The Predictors for Positive Yield Abdominal Computed Tomography in Pediatric Abdominal Trauma.

OBJECTIVES: Abdominal computed tomography (ACT) use in the initial evaluation of pediatric abdominal trauma is liberal in most instances. The aim of this study was to identify the predictors for a positive yield ACT scan in this population. METHODS: A prospective, cohort, single-center observational study was conducted at Children's Hospital at Westmead, New South Wales, from January 2008 to June 2015 on 240 pediatric abdominal trauma patients who had abdominal computed tomography. Clinical, laboratory, imaging, and interventional variables were explored with univariate and multivariate analyses among children who sustained abdominal trauma. RESULTS: Of 240 patients, positive ACT scans were found in 161 patients (67%), 112 patients (47%) had intra-abdominal injury, and 20 patients (8%) required invasive therapeutic interventions. Mortality rate was 1.7% (4 patients) due to nonabdominal causes. Multivariate analyses revealed that increasing age (odds ratio [OR], 1.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.24; P = 0.024), high injury severity score (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.07-1.21; P < 0.001), abnormal abdominal examination (OR, 5.95; 95% CI, 2.08-17.01; P = 0.001), elevated alanine aminotransferase greater than 125 IU/L (OR, 46.28; 95% CI, 2.81-762.49; P = 0.007), abnormal pelvic radiograph (OR, 14.03; 95% CI, 2.39-82.28; P = 0.003), presence of gross hematuria (OR, 4.14; 95% CI, 1.04-18.23; P = 0.044), low initial hematocrit level (less than 30%) (OR, 8.51; 95% CI, 1.14-63.70; P = 0.037), and positive focused assessment with sonography for trauma (OR, 2.61; 95% CI, 1.01-7.28; P = 0.048) remained significantly associated with abnormal ACT scan. In contrast, those who required scanning of other body region(s) were less likely to have abnormal ACT scan (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.14-0.86; P =0.022). CONCLUSIONS: Integrating the abdominal examination findings, relevant laboratory values, and focused assessment with sonography for trauma results with the physicians' suspicion may aid in stratifying patients for ACT scan. Further efforts should be made to decrease number of normal ACT scans; yet not to increase the number of delayed or missed injures with its inherent morbidity and mortality.

Ambu AuraOnce versus i-gel laryngeal mask airway in infants and children undergoing surgical procedures. A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and performance of the pediatric Ambu AuraOnce (Ambu AO) mask (Ambu, Copenhagen, Denmark) and i-gel mask (Intersurgical Ltd., Wokingham, United Kingdom). Methods: From May 2015 to September 2016, 112 patients, 0-14 years old, underwent elective surgery at a tertiary university hospital (Riyadh, Saudi Arabia). They were randomly assigned to the Ambu AO or i-gel group. Three groups underwent a subgroup analysis: ≤5 kg (group 1), 5.1-10.0 kg (group 2), and >10 kg (group 3). Results: The oropharyngeal leak pressure was significantly higher for the i-gel (25.4±4.1 cm H2O) than for the Ambu AO (22.5±3.9 cm H2O, p less than 0.001). The Ambu AO had a slightly higher ease of insertion compared to the i-gel (100% versus 94%, p=0.08)  and required less manipulation (2% versus 11%, p=0.07).The Ambu AO and i-gel showed non-significant differences in performance between weight groups. There were statistically significant differences for higher leak pressure in group 2 (p=0.01) and group 3 (p=0.002) in favor of the i-gel, and for less manipulation in the Ambu AO in group 1 (p=0.04). Fiberoptic viewing was superior in group 2 for the i-gel (p=0.03) and in group 3 for the Ambu AO (p=0.02). Conclusion: Both devices demonstrated equally good performance with low morbidity. The Ambu AO had a statistical tendency towards easier insertion and less manipulation. Confirming this finding will require large scale trials.

Ingested magnets and gastrointestinal complications.

Multiple magnet ingestion is an unexpected health hazard in children that can lead to significant gastrointestinal morbidity. The magnets are attracted to each other across the bowel wall and this may lead to pressure necrosis, resulting in perforation, fistula formation, and/or intestinal obstruction. We report herein a case of small bowel obstruction following ingestion of two magnets. The public and clinicians should be aware of the health hazard of such devices.