Effects on the Upper Airway Morphology with Intravenous Addition of Ketamine after Dexmedetomidine Administration in Normal Children

Dexmedetomidine Mitigates Acute Lung Injury by Enhancing M2 Macrophage Polarization and Inhibiting RAGE/Caspase-11-Mediated Pyroptosis

BACKGROUND

Acute lung injury (ALI) significantly impacts the survival rates in intensive care units (ICU). Releasing a lot of pro-inflammatory mediators during the progression of the disease is a core feature of ALI, which may lead to uncontrolled inflammation and further damages the tissues and organs of patients. This study explores the potential therapeutic mechanisms of Dexmedetomidine (Dex) in ALI.

METHODS

In present study, cecal ligation puncture (CLP)-established ALI model mice and lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-stimulated RAW264.7 cell line were established to discover the influence of Dex. The evaluation of lung injury in vivo using histopathology, TUNEL assay, and analysis of inflammatory factors in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) and serum. The receptor for advanced glycation end products (RAGE)/Caspase-11-dependent pyroptosis-related proteins and macrophage polarization markers were analyzed using western blot, immunofluorescence, and flow cytometry. Finally, the mechanism of Dex in macrophages was further verified in vitro.

RESULTS

In vivo, Dex alleviated lung injury and decreased TUNEL-positive cell expression in CLP group. Dex decreased tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), interleukin (IL)-6 and IL-17A levels in BALF and serum, while increasing IL-10 expression. Dex treatment decreased the protein levels of RAGE, caspase-11, IL-1β and Gasdermin-D (GSDMD) in both in cells and in mice. Dex also down-regulated the synthesis of inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) of classical activation phenotype (M1) markers, and up-regulated the synthesis of CD206 and Arg-1 of alternate activation phenotype (M2) markers.

CONCLUSIONS

Dex treatment can inhibit inflammation and reduce lung injury caused by CLP. It could be associated with mediating M1 and M2 polarization and suppressing RAGE/Caspase-11-depended pyroptosis.

Trends in analgesia-sedation of pediatric patients receiving I-131 MIBG in the pediatric intensive care unit: A report from the Pediatric Health Information System database

BACKGROUND

Children with neuroblastoma receiving I-131 metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) therapy require sedation-analgesia for strict radiation safety precautions during MIBG infusion and clearance. We evaluated the sedation-analgesia trends of patients undergoing MIBG therapy using the Pediatric Health Information System (PHIS) database.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective data from 476 patient encounters from the PHIS from 2010 to 2019.

RESULTS

Total 240/476 (50.45%) children evaluated were under 6 years of age. Compared to 2010, in 2018 there was a decrease in benzodiazepine infusion use (60% vs. 40%, p < .04), as well as a decrease in use of opiate infusion (35% vs. 25%, p < .001). Compared to 2010, in 2018 we report an increase in the use of ketamine (from 5% to 10%, p < .002), as well as an increase in dexmedetomidine use (0% vs. 30%, p < .001). Dexmedetomidine was the most used medication in the 0-3 years age group compared to children older than 3 years of age (14.19% vs. 5.80%, p < .001). Opiate was the most used medication in children greater than 3 years compared to the 0-3-year age group (36.23 vs. 23.87, p < .05).

CONCLUSION

Using PHIS data, we discovered considerable variability in the medications used for sedation in patients undergoing MIBG therapy. Although benzodiazepines and opioids were the most used agents, there was a trend toward decreasing use of benzodiazepines and opioids in these patients. Furthermore, there has been an increasing trend in the use of dexmedetomidine and ketamine.

Comparison of airway collapsibility following single induction dose ketamine with propofol versus propofol sedation in children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging: A randomised controlled study

Background and Aims

Adequate sedation is essential for children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) console. Propofol is commonly used for sedation, but it has the drawback of upper airway collapse at higher doses, which may be overcome by ketamine. This study was designed to evaluate the beneficial effect of ketamine on propofol in preventing airway collapse.

Methods

Fifty-eight children undergoing MRI were randomised to Group P (propofol bolus dose followed by infusion or Group KP (bolus dose of ketamine and propofol followed by propofol infusion). The primary aim is to compare the upper airway cross-sectional area (CSA) and diameters (transverse diameter [TD] and anteroposterior diameter [APD]) obtained from MRI during inspiration and expiration.

