Intranasal dexmedetomidine, as midazolam-sparing drug, for MRI in preterm neonates

Intranasal Analgesia in Preterm and Term Neonates

The prevention, recognition, and treatment of pain is crucial in the management of neonates. Infants do not tolerate pain better than adults; indeed, the immaturity of the endogenous antalgic system means they exhibit an increased stress response. Pain has been associated with worse cognitive and motor scores, reduced growth trend, reduced brain maturation, and altered corticospinal tract structure. The use of the intranasal route for drug delivery is currently expanding because it has many advantages. In certain contexts, it is preferable over the oral route because of the faster entry of drugs into the circulation, the absence of structural changes by the gastrointestinal environment, and the absence of the hepatic first-pass effect. The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of drugs commonly used for pain management have peculiar characteristics in infants, especially premature infants. In this article, we summarise the evidence regarding pain management in infants using intranasally administered drugs. We then provide a practical guide to the use of intranasal drugs currently being studied in the neonatal population, focusing on appropriate dosages and indications. Intranasal fentanest appears to be an attractive therapeutic alternative for procedural and palliative neonatal pain management when intravenous access is unavailable in preterm infants. Intranasal midazolam is a valid alternative to consider in term or near-term neonates, especially when the aim is to obtain sedation (and not analgesia, i.e. during magnetic resonance imaging), ketamine has favourable cardiovascular effects and should be considered in specific patients and situations. Intranasal dexmedetomidine is well tolerated in premature neonates. Additionally, endonasal dexmedetomidine can be used in combination with other anaesthetic, sedative, hypnotic, and opioid drugs to allow for dose reduction in sedated neonates.

Procedural pain management in neonates: A Narrative review

Over the past three decades, awareness regarding pain management in neonates has risen significantly. It has been very well established that neonates can perceive, feel, and react to stimuli that cause pain and discomfort to them. Neonates admitted to neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) are repeatedly subjected to invasive treatments, most of which are painful. These procedures, nevertheless, are still performed, sometimes without sufficient analgesia. Exposure to frequent traumatic and painful procedures has been associated with several adverse effects such as altered brain growth and signs of internalization. Both inadequate and excessive analgesia during this period of rapid development may lead to profound neurodevelopmental outcomes. Ensuring the avoidance of pain in NICUs is a crucial obligation from both ethical and medical standpoints. Despite established international criteria, there is currently insufficient adherence to this criterion, highlighting the need for additional development in uniformly providing effective pain management to newborns in NICUs.

Intranasal dexmedetomidine reduces pain scores in preterm infants during retinopathy of prematurity screening

Background

This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of intranasal dexmedetomidine in reducing pain scores during retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) screening examinations in preterm infants.

Methods

Infants born at ≤32 weeks of gestational age, undergoing routine ROP examinations in the neonatal intensive care unit, were included in the study and divided into two groups: the standard protocol group (n = 43) and the dexmedetomidine group (n = 56), over a 1-year period. Both groups received standard procedural preparation including swaddling, oral dextrose, and topical anesthesia with proparacaine. The dexmedetomidine group additionally received intranasal dexmedetomidine at a dose of 1 mcg/kg before the procedure. Pain scores (PIPP score), heart rate, respiratory rate, blood pressure, and oxygen saturation were compared at baseline, 1-min, and 5-min during the procedure.

Results

There were no significant differences between the groups regarding descriptive and pre-procedure characteristics. In the dexmedetomidine group, the median (25-75p) PIPP score, heart rate, systolic blood pressure and mean (±SD) respiratory rate measured at the 1st minute of the procedure were significantly lower than those in the standard group [PIPP score 10 (8-13) vs. 14 (10-16), p < 0.001; heart rate 165 (153-176) beats/min vs. 182 (17-190) beats/min, p < 0.001; respiratory rate 60 (±7) breaths/min vs. 65(±9) breaths/min, p = 0.002; systolic blood pressure 78 (70-92) mmHg vs. 87 (78-96) mmHg, p = 0.024; respectively] whereas the saturation value was significantly higher (88% (81-95) vs. 84% (70-92), p = 0.036; respectively). By the 5th minute of the procedure, the median (25-75p) PIPP score [4 (2-6) vs. 6 (4-10), p < 0.001], heart rate [148 (143-166) beats/min vs. 162 (152-180) beats/min, p = 0.001] and respiratory rate [56 (54-58) breaths/min vs. 58 (54-62) breaths/min, p = 0.034] were significantly lower, and the saturation level was significantly higher [96% (94-97) vs. 93% (91-96), p = 0.003] in the dexmedetomidine group. Additionally, the frequency of adverse effects was significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group compared to the standard protocol group (11% vs. 47%, p = 0.001).

