Comparison between chloral hydrate and propofol-ketamine as sedation regimens for pediatric auditory brainstem response testing / Comparação entre o uso de hidrato de cloral e propofol-quetamina como formas de sedação para exames de potenciais evocados auditivos de tronco encefálico

Abstract Introduction: The use of diagnostic auditory brainstem response testing under sedation is currently the "gold standard" in infants and young children who are not developmentally capable of completing the test. Objective: The aim of the study is to compare a propofol-ketamine regimen to an oral chloral hydrate regimen for sedating children undergoing auditory brainstem response testing. Methods: Patients between 4 months and 6 years who required sedation for auditory brainstem response testing were included in this retrospective study. Drugs doses, adverse effects, sedation times, and the effectiveness of the sedative regimens were reviewed. Results: 73 patients underwent oral chloral hydrate sedation, while 117 received propofol-ketamine sedation. 12% of the patients in the chloral hydrate group failed to achieve desired sedation level. The average procedure, recovery and total nursing times were significantly lower in the propofol-ketamine group. Propofol-ketamine group experienced higher incidence of transient hypoxemia. Conclusion: Both sedation regimens can be successfully used for sedating children undergoing auditory brainstem response testing. While deep sedation using propofol-ketamine regimen offers more efficiency than moderate sedation using chloral hydrate, it does carry a higher incidence of transient hypoxemia, which warrants the use of a highly skilled team trained in pediatric cardio-respiratory monitoring and airway management.

Resumo Introdução: O uso de testes diagnósticos de potencial evocado auditivo de tronco encefálico sob sedação é atualmente o padrão-ouro em lactentes e crianças pequenas que não têm desenvolvimento suficiente para realizar o exame. Objetivo: O objetivo do estudo foi comparar a sedação de crianças submetidas a testes de potencial evocado auditivo de tronco encefálico com propofol-quetamina e com hidrato de cloral por via oral. Método: Pacientes entre 4 meses e 6 anos de idade que necessitaram de sedação para a realização do potencial evocado auditivo de tronco encefálico foram incluídos nesse estudo retrospectivo. Foram revisadas as doses dos medicamentos, os efeitos adversos, os tempos de sedação e a eficácia das formas de sedação. Resultados: 73 pacientes foram submetidos à sedação oral com hidrato de cloral, enquanto 117 receberam sedação com propofol-quetamina; 12% dos pacientes do grupo hidrato de cloral não alcançaram o nível desejado de sedação. Os tempos médios de procedimento, recuperação e o tempo total de cuidados de enfermagem foram significativamente menores no grupo propofol-quetamina, entretanto este grupo experimentou maior incidência de hipoxemia transitória. Conclusão: Ambos os regimes de sedação podem ser utilizados com sucesso para sedar crianças para realização do exame de potencial evocado de tronco encefálico. Embora a sedação profunda com propofol e quetamina ofereça mais eficiência do que a sedação moderada com hidrato de cloral, ela apresenta maior incidência de hipoxemia transitória, o que requer uma equipe altamente qualificada, treinada em monitoramento cardiorrespiratório pediátrico e manejo de vias aéreas.

Comparison between chloral hydrate and propofol-ketamine as sedation regimens for pediatric auditory brainstem response testing.

INTRODUCTION: The use of diagnostic auditory brainstem response testing under sedation is currently the "gold standard" in infants and young children who are not developmentally capable of completing the test. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to compare a propofol-ketamine regimen to an oral chloral hydrate regimen for sedating children undergoing auditory brainstem response testing. METHODS: Patients between 4 months and 6 years who required sedation for auditory brainstem response testing were included in this retrospective study. Drugs doses, adverse effects, sedation times, and the effectiveness of the sedative regimens were reviewed. RESULTS: 73 patients underwent oral chloral hydrate sedation, while 117 received propofol-ketamine sedation. 12% of the patients in the chloral hydrate group failed to achieve desired sedation level. The average procedure, recovery and total nursing times were significantly lower in the propofol-ketamine group. Propofol-ketamine group experienced higher incidence of transient hypoxemia. CONCLUSION: Both sedation regimens can be successfully used for sedating children undergoing auditory brainstem response testing. While deep sedation using propofol-ketamine regimen offers more efficiency than moderate sedation using chloral hydrate, it does carry a higher incidence of transient hypoxemia, which warrants the use of a highly skilled team trained in pediatric cardio-respiratory monitoring and airway management.

Vasovagal syncope and severe bradycardia following intranasal dexmedetomidine for pediatric procedural sedation.

We report syncope and bradycardia in an 11-year-old girl following administration of intranasal dexmedetomidine for sedation for a voiding cystourethrogram. Following successful completion of VCUG and a 60-min recovery period, the patient's level of consciousness and vital signs returned to presedation levels. Upon leaving the sedation area, the patient collapsed, with no apparent inciting event. The patient quickly regained consciousness and no injury occurred. The primary abnormality found was persistent bradycardia, and she was admitted to the hospital for telemetric observation. The bradycardia lasted ~2 h, and further cardiac workup revealed no underlying abnormality. Unanticipated and previously unreported outcomes may be witnessed as we expand the use of certain sedatives to alternative routes of administration.