Tahsin ŞİMŞEK, Hande GÜRBÜZ AYTULUK, Mehmet YILMAZ, Aynur KAYNAR ŞİMŞEK, Ayşe Zeynep TURAN CIVRAZ, Kemal Tolga SARAÇOĞLU

Çocuk Hastalarda Manyetik Rezonans Görüntülemede Sevofluran ile Sedasyonun Değerlendirilmesi

GİRİŞ ve AMAÇ: Çocuklarda manyetik rezonans görüntüleme esnasında derin bir sedasyona ihtiyaç vardır. Bu amaçla birçok farklı anestezik ilaç kullanılmıştır. Bu çalışmada pediatrik hasta grubunda, manyetik rezonans görüntülemede, sedasyon için sevofluran kullanımının retrospektif olarak değerlendirilmesi amaçlandı. YÖNTEM ve GEREÇLER: Çalışma için, Derince Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesinde 2018 ocak-2019 şubat ayları arasında manyetik rezonans görüntüleme yapılan 0-12 yaş aralığındaki hasta kayıtları tarandı. Hastaların demografik bilgileri, hemodinamik verileri, işlem türleri, işlem süresi, komplikasyonlar ve derlenme süresi istatistiksel olarak değerlendirildi. BULGULAR: Çalışmaya American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) 1-2 risk grubundan toplam 187 hasta dahil edildi. Ortalama anestezi süresi 19.88 dk+11.73 dakikaydı. Hastaların kalp tepe atımı, soluk sonu karbondioksit basıncı ve periferik oksiken satürasyonu başlangıç ve bitiş değerleri arasında anlamlı bir farklılık saptanmadı (p>0,05). Aldrete derlenme skoru 8 ve üstü olma süreleri 1.42+0.68 dakikaydı. 2 hastada %88 düzeyinde satürasyon düşüşü olduğu görüldü. TARTIŞMA ve SONUÇ: Sevofluran kullanımının değerlendirildiği bu çalışmada hastaların işlem süresince hemodinamik açıdan stabil seyrettiği görüldü. Hastaların %99.8 inde hiçbir komplikasyon gelişmemiş olması ve hastaların derlenme sürelerinin kısa olması önemli bulgular olarak değerlendirildi. Sonuç olarak sevofluranın pediatrik manyetik rezonans görüntülemede, güvenle kullanılabilecek bir yöntem olduğu kanısına varıldı.

Evaluation of Sedation With Sevoflurane in Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Pediatric Patients

INTRODUCTION: Deep sedation is needed in children during magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). A lot of different anesthetic drugs have been used for this purpose. In this study, it was aimed to retrospectively evaluate the use of sevoflurane for sedation during MRI in pediatric patients. METHODS: For the study, the records of patients aged 0-12 years who underwent MRI between January 2018 and February 2019 at Derince Training and Research Hospital were examined. Patients demographic information, hemodynamic data, procedure types, procedure time, complications and recovery time were statistically evaluated. RESULTS: 187 patients who were classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) 1-2 risk groups were included in the study. The average duration of anesthesia was 19.88 minutes + 11.73 minutes. There was no significant difference between the beginning and end values of the patients heart rate, end-tidal carbon dioxide pressure, and peripheral oxygen saturation (p>0,05). The time to get an Aldrete recovery score of 8 and above was 1.42+0.68 minutes No complications were observed in 99% of the patients, only in two patients saturation is decreased to 88%. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: In this study, in which the use of sevoflurane was evaluated, findings such as the patients were hemodynamically stable during the procedure, no complications developed in 99% of the patients, and the shortness of recovery period were evaluated as important findings As a result, it was concluded that sevoflurane is an anesthetic agent that can be used safely in pediatric MRI.

PDF

___

1) Kang RA, Shin YH, Gil NS, Kim KY, Yeo H, Jeong JS. A comparison of the use of propofol alone and propofol with midazolam for pediatric magnetic resonance imaging sedation: a retrospective cohort study. BMC Anesthesiol 2017; 17(1): 138.
2) Cote CJ, Wilson S. Guidelines for monitoring and management of pediatric patients before, during, and after sedation for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures: Update Pediatrics. 2016; 138(1)
3) Wu J, Mahmoud M, Schmitt M, Hossain M, Kurth D. Comparison of propofol and dexmedetomedine techniques in children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging. Pediatric anesthesia 2014; 24: 813–818.
4) Fang H, Yang L, Wang X, Zhu H. Clinical efficacy of dexmedetomidine versus propofol in children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging: A meta-analysis. Int J Clin Exp Med 2015; 8: 11881– 11889
5) Siddappa R, Riggins J, Kariyanna S, Calkins P, Rotta AT. High-dose dexmedetomidine sedation for pediatric MRI. Paediatr Anaesth 2011; 21: 153–158.
6) Atalay YO, Leman T, Tobias JD. Efficacy and safety of intravenous thiopental for sedation during magnetic resonance imaging in pediatric patients: A retrospective analysis. Saudi J Anaesth 2017; 11(2): 185-189.
7) Ustun YB, Atalay YK, Koksal E, Kaya C, Ozkan F, Sener EB, et al. Thiopental versus ketofol in paediatric sedation for magnetic resonance imaging: A randomized trial. J Pak Med Assoc. 2017; 67(2): 247-251.
8) Schmitz A, Weiss M, Kellenberger C, Tuura RO, Klaghofer R, Scheer I, et al. Sedation for magnetic resonance imaging using propofol with or without ketamine at induction in pediatrics: A prospective randomized double-blinded study. Paediatr Anaesth 2018; 28(3): 264-274.
9) Grunwell JR, Travers C, McCracken CE, Scherrer PD, Stormorken AG, Chumpitazi CE, et al. Procedural sedation outside of the operating room using ketamine in 22,645 children: a report from the pediatric sedation research consortium. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2016; 17(12): 1109–16.
10) Keskin G, Akın M, Şenaylı Y, Saydam S, Özmert S, Kurt DT, et al. Evaluation of 865 children who underwent magnetic resonance imaging under propofol-midazolam sedation. Medeniyet Medical Journal 2017; 32(3): 141-146
11) Jung SM. Drug selection for sedation and general anesthesia in children undergoing ambulatory magnetic resonance imaging Yeungnam Univ J Med 2020 ;37(3):159-168
12) Briggs VDS. Magnetic resonance imaging under sedation in newborns and infants: A study of 640 cases using sevoflurane. Paediatr Anaesth 2005; 15(1): 9-15.
13) Shariffuddin II, Teoh WH, Wahab S, Wang CY. Effect of single-dose dexmedetomidine on postoperative recovery after ambulatory ureteroscopy and ureteric stenting: A double blind randomized controlled study. BMC Anesthesiol 2018; 18(1): 3
14) Kamal K, Asthana U, Bansal T, Dureja J, Ahlawat G, Kapoor S. Evaluation of efficacy of dexmedetomidine versus propofol for sedation in children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging. Saudi J Anaesth 2017; 11(2): 163-168.
15) Koroglu A, Demirbilek S, Teksan H, Sagir O, But AK, Ersoy MO. Sedative, haemodynamic and respiratory effects of dexmedetomidine in children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging examination: preliminary results. Br J Anaesth 2005; 94(6): 821-4.
16) Lang B, Zhang L, Zhang W, Lin Y, Fu Y, Chen S. A comparative evaluation of dexmedetomidine and midazolam in pediatric sedation: A meta‐ analysis of randomized controlled trials with trial sequential analysis. CNS Neurosci Ther 2020; 26(8): 862–875.