Results

Upper airway collapse as measured by delta CSA in mean (SD) [95% confidence interval] was statistically more significant between the two groups [at the soft palate level, 16.9 mm2 (19.8) [9.3-24.4] versus 9.0 mm2 (5.50) [6.9-11.1] (P = 0.043); at the base of the tongue level, 15.4 mm2 (11.03) [11.2-19.6] versus 7.48 mm2 (4.83) [5.64-9.32] (P < 0.001); at the epiglottis level, 23.9 (26.05) [14.0-33.8] versus 10.9 mm2 (9.47) [7.35-14.5] (P = 0.014)]. A significant difference was obtained for TD at all levels and for APD at the soft palate and base of tongue level.

Conclusion

Adding a single dose of ketamine to propofol reduced the upper airway collapse significantly, as evidenced by the MRI-based measurements of upper airway dimensions, compared to propofol alone.

Methodical control of the difficult pediatric airway: two case reports

BACKGROUND

Management of children who present with a history of impossible mask ventilation or difficult tracheal intubation is fraught with challenges. Despite this, the "airway stress test" of an inhalational induction is frequently employed risking airway obstruction, breath holding, apnea, and laryngospasm.

CASE PRESENTATIONS

We present two cases of children with anticipated difficult airway management. The first child (14-year-old African American boy) had severe mucopolysaccharidosis with a history of failed anesthetic induction and failed airway management. The second child (3-year-old African American girl) had progressive lymphatic infiltration of the tongue, resulting in severe macroglossia. We describe a technique that forgoes inhalational induction, incorporates recent pediatric airway guidelines, and provides a greater margin of safety. The technique encompasses the use of drugs that facilitate sedation for intravenous access, without respiratory depression or airway obstruction, titrated use of medications to achieve anesthetic depth while preserving ventilatory drive and airway tone, and the continuous provision of directed oxygen flow during airway manipulation. Propofol and volatile gases were avoided to preserve airway tone and respiratory drive.

CONCLUSIONS

We emphasize that an intravenous induction technique utilizing medications that preserve airway tone and ventilatory drive, and the use of  continuous oxygen flow throughout airway manipulation, allows for successful management of children with a difficult airway. The common practice of volatile inhalational induction should be avoided in anticipated difficult pediatric airways.

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.

Dexmedetomidine in combination with ketamine for pediatric procedural sedation or premedication: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate effectiveness of combinational use of dexmedetomidine and ketamine (DEX-KET) for pediatric procedural sedation or premedication.

METHODS

Relevant studies were identified after a literature search in electronic databases and study selection was based on precise eligibility criteria. Meta-analyses of mean differences were performed to examine differences in sedation onset and recovery times between DEX-KET and comparators. Changes from baseline in heart rate (HR), respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, and mean arterial pressure (MAP), were pooled. Meta-analyses of proportions were performed to estimate incidence of adverse events.

RESULTS

15 studies (1087 patients) were included. Onset of sedation was significantly shorter in DEX-KET than in DEX group. HR declined in DEX-KET group from start (-3.5 beats per minute (BPM) [95% CI: -5.1, -1.9]) through midpoint (-7.2 BPM [95% CI: -12.1, -2.3]) and at end of sedation (-8.7 BPM [95% CI: -13.1, -4.4]). Decrease in HR after DEX administration at start was -11.6 BPM [95% CI: -16.0, -7.1] and remained consistent afterward. There was no change in MAP during DEX-KET sedation. However, after DEX administration, MAP decreased by -6.9 [95% CI: -10.4, -3.3] at start, -7.8 [95% CI: -11.4, -4.2] at middle, and by -6.6 [95% CI: -14.4, 1.1] at end of sedation. Incidence of hypotension was 3% [95% CI: 0, 9] in DEX-KET, 7% [95% CI: 2, 14] in DEX, and 0% [95% CI: 0, 2] in KET groups. Incidence of bradycardia was 2% [95% CI: 0, 6] with DEX-KET and 12% [95% CI: 5, 20] with DEX. Incidence of oxygen desaturation was 3% [95% CI: 0, 8] in DEX-KET, 2% [95% CI: 0, 6] in DEX, 12% [95% CI: 5, 20] in KET, and 13% [95% CI: 6, 21] in PROP-KET groups. MIDA-KET sedation had 13% [95% CI: 4, 25] incidence of tachycardia.

CONCLUSIONS

DEX-KET for pediatric sedation results in better sedation outcomes than DEX or KET by shortening onset of sedation and recovery while maintaining hemodynamic and respiratory stability with low incidence of adverse events. DEX sedation was associated with higher incidence of bradycardia. Higher incidence of oxygen desaturation was observed with KET and PROP-KET whereas MIDA-KET was associated with higher incidence of tachycardia.