Comparative study between dexmedetomidine and fentanyl for sedation during mechanical ventilation in post-operative paediatric cardiac surgical patients

Dexmedetomidine for analgesia and sedation in newborn infants receiving mechanical ventilation

BACKGROUND

Dexmedetomidine is a selective alpha-2 agonist with minimal impact on the haemodynamic profile. It is thought to be safer than morphine or stronger opioids, which are drugs currently used for analgesia and sedation in newborn infants. Dexmedetomidine is increasingly being used in children and infants despite not being licenced for analgesia in this group.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the overall effectiveness and safety of dexmedetomidine for sedation and analgesia in newborn infants receiving mechanical ventilation compared with other non-opioids, opioids, or placebo.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and two trial registries in September 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We planned to include randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs evaluating the effectiveness of dexmedetomidine compared with other non-opioids, opioids, or placebo for sedation and analgesia in neonates (aged under four weeks) requiring mechanical ventilation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were level of sedation and level of analgesia. Our secondary outcomes included days on mechanical ventilation, number of infants requiring additional medication for sedation or analgesia (or both), hypotension, neonatal mortality, and neurodevelopmental outcomes. We planned to use GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified no eligible studies for inclusion. We identified four ongoing studies, two of which appear to be eligible for inclusion; they will compare dexmedetomidine with fentanyl in newborn infants requiring surgery. We listed the other two studies as awaiting classification pending assessment of full reports. One study will compare dexmedetomidine with morphine in asphyxiated newborns undergoing hypothermia, and the other (mixed population, age up to three years) will evaluate dexmedetomidine versus ketamine plus dexmedetomidine for echocardiography. The planned sample size of the four studies ranges from 40 to 200 neonates. Data from these studies may provide some evidence for dexmedetomidine efficacy and safety.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Despite the increasing use of dexmedetomidine, there is insufficient evidence supporting its routine use for analgesia and sedation in newborn infants on mechanical ventilation. Furthermore, data on dexmedetomidine safety are scarce, and there are no data available on its long-term effects. Future studies should address the efficacy, safety, and long-term effects of dexmedetomidine as a single drug therapy for sedation and analgesia in newborn infants.

2022 Society of Critical Care Medicine Clinical Practice Guidelines on Prevention and Management of Pain, Agitation, Neuromuscular Blockade, and Delirium in Critically Ill Pediatric Patients With Consideration of the ICU Environment and Early Mobility

RATIONALE

A guideline that both evaluates current practice and provides recommendations to address sedation, pain, and delirium management with regard for neuromuscular blockade and withdrawal is not currently available.

OBJECTIVE

To develop comprehensive clinical practice guidelines for critically ill infants and children, with specific attention to seven domains of care including pain, sedation/agitation, iatrogenic withdrawal, neuromuscular blockade, delirium, PICU environment, and early mobility.

DESIGN

The Society of Critical Care Medicine Pediatric Pain, Agitation, Neuromuscular Blockade, and Delirium in critically ill pediatric patients with consideration of the PICU Environment and Early Mobility Guideline Taskforce was comprised of 29 national experts who collaborated from 2009 to 2021 via teleconference and/or e-mail at least monthly for planning, literature review, and guideline development, revision, and approval. The full taskforce gathered annually in-person during the Society of Critical Care Medicine Congress for progress reports and further strategizing with the final face-to-face meeting occurring in February 2020. Throughout this process, the Society of Critical Care Medicine standard operating procedures Manual for Guidelines development was adhered to.

METHODS

Taskforce content experts separated into subgroups addressing pain/analgesia, sedation, tolerance/iatrogenic withdrawal, neuromuscular blockade, delirium, PICU environment (family presence and sleep hygiene), and early mobility. Subgroups created descriptive and actionable Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome questions. An experienced medical information specialist developed search strategies to identify relevant literature between January 1990 and January 2020. Subgroups reviewed literature, determined quality of evidence, and formulated recommendations classified as "strong" with "we recommend" or "conditional" with "we suggest." Good practice statements were used when indirect evidence supported benefit with no or minimal risk. Evidence gaps were noted. Initial recommendations were reviewed by each subgroup and revised as deemed necessary prior to being disseminated for voting by the full taskforce. Individuals who had an overt or potential conflict of interest abstained from relevant votes. Expert opinion alone was not used in substitution for a lack of evidence.