Conclusion

Administering intranasal dexmedetomidine before ROP screening examinations was associated with a decrease in pain scores among preterm infants. This suggests its potential as an effective and well-tolerated method for pain management during ROP screenings.

Clinical Analysis of Intranasal Dexmedetomidine Combined With Midazolam in Pediatric Cranial Magnetic Resonance Examinations

PURPOSE

To observe the efficacy and safety of intranasal dexmedetomidine combined with midazolam in cranial magnetic resonance imaging of children.

DESIGN

A prospective, observational, single-arm, one-center study.

METHODS

A total of 474 children were scheduled for cranial 3.0 T MRI at the first time. All patients were initially given 3 mcg/kg dexmedetomidine combined with 0.15 mg/kg midazolam. The one-time success rate, vital signs before and after treatment, onset time, recovery time, and incidence of adverse reactions were recorded.

FINDINGS

The one-time success rate was 78.1%. There were significant differences in respiration, heart rate, and blood oxygen saturation before and after treatment (P < .001). The onset time was 10 (8-15) minutes. The average recovery time was 2.58 ± 1.10 hours. Only 1.27% (6 cases) of adverse reactions were observed, including bradycardia (3 cases, 0.6%), tachycardia (1 case, 0.2%), and startle (2 cases, 0.4%). No special treatment was needed. The success of the examination was significantly correlated with age (OR 1.320, 95% CI 1.019-1.710, P = .035) and onset time (OR 0.959, 95% CI 0.921-0.998, P = .038).

CONCLUSION

Dexmedetomidine 3 mcg/kg combined with midazolam 0.15 mg/kg intranasally has a good sedative effect in pediatric cranial magnetic resonance examinations, little impact on breathing and circulation, and few adverse reactions. Age and onset time are related factors affecting the one-time success rate.

Dexmedetomidine: An Alternative to Pain Treatment in Neonatology

Infants might be exposed to pain during their admissions in the neonatal intensive care unit [NICU], both from their underlying conditions and several invasive procedures required during their stay. Considering the particularities of this population, recognition and adequate management of pain continues to be a challenge for neonatologists and investigators. Diverse therapies are available for treatment, including non-pharmacological pain management measures and pharmacological agents (sucrose, opioids, midazolam, acetaminophen, topical agents…) and research continues. In recent years one of the most promising drugs for analgesia has been dexmedetomidine, an alpha-2 adrenergic receptor agonist. It has shown a promising efficacy and safety profile as it produces anxiolysis, sedation and analgesia without respiratory depression. Moreover, studies have shown a neuroprotective role in animal models which could be beneficial to neonatal population, especially in preterm newborns. Side effects of this therapy are mainly cardiovascular, but in most studies published, those were not severe and did not require specific therapeutic measures for their resolution. The main objective of this article is to summarize the existing literature on neonatal pain management strategies available and review the efficacy of dexmedetomidine as a new therapy with increasing use in the NICU.

Dexmedetomidine - An emerging option for sedation in neonatal patients

Dexmedetomidine is a sedative agent with limited dosing, safety, and efficacy information in the neonatal population. This comprehensive review describes the available evidence summarizing the use of dexmedetomidine in various neonatal populations. We identified 21 studies and 1 case report supporting the efficacy and short-term safety of DEX in neonates. Reported dosing ranges from 0.5-1.5 mcg/kg/h with or without loading doses. Clinically relevant adverse effects include bradycardia and hypotension. Future studies are needed to determine long-term safety and facilitate clinical applicability.

Sedation and analgesia from prolonged pain and stress during mechanical ventilation in preterm infants: is dexmedetomidine an alternative to current practice?

