Is procedural sedation with propofol acceptable for complex imaging? A comparison of short vs. prolonged sedations in children

摘要

Background: Concerns exist in the community of non-anesthesiologist sedation providers regarding the appropriateness of prolonged sedations using propofol for outpatient procedures. Objective: To investigate interventions required, completion rate and resource use in prolonged vs. short sedations using propofol in outpatients. Materials and methods: We reviewed retrospectively 213 children sedated with propofol by a non-anesthesiologist sedation service. Cohorts were composed a priori of children sedated for ≥1 h and <1 h. Comparisons were made regarding need for interventions, sedation duration, sedation completion to discharge time, and procedural completion rate. Results: Most sedations were for MRI (87.5% short vs. 94.5% prolonged) with no statistically significant difference in overall need for interventions (75.2% prolonged vs. 65.4% short) nor completion to discharge times (30.7 ± 11.5 min [prolonged] vs. 30.3 ± 11.7 min [short]) between both groups. One child failed to complete the intended scan. No one required endotracheal intubation or unplanned admission. Conclusion: Prolonged outpatient sedations with propofol conducted by appropriately trained non-anesthesiology sedation providers appears effective for imaging procedures with no increase in interventions or increased resource burden compared to short sedations. This information can assist all stakeholders in determining scope of practice and guidelines for moderately longer pediatric sedations with propofol.