Comparison of Dexmedetomidine Administration Strategy for Propofol-Based Pediatric Sedation for Magnetic Resonance...

Intravenous dexmedetomidine is a safe and effective adjunct in propofol-based sedation. Dexmedetomidine is typically administered as a loading dose, followed by continuous infusion or not. Whether the addition of a maintenance infusion of dexmedetomidine after a loading dose in propofol-based sedation for pediatric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can be beneficial in terms of propofol consumption or adverse events is not clear.

We aimed to study whether maintaining dexmedetomidine infusion after loading dose can help reduce propofol consumption and minimize airway and cardiovascular interventions during sedation.

We retrospectively reviewed 884 medical records of pediatric sedation for MRI using both propofol and dexmedetomidine, performed at a single tertiary hospital between May 2021 and January 2023. We compared patients who received dexmedetomidine loading + maintenance (group LM) and dexmedetomidine loading only (group L) as an adjunct to propofol-based sedation. The consumption of propofol and time to recovery were measured. We also compared the incidence of airway rescue maneuver and hypotension requiring intervention during sedation.

Overall, 695 patients were included in the analysis (group LM, n = 351, group L, n = 344). The total sedation duration was similar between the two groups (52 vs. 50 min, p = 0.255). Group LM showed significantly less total propofol consumption (6.62 vs. 7.63 mg·kg^-1·h^-1, p = 0.001). The incidence of airway rescue maneuver did not differ significantly between the two groups (0.9 vs. 1.5%, p = 0.501); however, the incidence of hypotension requiring intervention was lower in group LM than in group L (4.3 vs. 8.1%, p = 0.040). The recovery time did not differ significantly between the two groups (34 vs. 34 min, p = 0.932).

In propofol-based sedation for pediatric MRI, maintenance infusion of dexmedetomidine after a loading dose reduces total propofol consumption and hemodynamic instability requiring intervention without prolonging recovery time, compared with dexmedetomidine bolus without maintenance.