RESULTS

The Pediatric Pain, Agitation, Neuromuscular Blockade, and Delirium in critically ill pediatric patients with consideration of the PICU Environment and Early Mobility taskforce issued 44 recommendations (14 strong and 30 conditional) and five good practice statements.

CONCLUSIONS

The current guidelines represent a comprehensive list of practical clinical recommendations for the assessment, prevention, and management of key aspects for the comprehensive critical care of infants and children. Main areas of focus included 1) need for the routine monitoring of pain, agitation, withdrawal, and delirium using validated tools, 2) enhanced use of protocolized sedation and analgesia, and 3) recognition of the importance of nonpharmacologic interventions for enhancing patient comfort and comprehensive care provision.

Efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine in maintaining hemodynamic stability in pediatric cardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Dexmedetomidine (DEX) is a highly selective alpha-2 adrenergic receptor agonist, which is the main sedative in the intensive care unit. This study aims to investigate the effectiveness and adverse events of DEX in maintaining hemodynamic stability in pediatric cardiac surgery.

SOURCES

Databases such as PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, WANFANG STATA and China National Knowledge Infrastructure were searched for articles about the application of DEX in maintaining hemodynamic stability during and after pediatric cardiac surgery up to 18th Feb. 2021. Only randomized controlled trials were included and random-effects model meta-analysis was applied to calculate the standardized mean deviation (SMD), odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).

SUMMARY OF THE FINDINGS

Fifteen articles were included for this meta-analysis, and 9 articles for qualitative analysis. The results showed that preoperative prophylaxis and postoperative recovery of DEX in pediatric patients undergoing cardiac surgery were effective in maintaining systolic blood pressure (SBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and reducing heart rate (HR) (SBP: SMD = -0.35,95% CI: -0.72, 0.01; MAP: SMD = -0.83, 95% CI: -1.87,0.21; DBP: SMD = -0.79,95% CI: -1.66,0.08; HR: SMD = -1.71,95% CI: -2.29, -1.13). In addition, the frequency of Junctional Ectopic Tachycardia in the DEX treatment group was lower than that in the placebo group.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of DEX for preoperative prophylaxis and postoperative recovery in pediatric cardiac surgery patients are effective in maintaining hemodynamic stability, and the clinical dose of DEX is not significantly related to the occurrence of pediatric adverse events which may be related to individual differences.

Design and reporting characteristics of clinical trials investigating sedation practices in the paediatric intensive care unit: a scoping review by SCEPTER (Sedation Consortium on Endpoints and Procedures for Treatment, Education and Research)

OBJECTIVES

To conduct a scoping review of sedation clinical trials in the paediatric intensive care setting and summarise key methodological elements.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and grey references including ClinicalTrials.gov from database inception to 3 August 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

All human trials in the English language related to sedation in paediatric critically ill patients were included. After title and abstract screening, full-text review was performed. 29 trials were eligible for final analysis.

DATA EXTRACTION

A coding manual was developed and pretested. Trial characteristics were double extracted.

RESULTS

The majority of trials were single centre (22/29, 75.9%), parallel group superiority (17/29, 58.6%), double-blinded (18/29, 62.1%) and conducted in an academic setting (29/29, 100.0%). Trial enrolment (≥90% planned sample size) was achieved in 65.5% of trials (19/29), and retention (≥90% enrolled subjects) in 72.4% of trials (21/29). Protocol violations were reported in nine trials (31.0%). The most commonly studied cohorts were mechanically ventilated patients (28/29, 96.6%) and postsurgical patients (11/29, 37.9%) with inclusion criteria for age ranging from 0±0.5 to 15.0±7.3 years (median±IQR). The median age of enrolled patients was 1.7 years (IQR=4.4 years). Patients excluded from trials were those with neurological impairment (21/29, 72.4%), complex disease (20/29, 69.0%) or receipt of neuromuscular blockade (10/29, 34.5%). Trials evaluated drugs/protocols for sedation management (20/29, 69.0%), weaning (3/29, 10.3%), daily interruption (3/29, 10.3%) or protocolisation (3/29, 10.3%). Primary outcome measures were heterogeneous, as were assessment instruments and follow-up durations.

