Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28488002›Full record

ArticlePediatric radiology2017

Experience with the use of propofol for radiologic imaging in infants younger than 6 months of age.

Elan Jenkins, Kiran B Hebbar, Katie K Karaga, Daniel A Hirsh, James D Fortenberry, Courtney E McCracken, Stephen F Simoneaux, Michael D Mallory, Pradip P Kamat

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Pediatric radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Elan JenkinsDepartment of Pediatrics, Emory University School of Medicine, 1405 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA.
Kiran B HebbarDepartment of Pediatrics, Emory University School of Medicine, 1405 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA.
Katie K KaragaChildren's Healthcare of Atlanta at Egleston, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Daniel A HirshPediatric Emergency Medicine Associates, Children's Healthcare of Atlanta at Scottish Rite, Atlanta, GA, USA.
James D FortenberryDepartment of Pediatrics, Emory University School of Medicine, 1405 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA.
Courtney E McCrackenDepartment of Pediatrics, Emory University School of Medicine, 1405 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA.
Stephen F SimoneauxDepartment of Pediatrics, Emory University School of Medicine, 1405 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA.
Michael D MalloryChildren's Healthcare of Atlanta at Egleston, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Pradip P KamatDepartment of Pediatrics, Emory University School of Medicine, 1405 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA. pradip.kamat@choa.org.
Children's Healthcare of Atlanta · USEmory University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is an increased risk associated with procedural sedation of infants younger than 6 months of age. The use of propofol for radiologic imaging of this age group is not well studied.

objectiveWe hypothesize that adverse events are higher in the infant population receiving propofol for radiologic imaging. MATERIALS AND

methodsA retrospective chart review was undertaken of 304 infants younger than 6 months old who received propofol for procedural sedation from October 2012 to February 2015. Patient demographics, propofol dosing, sedation-related adverse events and interventions were collected. Serious adverse events were defined as laryngospasm, aspiration, the need for admission, cardiac arrest or death.

resultsProcedural sedation for radiologic imaging was successful in 301/304 (99%) of infants using propofol. Of these 304 patients, 130 (42.8%) patients were female, and 240 of the 304 (79%) were between 3 and 6 months of age. The majority of patients (172/304 [56.6%]) were American Society of Anesthesiologists-Physical Status Class II. There were 57 sedation-related, minor adverse events in 39 out of 304 (12.8%) patients. Thirteen of the 304 (4.3%) patients had 14 serious adverse events, with airway obstruction the most common. Eighty interventions were required in 56/304 (18.4%) patients. The most common interventions were continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) in 25/304 patients (8.2%) and jaw thrust in 15/304 (4.9%). The median induction propofol dose was 4.7 mg/kg. A need for an increase in the propofol infusion rate during the procedure was noted in 162/304 (53.3%) infants. No significant predictors of sedation-related adverse events were detected.

conclusionPropofol can be used for radiologic imaging of infants younger than 6 months of age with a high success rate. Practitioners should be mindful of significantly higher dosing requirements and a higher incidence of airway events, which can be easily identified and managed by a team of experienced sedation providers.

Indexed as

Diagnostic ImagingAnesthetics, IntravenousFemaleHumansInfantMalePropofolRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsAnesthetics, IntravenousPropofolAdverse eventsInduction doseInfantsPediatric procedural sedationPropofol

Identifiers

PMID28488002
OpenAlexW2613890727

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.