Search

Numerous formulas that can predict endotracheal intubation depth at the corner of the mouth or the nasal wing of patients have been reported, even though the oral and nasal cavity anatomies differ among patients. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to derive a simple and reliable formula to predict the ideal endotracheal tube insertion depth at the vocal cord level in pediatric patients. The current study was conducted as a retrospective observational study, involving 425 and 335 cardiac pediatric patients in Germany and Japan, respectively, and aimed to determine a formula for predicting tracheal length and ideal depth of endotracheal intubation at the vocal cord level in pediatric patients. The distance between the vocal cords and the carina tracheae was defined as the tracheal length, and was measured on preoperative chest radiographs obtained in the supine position. The tracheal length in cardiac pediatric patients ranged from 6 to 10% of the body height in Germany and from 7 to 11% in Japan. This study revealed racial differences in the tracheal length, that is, in the ideal depth of endotracheal intubation at the vocal cord level. This study suggests that an adequate endotracheal intubation depth can be achieved by inserting endotracheal tubes at the vocal cord level with the minimum tracheal length of each racial group in pediatric patients, for example, 6% and 7% of the body height in Europeans and Asians, respectively. If the endotracheal tube inserted with this method appears to be shallow on chest radiographs, this does not represent an increased risk of accidental extubation, due to an excessively short intubation depth, because the minimum tracheal length for each racial group is considered. That is, it is not due to the endotracheal tube insertion length, but is likely due to the tracheal length of the patient, who has a relatively long tracheal length in the racial group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are utilizing a multidisciplinary approach, reassessing physiology to improve clinical outcomes, reducing length of hospital stay (LOS) stay, resulting in cost reduction. Since its introduction in colorectal surgery. the concept has been utilized in various fields and benefits have been recognized also in adult cardiac surgery. However, ERAS concepts in pediatric cardiac surgery are not yet widely established. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to assess the effects of on-table extubation (OTE) after pediatric cardiac surgery compared to the standard approach of delayed extubation (DET) during intensive care treatment. Study Design and Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of all pediatric cardiac surgery cases performed in children below the age of two years using cardiopulmonary bypass at our institution in 2021. Exclusion criteria were emergency and off pump surgeries as well as children already ventilated preoperatively. Results: OTE children were older (267.3 days vs. 126.7 days, p < 0.001), had a higher body weight (7.0 ± 1.6 kg vs. 4.9 ± 1.9 kg, p < 0.001), showed significantly reduced duration of ICU treatment (75.9 ± 56.8 h vs. 217.2 ± 211.4 h, p < 0.001) and LOS (11.1 ± 10.2 days vs. 20.1 ± 23.4 days; p = 0.001) compared to DET group. Furthermore, OTE children had significantly fewer catecholamine dependencies at 12-, 24-, 48-, and 72-h post-surgery, while DET children showed a significantly increased intrafluid shift relative to body weight (109.1 ± 82.0 mL/kg body weight vs. 63.0 ± 63.0 mL/kg body weight, p < 0.001). After propensity score matching considering age, weight, bypass duration, Society of Thoracic Surgeons-European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery Mortality (STATS)-Score, and the outcome variables, including duration of ICU treatment, catecholamine dependencies, and hospital LOS, findings significantly favored the OTE group. Conclusion: Our results suggest that on-table extubation after pediatric cardiac surgery is feasible and in our cohort was associated with a favorable postoperative course. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Children with congenital heart disease require repeated catheterization. Anesthetic management influences the procedure and may influence outcome; however, data and recommendations are lacking for infants. We studied the influence of sedation versus general anesthesia (GA) on adverse events during catheterization for children <2 years old. Methods: We conducted a monocentric, retrospective study of all catheterization procedures (2008–2013). High-severity adverse event (HSAE) rates were compared using propensity-score-adjusted models, including pre- and intra-procedural variables. Results: 803 cases (619 patients) (368 (46%) GA, 435 (54%) sedation) with a mean age of 6.9 ± 6.1 months were studied. The conversion rate (GA after sedation) was 18 (4%). Hospital stay was 4.9 ± 4.0 and 4.1 ± 2.5 (p = 0.01) after GA or sedation, respectively. HSAE occurred in 75 (20%) versus 40 (9%) (p < 0.01) in GA versus sedation procedures, respectively. Risk factors (multivariable analysis) were older patients (p = 0.05), smaller weights (p < 0.01), palliated status (OR 3.2 [1.2–8.9], p = 0.02), two-ventricle physiology (OR 7.3 [2.7–20.2], p < 0.01), cyanosis (OR 4.6 [2.2–9.8], p < 0.01), pulmonary hypertension (OR 5.6 [2.0–15.5], p < 0.01), interventional catheterization (OR 1.8 [1.1–3.2], p = 0.02) and procedure-type risk category 4 (OR 28.9 [1.8–455.1], p = 0.02). Sedation did not increase the events rate and decreased the requirement for hemodynamic support (OR 5.2 [2.2–12.0], p < 0.01). Conclusion: Sedation versus GA for cardiac catheterization in children <2 years old is safe and effective with regard to HSAE. Sedation also decreases the requirement for hemodynamic support. Paradoxical effects (older age and two-ventricle physiology) on risk have been found for this specific age cluster. