Dexmedetomidine sedation vs. inhaled general anesthesia for pediatric MRI: A retrospective cohort study: Dexmedetomidine sedation vs. inhaled general anesthesia for MRI.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and the efficacy of a dexmedetomidine-based protocol followed by anesthesiologists unaccustomed to using dexmedetomidine during pediatric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations compared to conventional halogenated general anesthesia. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective cohort study including patients younger than 18 years who underwent sedation for MRI between August 1, 2018 and March 31, 2019. Patients who received dexmedetomidine were included in the DEX group and patients who had general anesthesia formed the GA group. Patients were matched with a ratio of 2 GA:1 DEX, based on age and type of MRI examination. RESULTS: Overall, 78 patients were included (DEX=26; GA=52). Dexmedetomidine was significantly associated with a decrease in invasive ventilation (p<0.001) with no impact on image quality. The sedation failure rate was 42% with dexmedetomidine vs. 0% with general anesthesia (p<0.001). All cases of failure followed the intranasal administration of dexmedetomidine. CONCLUSION: Dexmedetomidine seems to be a suitable sedation option for pediatric MRI. It provides an alternative to halogenated general anesthesia with the aim of limiting exposure to conventional anesthetic agents and invasive ventilation.

From hypotonic maintenance fluid to severe hyponatremia: a case report.

BACKGROUND: The principles for maintenance intravenous fluid prescription in children were developed in the 1950s. These guidelines based on the use of hypotonic solutions have been challenged regularly for they seem to be associated with an increased risk of hospital-acquired hyponatremia. CASE PRESENTATION: We report the case of a 4-week-old Caucasian child admitted for acute bronchiolitis who received hypotonic maintenance fluids and developed severe hyponatremia (94 mmol/L) with hyponatremic encephalopathy. CONCLUSION: This clinical situation can serve as a reminder of the latest recommendations from the American Academy of Pediatrics regarding the use of intravenous fluids that promote the use of isotonic fluids in children.

Caffeine treatment for bronchiolitis-related apnea in the pediatric intensive care unit.

INTRODUCTION: Apnea is commonly encountered in children with bronchiolitis. Despite the lack of recommendations regarding bronchiolitis-related apnea (BRA) management, some pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) practitioners use caffeine treatment based on extrapolation from the recommendations for prematurity-related apnea management. The objectives of this study were to describe the management of BRA in our PICU, evaluate the caffeine prescription rate for this indication, and explore its potential effects on clinical outcomes. METHODS: This was a retrospective study in a university hospital PICU between January 1st, 2009 and December 31st, 2016. All children under 1 year of age admitted to the PICU with a diagnosis of BRA were included. Patients were allocated to a control group or a caffeine group depending on the administration of caffeine. RESULTS: In total, 54 infants were included and caffeine treatment was administered to 49 (91%) of them. Patient characteristics were similar between the two groups. Ventilatory support was initiated for 50 patients (93%). Supportive care and length of PICU stay were similar between the two groups. Caffeine was not associated with adverse events. CONCLUSION: Caffeine treatment in BRA could be considered as a local standard practice. This retrospective study was underpowered to show any benefit of caffeine treatment on clinical outcomes. This treatment was not associated with significant adverse effects. We raised the question of the appropriate caffeine dosing regimen for BRA in this postterm population. Further studies on this topic are warranted.

Hemodynamic support of a 15-year-old waiting for a heart transplant: Is there a role for levosimendan in pediatric heart failure?

Decompensated heart failure in children requires rapid and aggressive support. In refractory cases, invasive supportive care is essential to ensure cardiac output. This results in lengthy pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) stays, secondary morbidity, and high cost. Levosimendan may help palliate the pitfalls encountered with the usual treatment. It has been shown to improve hemodynamics and decrease morbidity and mortality from heart failure in adult trials and pediatric cohorts. We report the case of a 15-year-old boy with dilated cardiomyopathy and refractory ventricular dysfunction who was weaned from continuous inotropes and discharged from the PICU with levosimendan while waiting for heart transplantation.

Comparative effectiveness of linezolid versus vancomycin as definitive antibiotic therapy for heterogeneously resistant vancomycin-intermediate coagulase-negative staphylococcal central-line-associated bloodstream infections in a neonatal intensive care unit.

Objectives: Heterogeneously resistant vancomycin-intermediate coagulase-negative staphylococci (hVICoNS) are emerging pathogens causing central-line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) in neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) patients. Given the burden of disease associated with CLABSI and the current lack of therapeutic guidelines, we aimed to compare the effectiveness of linezolid versus vancomycin used as the definitive antibiotic therapy for hVICoNS CLABSI. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of infants with hVICoNS CLABSI from a single NICU between 2009 and 2014, treated with either linezolid or vancomycin as definitive antibiotic therapy. CLABSI duration, early and late recurrence and in-hospital mortality were compared using propensity score-adjusted proportional hazards and logistic regression models. Results: Of 89 infants with hVICoNS CLABSI, 33 (37.1%) treated with linezolid were compared with 56 (62.9%) treated with vancomycin. The median duration of CLABSI was 5 (range 1-12) versus 4 days (range 0-14) ( P = 0.11), early recurrences were 3.0% versus 7.1% ( P = 0.42), late recurrences 0% versus 14.3% ( P = 0.02) and mortality 27.3% versus 28.6% ( P = 0.90), when treated with linezolid versus vancomycin, respectively. When adjusting using a continuous propensity score, linezolid had an HR of 0.78 (95% CI 0.48-1.27) for CLABSI duration, an OR of 0.23 (95% CI 0.02-2.56) for early recurrence and an OR of 0.9 (95% CI 0.3-2.67) for mortality, relative to vancomycin. Conclusions: There was no statistically significant difference between linezolid and vancomycin when used as definitive treatment for hVICoNS CLABSI in NICU patients, in terms of CLABSI duration, recurrence or all-cause mortality.