CONCLUSIONS

There is substantial heterogeneity in methodological approach in clinical trials evaluating sedation in critically ill paediatric patients. These results provide a basis for the design of future clinical trials to improve the quality of trial data and aid in the development of sedation-related clinical guidelines.

A systematic review of the evidence supporting post-operative medication use in congenital heart disease

BACKGROUND

Targeted drug development efforts in patients with CHD are needed to standardise care, improve outcomes, and limit adverse events in the post-operative period. To identify major gaps in knowledge that can be addressed by drug development efforts and provide a rationale for current clinical practice, this review evaluates the evidence behind the most common medication classes used in the post-operative care of children with CHD undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed and EMBASE from 2000 to 2019 using a controlled vocabulary and keywords related to diuretics, vasoactives, sedatives, analgesics, pulmonary vasodilators, coagulation system medications, antiarrhythmics, steroids, and other endocrine drugs. We included studies of drugs given post-operatively to children with CHD undergoing repair or palliation with cardiopulmonary bypass.

RESULTS

We identified a total of 127 studies with 51,573 total children across medication classes. Most studies were retrospective cohorts at single centres. There is significant age- and disease-related variability in drug disposition, efficacy, and safety.

CONCLUSION

In this study, we discovered major gaps in knowledge for each medication class and identified areas for future research. Advances in data collection through electronic health records, novel trial methods, and collaboration can aid drug development efforts in standardising care, improving outcomes, and limiting adverse events in the post-operative period.

Dexmedetomidine Sedation in Mechanically Ventilated Critically Ill Children: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES

To assess the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of a sedation protocol using dexmedetomidine as the primary sedative in mechanically ventilated critically ill children.

DESIGN

Open-label, pilot, prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. The primary outcome was the proportion of sedation scores in the target sedation range in the first 48 hours. Safety outcomes included device removal, adverse events, and vasopressor use. Feasibility outcomes included time to randomization and protocol fidelity.

SETTING

Six tertiary PICUs in Australia and New Zealand.

PATIENTS

Critically ill children, younger than 16 years old, requiring intubation and mechanical ventilation and expected to be mechanically ventilated for at least 24 hours.

INTERVENTIONS

Children randomized to dexmedetomidine received a dexmedetomidine-based algorithm targeted to light sedation (State Behavioral Scale -1 to +1). Children randomized to usual care received sedation as determined by the treating clinician (but not dexmedetomidine), also targeted to light sedation.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Sedation with dexmedetomidine as the primary sedative resulted in a greater proportion of sedation measurements in the light sedation range (State Behavioral Scale -1 to +1) over the first 48 hours (229/325 [71%] vs 181/331 [58%]; p = 0.04) and the first 24 hours (66/103 [64%] vs 48/116 [41%]; p < 0.001) compared with usual care. Cumulative midazolam dosage was significantly reduced in the dexmedetomidine arm compared with usual care (p = 0.002).There were more episodes of hypotension and bradycardia with dexmedetomidine (including one serious adverse event) but no difference in vasopressor requirements. Median time to randomization after intubation was 6.0 hours (interquartile range, 2.0-9.0 hr) in the dexmedetomidine arm compared with 3.0 hours (interquartile range, 1.0-7.0 hr) in the usual care arm (p = 0.24).

CONCLUSIONS

A sedation protocol using dexmedetomidine as the primary sedative was feasible, appeared safe, achieved early, light sedation, and reduced midazolam requirements. The findings of this pilot study justify further studies of sedative agents in critically ill children.

The Effectiveness of α2 Agonists As Sedatives in Pediatric Critical Care: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study

OBJECTIVES

There is limited evidence supporting the widespread use of α2 agonists (clonidine and dexmedetomidine) in pediatric critical care sedation. This study sought to test the association between the use of α2 agonists and enhanced sedation.

