Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012 Apr;28(2):178-84.
doi: 10.4103/0970-9185.94837.

Complications of three deep sedation methods for magnetic resonance imaging

Solina Tith  1 , Kirk Lalwani, Rongwei Fu
Affiliations

Complications of three deep sedation methods for magnetic resonance imaging

Solina Tith et al. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2012 Apr.

Abstract

Background: Propofol and pentobarbital are commonly used to sedate children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

Aim/objective: TO COMPARE THE SAFETY OF THREE TYPES OF SEDATION: intravenous propofol (PROP), mixed pentobarbital/propofol (PENT), and mixed pentobarbital group requiring supplemental sedation (PENT SUPP) regimens in pediatric patients following deep sedation (DS) for noncardiac MRI.

Materials and methods: We conducted a case-control study matching 619 cases with complications with 619 controls using data from our institution's sedation database for children deeply sedated for noncardiac MRI. Cases were defined as patients with any complication and we characterized complications from cases, and used a conditional logistic regression model to assess the association between three DS methods and occurrence of complications after adjusting for confounding variables.

Results: We found that complications occurred in association with 794 (10.1%) of the 7,839 DSs performed for MRI between 1998 and 2008. Of the 794 cases, 619 cases met inclusion criteria for the study. Among the 619 cases that met inclusion criteria, 24 (0.3% of 7,839 DSs total) were associated with major complications. Type of sedation was significantly associated with the occurrence of complications, and the PENT group was associated with decreased odds of complications when compared to the PROP regimen (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.46, 0.98; P=0.040) and compared to the PENT SUPP group (OR 0.60; 95% CI 0.31, 0.89; P<0.0001).

Conclusions: DS with a pentobarbital technique was associated with decreased odds for complications when compared to a propofol-based technique or a pentobarbital technique requiring supplemental sedation.

Keywords: MRI in infants and children; pediatric sedation; pentobarbital; propofol.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest: None declared.

References

    1. Bloomfield EL, Masaryk TJ, Caplin A, Obuchowski NA, Schubert A, Hayden J, et al. Intravenous sedation for MR imaging of the brain and spine in children: Pentobarbital versus propofol. Radiology. 1993;186:93–7. - PubMed
    1. Frankville DD, Spear RM, Dyck JB. The dose of propofol required to prevent children from moving during magnetic resonance imaging. Anesthesiology. 1993;79:953–8. - PubMed
    1. Hasan RA, Shayevitz JR, Patel V. Deep sedation with propofol for children undergoing ambulatory magnetic resonance imaging of the brain, experience from a pediatric intensive care unit. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2003;4:454–8. - PubMed
    1. Cravero JP, Beach ML, Blike GT, Gallagher SM, Hertzog JH. Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium.The incidence and nature of adverse events during pediatric sedation/anesthesia with propofol for procedures outside the operating room: A report from the Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium. Anesth Analg. 2009;108:795–804. - PubMed
    1. Pershad J, Wan J, Anghelescu DL. Comparison of propofol with pentobarbital/midazolam/fentanyl sedation for magnetic resonance imaging of the brain in children. Pediatrics. 2007;120:e629–36. - PubMed