Mechanical ventilation is an uncomfortable and potentially painful intervention. Opioids, such as morphine and fentanyl, are used for analgesia and sedation but there is uncertainty whether they reduce pain in mechanically ventilated infants. Moreover, there may be short-term and long-term adverse consequences such as respiratory depression leading to prolonged mechanical ventilation and detrimental long-term neurodevelopmental effects. Despite this, opioids are widely used, possibly due to a lack of alternatives.Dexmedetomidine, a highly selective alpha-2-adrenergic agonist with analgesic and sedative effects, currently approved for adults, has come into use in newborn infants. It provides analgesia and simulates natural sleep with maintenance of spontaneous breathing and upper airway tone. Although data on pharmacokinetics-pharmacodynamics in preterm infants are scant, observational studies report that using dexmedetomidine in conjunction with opioids/benzodiazepines or on its own can reduce the cumulative exposure to opioids/benzodiazepines. As it does not cause respiratory depression, dexmedetomidine could enable quicker weaning and extubation. Dexmedetomidine has also been suggested as an adjunct to therapeutic hypothermia in hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy and others have used it during painful procedures and surgery. Dexmedetomidine infusion can cause bradycardia and hypotension although most report clinically insignificant effects.The increasing number of publications of observational studies and clinical use demonstrates that dexmedetomidine is being used in newborn infants but data on safety and efficacy are scant and not of high quality. Importantly, there are no data on long-term neurodevelopmental impact on preterm or term-born infants. The acceptance of dexmedetomidine in routine clinical practice must be preceded by clinical evidence. We need adequately powered and well-designed randomised controlled trials investigating whether dexmedetomidine alone or with opioids/benzodiazepines in infants on mechanical ventilation reduces the need for opioids/benzodiazepine and improves neurodevelopment at 24 months and later as compared with the use of opioids/benzodiazepines alone.

Best Evidence-Based Dosing Recommendations for Dexmedetomidine for Premedication and Procedural Sedation in Pediatrics: Outcome of a Risk-Benefit Analysis By the Dutch Pediatric Formulary

BACKGROUND

Dexmedetomidine is currently off-label for use in pediatric clinical care worldwide. Nevertheless, it is frequently prescribed to pediatric patients as premedication prior to induction of anesthesia or for procedural sedation. There is ample literature on the pharmacokinetics, efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine in this vulnerable patient population, but there is a general lack of consensus on dosing. In this project, we aimed to use the standardized workflow of the Dutch Pediatric Formulary to establish best evidence-based pediatric dosing guidelines for dexmedetomidine as premedication and for procedural sedation.

METHOD

The available literature on dexmedetomidine in pediatrics was reviewed in order to address the following three questions: (1) What is the right dose? (2) What is known about efficacy? (3) What is known about safety? Relevant literature was compiled into a risk-benefit analysis document. A team of clinical experts critically appraised the analysis and the proposed dosing recommendations.

RESULTS

Dexmedetomidine is most commonly administered via the intravenous or intranasal route. Clearance is age dependent, warranting higher doses in infants to reach similar exposure as in adults. Dexmedetomidine use results in satisfactory sedation at parent separation, adequate sedation and a favorable recovery profile. The safety profile is good and comparable to adults, with dose-related hemodynamic effects.

CONCLUSION

Following the structured approach of the Dutch Pediatric Formulary, best evidence-based dosing recommendations were proposed for dexmedetomidine, used as premedication prior to induction of anesthesia (intranasal dose) and for procedural sedation (intranasal and intravenous dose) in pediatric patients.

Intranasal dexmedetomidine and intranasal ketamine association allows shorter induction time for pediatric sedation compared to intranasal dexmedetomidine and oral midazolam

BACKGROUND

Non-painful diagnostic procedures require an inactive state for a prolonged time, so that sedation is often needed in younger children to perform the procedures. Our standard of care in this setting consists of the association between oral midazolam (0.5 mg/kg) and intranasal dexmedetomidine (4 mcg/kg). One of the limits of this approach is that the onset of action is quite delayed (up to 55 min) and poorly predictable. We chose to compare this association with intranasal-ketamine and intranasal-dexmedetomidine.

METHODS

This is a "pre-post" study. The study population included the first forty children receiving sedation with the "new" combination intranasal ketamine (3 mg/kg) and intranasal dexmedetomidine (4 mcg/kg) compared to a historical cohort including the last forty children receiving sedation with our standard of care combination of intranasal dexmedetomidine (4mcg/kg) and oral midazolam (0,5 mg/kg).

RESULTS

The association intranasal dexmedetomidine and intranasal ketamine allowed for a significantly shorter sedation induction time than the combination intranasal dexmedetomidine and oral midazolam (13,5 min versus 35 min). Both group's cumulative data showed a correlation between age and sedation effectiveness, with younger children presenting a higher success rate and shorter induction time (p 0,001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that the ketamine and dexmedetomidine intranasal association may have a shorter onset of action when compared to intranasal dexmedetomidine and oral midazolam.