DESIGN

A retrospective observational cohort study was conducted. Noninferiority of time adequately sedated (COMFORT Behavior Score 11-16) while mechanically ventilated was assessed. Secondarily, dosing of opioids and benzodiazepines was examined.

SETTING

Two tertiary PICUs.

PATIENTS

Children were classified into an exposed group, who received an α2 agonist as part of their sedation regimen, and an unexposed group. Groups were matched using propensity score analysis.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

One-thousand eighty-five patients were included. The exposed group were adequately sedated 74% (95% CI, 72-75%) of the study time compared with the unexposed group at 70% (95% CI, 67-72%) giving a ratio of 1.06 (95% CI, 1.02-1.10) and a noninferior time adequately sedated. A decrease in time oversedated was observed with 8.1% (95% CI, 4.3-11.9%) less time classified as oversedated in the exposed group. Reduction in morphine use of 0.25 μg/kg/hr (95% CI, -0.68 to 1.18 μg/kg/hr) was not statistically significant. Midazolam use did not decrease and was statistically higher.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of α2 agonists was associated with similar time adequately sedated as a matched unexposed group although no reduction in morphine or benzodiazepine coadministration was observed. There was a shift toward lighter sedation with α2 agonist use.

Intranasal Dexmedetomidine for Procedural Distress in Children: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Intranasal dexmedetomidine (IND) is an emerging agent for procedural distress in children.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the effectiveness of IND for procedural distress in children.

DATA SOURCES

We performed electronic searches of Medline (1946-2019), Embase (1980-2019), Google Scholar (2019), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (1981-2019), and Cochrane Central Register.

STUDY SELECTION

We included randomized trials of IND for procedures in children.

DATA EXTRACTION

Methodologic quality of evidence was evaluated by using the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system, respectively. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with adequate sedation.

RESULTS

Among 19 trials (N = 2137), IND was superior to oral chloral hydrate (3 trials), oral midazolam (1 trial), intranasal midazolam (1 trial), and oral dexmedetomidine (1 trial). IND was equivalent to oral chloral hydrate (2 trials), intranasal midazolam (2 trials), and intranasal ketamine (3 trials). IND was inferior to oral ketamine and a combination of IND plus oral ketamine (1 trial). Higher doses of IND were superior to lower doses (4 trials). Adverse effects were reported in 67 of 727 (9.2%) participants in the IND versus 98 of 591 (16.6%) in the comparator group. There were no reports of adverse events requiring resuscitative measures.

LIMITATIONS

The adequacy of sedation was subjective, which possibly led to biased outcome reporting.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the methodologic limitations of included trials, IND is likely more effective at sedating children compared to oral chloral hydrate and oral midazolam. However, this must be weighed against the potential for adverse cardiovascular effects.

Sedation strategies in children with pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome (PARDS)

In this review, we discuss the changing landscape of sedation in mechanically ventilated children with pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome (PARDS). While previous approaches advocated for early and deep sedation with benzodiazepines, emerging literature has highlighted the benefits of light sedation and use of non-benzodiazepine sedating agents, such as dexmedetomidine. Recent studies have emphasized the importance of monitoring multiple factors including, but not limited to, sedation depth, analgesia efficacy, opiate withdrawal, and development of delirium. Through this approach, we hope to improve PARDS outcomes. Overall, more research is needed to further our understanding of the best sedation strategies in children with PARDS.

Efficacy of different analgesic or sedative drug therapies in pediatric patients with congenital heart disease undergoing surgery: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Surgery is an effective therapy for congenital heart disease (CHD) and the management after surgery poses challenges for the clinical workers. We performed this network meta-analysis to enhance the corresponding evidence with respect to the relative efficacy of different drug treatments applied after the CHD surgery.

METHODS

Embase and PubMed were systematically retrieved to identify all published controlled trials investigating the effectiveness of drugs for patients up to 25 August, 2018. Mean differences (MD), odds ratios and their 95% credible intervals (CrIs) were used to evaluate multi-aspect comparisons. Surface under cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was used to analyze the relative ranking of different treatments in each endpoint.