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: One undisputed benefit of digital support is the possibility of contact reduction, which has become particularly important in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, to the best of our knowledge, there is currently no study assessing the Europe-wide use of digital online pre-operative patient information or evaluation in the health sector. The aim of this study was to give an overview of the current status in Europe. Methods: A web-based questionnaire covering the informed consent process was sent to members of the European Society of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine (ESAIC) in 47 European countries (42,433 recipients/930 responses). Six questions related specifically to the practice in paediatrics. Results: A total of 70.2% of the respondents indicated that it was not possible to obtain informed consent via the Internet in a routine setting, and 67.3% expressed that they did not know whether it is in line with the legal regulations. In paediatric anaesthesia, the informed consent of only one parent was reported to be sufficient by 77.6% of the respondents for simple interventions and by 63.8% for complex interventions. Just over 50% of the respondents judged that proof of identity of the parents was necessary, but only 29.9% stated that they ask for it in clinical routine. In the current situation, 77.9% would favour informed consent in person, whereas 60.2% could imagine using online or telephone interviews as an alternative to a face-to-face meeting if regulations were changed. Only 18.7% participants reported a change in the regulations due to the current pandemic situation. Conclusion: Whether informed consent is obtained either online or on the telephone in the paediatric population varies widely across Europe and is not currently implemented as standard practice. For high-risk patients, such as the specific cohort of children with congenital heart defects, wider use of telemedicine might provide a benefit in the future in terms of reduced contact and reduced exposure to health risks through additional hospital stays. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Central venous catheters (CVC) are commonly required for pediatric congenital cardiac surgeries. The current standard for verification of CVC positioning following perioperative insertion is postsurgical radiography. However, incorrect positioning may induce serious complications, including pleural and pericardial effusion, arrhythmias, valvular damage, or incorrect drug release, and point of care diagnostic may prevent these serious consequences. Furthermore, pediatric patients with congenital heart disease receive various radiological procedures. Although relatively low, radiation exposure accumulates over the lifetime, potentially reaching high carcinogenic values in pediatric patients with chronic disease, and therefore needs to be limited. We hypothesized that correct CVC positioning in pediatric patients can be performed quickly and safely by point-of-care ultrasound diagnostic. Methods: We evaluated a point-of-care ultrasound protocol, consistent with the combination of parasternal craniocaudal, parasternal transversal, suprasternal notch, and subcostal probe positions, to verify tip positioning in any of the evaluated views at initial CVC placement in pediatric patients undergoing cardiothoracic surgery for congenital heart disease. Results: Using the combination of the four views, the CVC tip could be identified and positioned in 25 of 27 examinations (92.6%). Correct positioning was confirmed via chest X-ray after the surgery in all cases. Conclusions: In pediatric cardiac patients, point-of-care ultrasound diagnostic may be effective to confirm CVC positioning following initial placement and to reduce radiation exposure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

(1) Background: we compare a new SBAR based electronic handover tool versus a paper-based checklist for handover in a pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). (2) Methods: this is a randomized, observational study of 40 electronic vs. 40 paper checklist handovers after pediatric cardiac surgery, with a 48 items checklist for comparison of reporting frequencies and notification of disturbances and noise. PICU staff satisfaction was evaluated by a 12-item questionnaire. (3) Results: in 14 out of 40 cases, there were problems with data processing (incomplete or no data processing). Some item groups (e.g., hemodynamics) were consistently reported at higher frequencies than other groups. Items not specifically asked for did not get reported. Some items, automatically processed in the SBAR handover page, did not get reported. Many handovers suffered a noisy and distracting atmosphere. There was no difference in staff satisfaction between the two handover approaches. Nurses were highly unsatisfied with the general approach by which the handover was performed. (4) Conclusions: human error appears to be a main factor for unreliable data processing. Software is still too complicated, and multitasking is a stressful and error prone event. Handover is a complex task with many factors required for a successful completion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]