Reducing Benzodiazepine Exposure by Instituting a Guideline for Dexmedetomidine Usage in the NICU

BACKGROUND

Midazolam is a benzodiazepine sedative used in NICUs. Because benzodiazepine's effects include respiratory depression and potential detrimental developmental effects, minimizing exposure could benefit neonates. Dexmedetomidine is routinely used for sedation in older pediatric populations. We implemented a quality improvement initiative with the aim of decreasing midazolam infusions by 20% through use of dexmedetomidine.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary committee created a sedation guideline that included standardized dexmedetomidine dosing escalation and weaning. Baseline data collection occurred from January 2015 to February 2018, with intervention from March 2018 to December 2019. Percentage of sedation episodes with dexmedetomidine initiated was followed as a process measure. Outcomes measures were percentage of eligible infants receiving midazolam infusions and midazolam-free days per sedation episode. Bradycardia with dexmedetomidine, unplanned extubation rates, and morphine dosage were monitored as balancing measures.

RESULTS

Our study included 434 episodes of sedation in 386 patients. Dexmedetomidine initiation increased from 18% to 49%. The intervention was associated with a significant reduction in midazolam initiation by 30%, from 95% to 65%, with special cause variation on statistical process control chart analysis. Midazolam-free days per sedation episode increased from 0.3 to 2.2 days, and patients receiving dexmedetomidine had lower midazolam doses (1.3 mg/kg per day versus 2.2 mg/kg per day, P = 5.97 × 10-04). Bradycardia requiring discontinuation of dexmedetomidine, unplanned extubation rates, and morphine doses were unchanged.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of a quality improvement initiative was successful in reducing the percentage of patients receiving midazolam infusions and increased midazolam-free days per sedation episode, revealing an overall reduction in benzodiazepine exposure while maintaining adequate sedation.

Dexmedetomidine: What's New for Pediatrics? A Narrative Review

Over the past few years, despite the lack of approved pediatric labelling, dexmedetomidine’s (DEX) use has become more prevalent in pediatric clinical practice as well as in research trials. Its respiratory-sparing effects and bioavailability by various routes are only some of the valued features of DEX. In recent years the potential organ-protective effects of DEX, with the possibility for preserving neurocognitive function, has put it in the forefront of clinical and bench research. This comprehensive review focused on the pediatric literature but presents relevant, supporting adult and animal studies in order to detail the recent growing body of literature around the pharmacology, end-organ effects, organ-protective effects, alternative routes of administration, synergetic effects, and clinical applications, with considerations for the future.

Intranasal dexmedetomidine is an effective sedative agent for electroencephalography in children

BACKGROUND

Intranasal dexmedetomidine (DEX), as a novel sedation method, has been used in many clinical examinations of infants and children. However, the safety and efficacy of this method for electroencephalography (EEG) in children is limited. In this study, we performed a large-scale clinical case analysis of patients who received this sedation method. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intranasal DEX for sedation in children during EEG.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study. The inclusion criteria were children who underwent EEG from October 2016 to October 2018 at the Children's Hospital affiliated with Chongqing Medical University. All the children received 2.5 μg·kg^- 1 of intranasal DEX for sedation during the procedure. We used the Modified Observer Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale (MOAA/S) and the Modified Aldrete score (MAS) to evaluate the effects of the treatment on sedation and resuscitation. The sex, age, weight, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status (ASAPS), vital signs, sedation onset and recovery times, sedation success rate, and adverse patient events were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 3475 cases were collected and analysed in this study. The success rate of the initial dose was 87.0% (3024/3475 cases), and the success rate of intranasal sedation rescue was 60.8% (274/451 cases). The median sedation onset time was 19 mins (IQR: 17-22 min), and the sedation recovery time was 41 mins (IQR: 36-47 min). The total incidence of adverse events was 0.95% (33/3475 cases), and no serious adverse events occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Intranasal DEX (2.5 μg·kg^- 1) can be safely and effectively used for EEG sedation in children.

Pharmacology of Common Analgesic and Sedative Drugs Used in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit

In this review of analgesic and sedation medication in neonates, important classes of old and newer medications commonly used in the neonatal intensive care unit setting are discussed. In addition to drug metabolism, efficacy, and safety for individual drugs, new insights into multimodal analgesic approaches suggest ways in which multiple analgesic drug classes can be combined to maximize efficacy and minimize toxicity. Opiate pharmacogenetics and the potential for a precision therapeutics approach is explored, with a final description of gaps in knowledge and a call for future research of pain and sedation control in the neonatal population.