RESULTS

Compared to saline, all the drugs achieved better preference under the efficacy endpoints except fentanyl in JET. As for ventilator time, all drugs were more effective than saline while only the difference of dexmedetomidine was statistically obvious (MD = 6.92, 95% CrIs 1.77-12.54). Under the endpoint of ICU time, dexmedetomidine was superior to saline as well (MD = 1.26, 95% CrIs 0.11-2.45). When all the endpoints were taken into consideration and with the help of ranking probabilities and SUCRA values, fentanyl combined with dexmedetomidine was one of the recommended drugs due to its shorter time on ventilator and stay in hospital as well as lower mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, based on the comprehensive consideration of all the endpoints, fentanyl combined with dexmedetomidine was considered to be the best-recommended clinical interventions among all the methods.

Analgesia, sedation, and delirium in pediatric surgical critical care

The alleviation of discomfort and distress is an essential component of the management of critically ill surgical patients. Pain and anxiety have multifocal etiologies that may be related to an underlying disease or surgical procedure, ongoing medical therapy, invasive monitors, an unfamiliar, complex and chaotic environment, as well as fear. Pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic therapies have complex risk benefit profiles. A fundamental understanding of analgesia, sedation, and delirium is essential for optimizing important outcomes in critically ill pediatric surgical patients. There has been a recent emphasis on goal directed, evidence based, and patient-centered management of the physical and psychological needs of these children. The purpose of this article is to review and summarize recent advances and describe current practice of these important subjects in the pediatric surgical intensive care environment.

Prolonged Infusion of Dexmedetomidine in Critically-ill Children

OBJECTIVE

To describe main indications, doses, length of infusion and side effects related to dexmedetomidine infusion.

METHODS

Observational and retrospective study evaluating dexmedetomidine use in pediatric intensive care unit.

RESULTS

77 children received dexmedetomidine infusion longer than 6 hours for mechanical ventilation weaning (32.5%), post- neurosurgery and post-upper airway surgery (24.7%), non-invasive ventilation (13%), refractory tachycardia (6.5%) and other causes (23.3%). After 6 hours of infusion, significant decrease in mean arterial pressure and heart rate was observed in all groups. Six children (8%) required withdrawal of drug because of possible side effects: hypotension, bradycardia and somnolence.

CONCLUSION

Dexmedetomidine may be used as sedative in critically ill children without much side effects.

Pharmacological sedation management in the paediatric intensive care unit

Objective

This review addresses sedation management on paediatric intensive care units and possible gaps in the knowledge of optimal sedation strategies. We present an overview of the commonly used sedatives and their pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic considerations in children, as well as the ongoing studies in this field. Also, sedation guidelines and current sedation strategies and assessment methods are addressed.

Key findings

This review shows that evidence and pharmacokinetic data are scarce, but fortunately, there is an active research scene with promising new PK and PD data of sedatives in children using new study designs with application of advanced laboratory methods and modelling. The lack of evidence is increasingly being recognized by authorities and legislative offices such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA).

Conclusion

The population in question is very heterogeneous and this overview can aid clinicians and researchers in moving from practice-based sedation management towards more evidence- or model-based practice. Still, paediatric sedation management can be improved in other ways than pharmacology only, so future research should aim on sedation assessment and implementation strategies of protocolized sedation as well.

Comparative evaluation of two different loading doses of dexmedetomidine with midazolam-fentanyl for sedation in vitreoretinal surgery under peribulbar anaesthesia

Background and Aims:

Midazolam-fentanyl (MDZ:FEN) combination has been routinely used for intravenous sedation in ophthalmic surgeries. Dexmedetomidine (DEX), a recent α₂ adrenoreceptor agonist indicated for sedation for ophthalmic use at a loading dose of 0.5 μg/kg over 10 min, can cause deeper plane of sedation and surgeon dissatisfaction. Therefore, we proposed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of two different loading doses of DEX.

Methods:

In a prospective study, 60 patients aged 50-70 years, scheduled for retinal surgery under peribulbar block were divided equally to receive either MDZ:FEN or DEX 0.5 μg/kg (DEX full) or DEX 0.25 μg/kg (DEX half) loading dose over 10 min followed by titrated maintenance dose of DEX 0.25-0.4 μg/kg/h. Vital parameters, level of sedation (Ramsay Sedation Scale 1–6), effect on respiration and surgeon satisfaction were assessed at regular intervals. Surgeon satisfaction score (0–3) was noted.

