51%) and midazolam (71%) being the preferred drugs. The starting doses differed between PICUs from 0.1 to 5 mcg/kg/h for fentanyl, and 0.01 to 0.5 mg/kg/h for midazolam. Daily assessment and documentation for pain (81%) and sedation (87%) was reported by most of the PICUs, using the preferred validated FLACC scale (54%) and the COMFORT Behavioural scale (48%), respectively. Both analgesia and sedation were mainly monitored by nurses (92% and 84%, respectively). Eighty-six percent of the responding PICUs stated to use neuromuscular blocking agents in some scenarios. Monitoring of paralysed patients was preferably done by observation of vital signs with electronic devices support.

CONCLUSIONS

This survey provides an overview of current analgosedation practices among European PICUs. Drugs of choice, dosing and assessment strategies were shown to differ widely. Further research and development of evidence-based guidelines for optimal drug dosing and analgosedation assessment are needed.

Dexmedetomidine in Children on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: Pharmacokinetic Data Exploration Using Previously Published Models

BACKGROUND

Dexmedetomidine is a sedative and analgesic increasingly used in children supported with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). No data is available to describe the pharmacokinetics (PK) of dexmedetomidine in this population.

METHODS

We performed a single-center prospective PK study. Children <18 years old, supported with ECMO, and on a dexmedetomidine infusion as part of their management were prospectively included. PK samples were collected. Dexmedetomidine dosing remained at the discretion of the clinical team. Six population PK models built in pediatrics were selected. Observed concentrations were compared with population predicted concentrations using the PK models.

RESULTS

Eight children contributed 30 PK samples. None of the PK models evaluated predicted the concentrations with acceptable precision and bias. Four of the six evaluated models overpredicted the concentrations. The addition of a correction factor on clearance improved models' fit. Two of the evaluated models were not applicable to our whole population age range because of their structure.

CONCLUSION

Most of the evaluated PK models overpredicted the concentrations, potentially indicating increased clearance on ECMO. Population PK models applicable to a broad spectrum of ages and pathologies are more practical in pediatric critical care settings but challenging to develop.

Dexmedetomidine versus Propofol for Operator-Directed Nurse-Administered Procedural Sedation during Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation: a Randomized Controlled Study

BACKGROUND

Operator-directed nurse-administered (ODNA) sedation with propofol is the preferred sedation technique for catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) in many centers.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to investigate whether Dexmedetomidine, an α2-adrenergic receptor agonist, is superior to propofol.

METHODS

We randomized 160 consecutive patients undergoing first AF ablation to ODNA sedation by dexmedetomidine (DEX group) versus propofol (PRO group), according to a standardized protocol. Patients were unaware of treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was a composite of inefficient sedation, termination/change of sedation protocol or procedure abortion, hypercapnia (transcutaneous CO2 >55 mmHg), hypoxemia (SpO₂ <90%) or intubation, prolonged hypotension (systolic blood pressure <80 mmHg), and sustained bradycardia necessitating cardiac pacing. Secondary endpoints were the components of the primary endpoint and patient satisfaction with procedural sedation, as assessed by a standardized questionnaire the day following ablation.

RESULTS

The primary endpoint occurred in 15 DEX group and 25 PRO group patients (19% vs. 31%; p=0.068). Hypercapnia was significantly more frequent in PRO group patients (29% vs. 10%; p=0.003). There was no significant difference among the other components of the primary endpoint, no procedure was aborted. Patient satisfaction was significantly better in PRO group patients (visual analog scale 0-100; median 100 in PRO group vs. median 93 in DEX group; p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Efficacy of ODNA sedation with dexmedetomidine was not different to propofol. Hypercapnia occurs less frequent with dexmedetomidine, but patient satisfaction is better with propofol sedation. In selected patients, dexmedetomidine may be used as an alternative to propofol for ODNA sedation during AF ablation. (ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT03844841).

Dexmedetomidine for prevention of opioid/benzodiazepine withdrawal syndrome in pediatric intensive care unit: Interim analysis of a randomized controlled trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Withdrawal syndrome (WS) may be a critical drawback of opioid/benzodiazepine weaning in children. The most effective intervention to reduce WS prevalence is yet to be determined. Dexmedetomidine (DEX) was estimated to be effective in reducing WS-related symptoms, but no randomized trial has been conducted to prove its efficacy so far. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DEX in reducing the occurrence of WS.

DESIGN AND SETTING

This was an adaptive randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial conducted at three Italian Pediatric Intensive Care Units (PICUs).

PATIENTS

It included children admitted to PICU, undergoing at least five days of opioids/benzodiazepines continuous infusion, and ready to start the analgosedation weaning.

INTERVENTION

Twenty-four hours before the start of weaning, an infusion of DEX/placebo was started. WS symptoms were monitored using the Withdrawal-Assessment-Tool-version-1 (WAT-1). In case of WS symptoms (WAT-1 ≥ 3) an opioid/benzodiazepine bolus was given and the DEX/placebo infusion-rate was increased.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome measure was the prevalence of WS. Secondary outcomes were the trend of WAT-1 over time, number of rescue doses, length of weaning and PICU-stay, and onset of adverse events (AEs).

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-five patients were enrolled, of whom 5 dropped-out and 40 entered the interim analysis. There were no significant baseline differences between groups. WS prevalence did not significantly differ between groups (77.8% DEX vs 90.9% placebo, p = 0.381). By generalized linear mixed modeling, the WAT-1 trend showed a significant increase per unit of time in the DEX arm (estimate 0.27, CI 0.07-0.47, p = 0.009) compared to placebo. Most frequent AEs were hemodynamic, and all of them happened in the DEX arm.

