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

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Abulebda,Kamal
Data de Publicação: 2019
Outros Autores: Patel,Vinit J., Ahmed,Sheikh S., Tori,Alvaro J., Lutfi,Riad, Abu-Sultaneh,Samer
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1808-86942019000100032
Resumo: 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.
id ABORL-F-1_e56b8c521fa81bb58bff9732fc32ecc9
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S1808-86942019000100032
network_acronym_str ABORL-F-1
network_name_str Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology
repository_id_str
spelling Comparison between chloral hydrate and propofol-ketamine as sedation regimens for pediatric auditory brainstem response testingProcedural sedationChloral hydratePropofolAuditory brainstem response testingAbstract 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.Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial.2019-02-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1808-86942019000100032Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology v.85 n.1 2019reponame:Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngologyinstname:Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial (ABORL-CCF)instacron:ABORL-CCF10.1016/j.bjorl.2017.10.003info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessAbulebda,KamalPatel,Vinit J.Ahmed,Sheikh S.Tori,Alvaro J.Lutfi,RiadAbu-Sultaneh,Samereng2019-02-05T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1808-86942019000100032Revistahttp://www.bjorl.org.br/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phprevista@aborlccf.org.br||revista@aborlccf.org.br1808-86861808-8686opendoar:2019-02-05T00:00Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology - Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial (ABORL-CCF)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparison between chloral hydrate and propofol-ketamine as sedation regimens for pediatric auditory brainstem response testing
title Comparison between chloral hydrate and propofol-ketamine as sedation regimens for pediatric auditory brainstem response testing
spellingShingle Comparison between chloral hydrate and propofol-ketamine as sedation regimens for pediatric auditory brainstem response testing
Abulebda,Kamal
Procedural sedation
Chloral hydrate
Propofol
Auditory brainstem response testing
title_short Comparison between chloral hydrate and propofol-ketamine as sedation regimens for pediatric auditory brainstem response testing
title_full Comparison between chloral hydrate and propofol-ketamine as sedation regimens for pediatric auditory brainstem response testing
title_fullStr Comparison between chloral hydrate and propofol-ketamine as sedation regimens for pediatric auditory brainstem response testing
title_full_unstemmed Comparison between chloral hydrate and propofol-ketamine as sedation regimens for pediatric auditory brainstem response testing
title_sort Comparison between chloral hydrate and propofol-ketamine as sedation regimens for pediatric auditory brainstem response testing
author Abulebda,Kamal
author_facet Abulebda,Kamal
Patel,Vinit J.
Ahmed,Sheikh S.
Tori,Alvaro J.
Lutfi,Riad
Abu-Sultaneh,Samer
author_role author
author2 Patel,Vinit J.
Ahmed,Sheikh S.
Tori,Alvaro J.
Lutfi,Riad
Abu-Sultaneh,Samer
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Abulebda,Kamal
Patel,Vinit J.
Ahmed,Sheikh S.
Tori,Alvaro J.
Lutfi,Riad
Abu-Sultaneh,Samer
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Procedural sedation
Chloral hydrate
Propofol
Auditory brainstem response testing
topic Procedural sedation
Chloral hydrate
Propofol
Auditory brainstem response testing
description 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.
publishDate 2019
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2019-02-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1808-86942019000100032
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1808-86942019000100032
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1016/j.bjorl.2017.10.003
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial.
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial.
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology v.85 n.1 2019
reponame:Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology
instname:Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial (ABORL-CCF)
instacron:ABORL-CCF
instname_str Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial (ABORL-CCF)
instacron_str ABORL-CCF
institution ABORL-CCF
reponame_str Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology
collection Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology
repository.name.fl_str_mv Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology - Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial (ABORL-CCF)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv revista@aborlccf.org.br||revista@aborlccf.org.br
_version_ 1754575993257852928