Results:

‘DEX half’ group patients had predominantly stable haemodynamics, level 3 sedation and surgeon satisfaction score of 2–3 (good to excellent operating conditions). This group had no vomiting and no respiratory depression. ‘DEX full’ group had a higher incidence of bradycardia, hypotension, level 4 sedation (Ramsay Sedation Scale) and lower surgeon satisfaction. Incidence of nausea and vomiting was higher in MDZ:FEN group compared to other two groups.

Conclusion:

DEX 0.25 μg/kg loading dose over 10 min followed by titrated maintenance dose is an effective alternative to MDZ:FEN and provides controlled (level 3) sedation and stable haemodynamics maximising surgeon satisfaction. Avoiding narcotic analgesics with its associated post-operative nausea and vomiting is an additional benefit.

Outcomes of dexmedetomidine treatment in pediatric patients undergoing congenital heart disease surgery: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Dexmedetomidine decreases cardiac complications in adults undergoing cardiovascular surgery. This systematic review assessed whether perioperative dexmedetomidine improves congenital heart disease (CHD) surgery outcomes in children.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or observational studies that were published until 16 April 2015 and compared dexmedetomidine with placebo or an alternative anesthetic agent during pediatric CHD surgery. The assessed outcomes included hemodynamics, ventilation length, intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital stays, blood glucose and serum cortisol levels, postoperative analgesia requirements, and postoperative delirium.

RESULTS

Five RCTs and nine observational studies involving 2229 patients were included. In pooled analyses, dexmedetomidine was associated with shorter length of mechanical ventilation (mean difference: -93.36, 95% CI: -137.45, -49.27), lower postoperative fentanyl (mean difference: -24.11, 95% CI: -36.98, -11.24) and morphine (mean difference: -0.07, 95% CI: -0.14, 0.00) requirements, reduced stress response (i.e., lower blood glucose and serum cortisol levels), and lower risk of delirium (OR: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.21, 0.74). The hemodynamics of dexmedetomidine-treated patients appeared more stable, but there were no significant differences in the ICU or hospital stay durations. Dexmedetomidine may increase the bradycardia and hypotension risk (OR: 3.14, 95% CI: 1.47, 6.69).

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence indicates that dexmedetomidine improves outcomes in children undergoing CHD surgery. However, this finding largely relies on data from observational studies; high-quality RCTs are warranted because of the potential for subject selection bias.

Efficacy of α2-Agonists for Sedation in Pediatric Critical Care: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Children in PICUs normally require analgesics and sedatives to maintain comfort, safety, and cooperation with interventions. α2-agonists (clonidine and dexmedetomidine) have been described as adjunctive (or alternative) sedative agents alongside opioids and benzodiazepines. This systematic review aimed to determine whether α2-agonists were effective in maintaining patients at a target sedation score over time compared with a comparator group. We also aimed to determine whether concurrent use of α2-agonists provided opioid-sparing effects.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic search was performed using the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and LILACS.

STUDY SELECTION

We included randomized controlled trials of children in PICU treated with clonidine or dexmedetomidine for the indication of sedation.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two authors independently screened articles for inclusion.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Six randomized controlled trials with sufficient data were identified and critically appraised. Three clonidine trials (two vs placebo and one vs midazolam) and three dexmedetomidine trials (two vs fentanyl, one vs midazolam) were included. Due to study heterogeneity it was not possible to pool studies. A narrative synthesis is provided.

CONCLUSIONS

Reporting of study results using the outcome "time maintained at target sedation score' for clonidine or dexmedetomidine was poor. Only one trial compared clonidine with midazolam using a sedation score outcome. This study was underpowered to demonstrate equivalence to midazolam as a sedative. The adjunctive use of clonidine demonstrated significant decreases in opioid use in neonates but not in older groups. Clonidine dose was inconsistent between studies. Dexmedetomidine demonstrated an opioid-sparing effect in two small trials. Further studies, including dose-finding studies and studies with sedation score-based outcomes, are needed.