CONCLUSIONS

A continuous infusion of DEX, started 24 h before the analgosedation weaning and increased based on WS signs, was not able to significantly modify the prevalence of WS in children who received at least five days of opioids/benzodiazepines treatment compared to placebo.

Long-Term Increases in Mental Disorder Diagnoses After Invasive Mechanical Ventilation for Severe Childhood Respiratory Disease: A Propensity Matched Observational Cohort Study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate neurodevelopmental and mental disorders after PICU hospitalization in children requiring invasive mechanical ventilation for severe respiratory illness.

DESIGN

Retrospective longitudinal observational cohort.

SETTING

Texas Medicaid Analytic eXtract data from 1999 to 2012.

PATIENTS

Texas Medicaid-enrolled children greater than or equal to 28 days old to less than 18 years old hospitalized for a primary respiratory illness, without major chronic conditions predictive of abnormal neurodevelopment.

INTERVENTIONS

We examined rates of International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision-coded mental disorder diagnoses and psychotropic medication use following discharge among children requiring invasive mechanical ventilation for severe respiratory illness, compared with general hospital patients propensity score matched on sociodemographic and clinical characteristics prior to admission. Children admitted to the PICU for respiratory illness not necessitating invasive mechanical ventilation were also compared with matched general hospital patients as a negative control exposure.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Of 115,335 eligible children, 1,351 required invasive mechanical ventilation and were matched to 6,755 general hospital patients. Compared with general hospital patients, children requiring invasive mechanical ventilation had increased mental disorder diagnoses (hazard ratio, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.26-1.64]; p < 0.0001) and psychotropic medication use (hazard ratio, 1.67 [1.34-2.08]; p < 0.0001) following discharge. Seven-thousand seven-hundred eighty children admitted to the PICU without invasive mechanical ventilation were matched to 38,900 general hospital patients and had increased mental disorder diagnoses (hazard ratio, 1.08 [1.02-1.15]; p = 0.01) and psychotropic medication use (hazard ratio, 1.11 [1.00-1.22]; p = 0.049).

CONCLUSIONS

Children without major comorbidity requiring invasive mechanical ventilation for severe respiratory illness had a 43% higher incidence of subsequent mental disorder diagnoses and a 67% higher incidence of psychotropic medication use. Both increases were substantially higher than in PICU patients with respiratory illness not necessitating invasive mechanical ventilation. Invasive mechanical ventilation is a life-saving therapy, and its application is interwoven with underlying health, illness severity, and PICU management decisions. Further research is required to determine which factors related to invasive mechanical ventilation and severe respiratory illness are associated with abnormal neurodevelopment. Given the increased risk in these children, identification of strategies for prevention, neurodevelopmental surveillance, and intervention after discharge may be warranted.

Clinical effect of dexmedetomidine combined with sufentanil on postoperative analgesia for transthoracic device closure of ventricular septal defects in children with ultrafast track anesthesia

Background

To observe the effect of combining dexmedetomidine with sufentanil on postoperative analgesia in children who underwent transthoracic device closure of ventricular septal defects (VSDs) with ultrafast track anesthesia.

Methods

This was a retrospective study. Eighty-seven children who underwent transthoracic device closure of VSDs were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into three groups based on the different drugs used for postoperative patient-controlled analgesia.

Results

No statistically significant differences in hemodynamic parameters were noted among the three groups after surgery (p > 0.05). The FLACC score in the SD2 group was significantly greater than those in the S groups and SD1 groups after surgery (p < 0.001). The Ramsay score in the S group was significantly lower than that of the SD1 and SD2 groups at 6 h (p < 0.001 and p = 0.003), 12 h (p = 0.002 and p = 0.012), and 24 h (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001) after surgery. The pressing frequency of the analgesic pump 48 h after the operation in the SD2 group was significantly greater than that in the other two groups (p < 0.05). The incidences of respiratory depression, nausea, and vomiting in the S group were significantly greater than those in the SD1 and SD2 groups (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

The combination of 0.04 μg/kg/h dexmedetomidine and 0.04 μg/kg/h sufentanil intravenous analgesia was more effective than the other two analgesic strategies in children who underwent transthoracic device closure of ventricular septal defects (VSDs) with ultrafast track anesthesia.

Evaluation of an Enteral Clonidine Taper following Prolonged Dexmedetomidine Exposure in Critically Ill Children

The aim of the current study is to evaluate the use of an enteral clonidine transition for the prevention or management of dexmedetomidine withdrawal symptoms in critically ill children not exposed to other continuous infusion sedative agents. A retrospective, single-center study was conducted in patients ≤ 18 years of age admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit who received a continuous infusion of dexmedetomidine for ≥ 24 hours and who were prescribed enteral clonidine within 72 hours of dexmedetomidine discontinuation. Predefined withdrawal terminology was established to assess for hypertension, tachycardia, agitation, tremors, and decreased sleep. A total of 105 patients were included and received enteral clonidine for prevention or management of dexmedetomidine withdrawal symptoms, with 13 patients (12.4%) requiring a taper modification to manage withdrawal symptoms. The median duration of dexmedetomidine infusion was 120.5 hours (95.5, 143.5) and median peak infusion rate was 1 µg/kg/h (1, 1.2). A higher cumulative dexmedetomidine dose of 119.2 µg/kg (96.6, 154.9) and duration of 142.9 hours (122.6, 158.3) were noted in patients who required a taper modification. Risk factors for dexmedetomidine withdrawal such as dexmedetomidine duration and cumulative dose may help predict patients at the highest risk of withdrawal that would benefit from an enteral clonidine taper to prevent dexmedetomidine withdrawal symptoms. An enteral clonidine taper can be effective in the prevention and management of dexmedetomidine withdrawal symptoms.