Abstract
Abstract
Background
Children under 6 years who need magnetic resonance imaging usually require sedation to obtain best quality images, but the optimal sedation protocol remains to be determined. In 2018, we showed a 22% interruption in image acquisition during magnetic resonance imaging when performing a propofol-based sedation using a bolus approach. As non-pharmacological premedication is often insufficient to reduce the anxiety of children related to parental separation, pharmacological premedication may be useful to facilitate the induction of anesthesia. In our institution, effective premedication is obtained oral intake of midazolam, though its administration relies on patients’ compliance and could also lead to paradoxical reaction. Dexmedetomidine has a safe profile in the pediatric population and can therefore represent an interesting alternative. The primary objective of this trial is to demonstrate the superiority of intranasal dexmedetomidine compared to oral midazolam as premedication in reducing the occurrence of any event requiring temporary or definitive interruption of the examination to allow anesthesiologist intervention in children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging under propofol sedation.
Methods
In this single-center, prospective, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active comparator-controlled, superiority trial, we planned to include 250 patients, aged 6 months to 6 years, undergoing a scheduled magnetic resonance imaging requiring the presence of an anesthesiologist. After informed consent, the patients will be randomized to receive either oral midazolam or intranasal dexmedetomidine as premedication. The data will be analyzed in intention to treat, using Kolmogorov–Smirnov Z, chi-square, Wilcoxon, and Mann–Whitney U tests. A P-value < 0.05 will be considered statistically significant.
Discussion
The MIDEX MRI study will assess the efficacy of intranasal dexmedetomidine compared to oral midazolam to improve the quality of a propofol-based sedation prior to magnetic resonance imaging, without negative repercussion on the postoperative period.
Trial registration
ClinicalTrial.gov NCT05192629. Registered on 14 January 2022. Protocol version 2.1
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Pharmacology (medical),Medicine (miscellaneous)
Reference35 articles.
1. Coté CJ, Wilson S, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Academy of pediatric dentistry. Guidelines for monitoring and management of pediatric patients before, during, and after sedation for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures: update 2016. Pediatrics. 2016;138(1):e20161212.
2. Gutmann A, Pessenbacher K, Gschanes A, Eggenreich U, Wargenau M, Toller W. Propofol anesthesia in spontaneously breathing children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging: comparison of two propofol emulsions. Paediatr Anaesth mars. 2006;16(3):26674.
3. Jung SM. Drug selection for sedation and general anesthesia in children undergoing ambulatory magnetic resonance imaging. Yeungnam Univ J Med. 2020;37(3):15968.
4. Cravero JP. Progress in pediatric sedation research. Clin Pediatr Emerg Medi. 2010;11(4):2829.
5. Yip P, Middleton P, Cyna AM, Carlyle AV. Cochrane Review: Non-pharmacological interventions for assisting the induction of anesthesia in children. Evid Based Child Health A Cochrane Rev J. 2011;6(1):71134.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献