Search

Abstract Background Lidocaine, a widely used local anaesthetic, also serves as an adjuvant in pain management. However, its use in children is off-label. This study aimed to determine if intravenous lidocaine alleviates the haemodynamic, metabolic, and hormonal responses to intubation and laparoscopic surgery in children. Methods A single-centre, parallel, double-masked, randomised, placebo-controlled trial. 132 patients, aged 18 months to 18 years, with no contraindications to lidocaine administration and qualified for laparoscopic appendectomy were enrolled. The intervention studied was a lidocaine bolus of 1.5 mg⋅kg− 1 over 5 min given before induction of anaesthesia, followed by intraoperative lidocaine infusion at 1.5 mg⋅kg− 1⋅h− 1 intraoperatively. Patients in the control group were administered a placebo. Mean arterial pressure, glucose, cortisol, lidocaine blood levels, lidocaine-related side effects, and intraoperative opioid requirements were analysed. Results 132 participants completed the trial. The number of patients who experienced an excessive cardiovascular response to induction of anaesthesia or intubation was 23 (37%) in the control group and 21 (34%) in the lidocaine group (p = 0.707). No statistically significant difference was found between the control and lidocaine groups in the hormonal and metabolic responses, as well as intraoperative fentanyl requirements. Serum lidocaine levels remained below the toxic threshold in all patients. Conclusions Although the studied intervention appears to be safe, with no clinical side effects observed and serum lidocaine levels remaining below the toxic threshold, its intraoperative administration is not recommended, as it does not demonstrate any significant benefit during the anaesthesia period when compared to placebo. Trial registration number NCT05238506. The date of first registration: 14/02/2022.

Abstract We assessed the influence of systemic lidocaine administration on ventilatory and circulatory parameters, and the pneumoperitoneum impact on the cardiopulmonary system during a laparoscopic appendectomy in children. A single-center parallel single-masked randomized controlled study was carried out with 58 patients (3–17 years). Intravenous lidocaine bolus of 1.5 mg/kg over 5 min before induction of anesthesia followed by lidocaine infusion at 1.5 mg/kg/h intraoperatively. Respiratory system compliance (C, C/kg), Ppeak-PEEP and Pulse rate (Pulse), systolic, diastolic and mean blood pressure (NBPs, NBPd, NBPm), assessed in the Lidocaine and Control group, at the: beginning (P1), minimum lung compliance (P2) and at the end of surgery (P3) were compared. The respiratory/hemodynamic parameters did not differ between the groups at any stage of operation. Blood Pressure and Ppeak-PEEP were significantly higher at the P2 compared to P1 and P3 stages (P

In recent years commensal microorganisms are not just “passive occupants”, but important element of homeostasis. There are numerous reports documenting the composition and role of the gut, skin or vagina microbiome but the role of commensal organisms living in the lungs is relatively unknown. Pulmonary microbiome impact on the immune response of the host organism and may indicate new therapeutic directions. Lung microbiome, by modulating the expression of innate immunity genes, causes an increase in the concentration of IL-5, IL-10, IFNγ and CCL11, affects the TLR4 dependent response of pulmonary macrophages and modulate the production of antibacterial peptides contained in the mucus. It is documented that disorders of the lung microbiome contribute to asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. However it is known that pulmonary dysbiosis also occurs in critically ill patients. It is possible, therefore, that microbiota-targeted therapy may constitute the future therapeutic direction in ICU.

Abstract Intravenous lidocaine, a potent local anesthetic with analgesic and anti-inflammatory properties, has been shown to be an effective adjunct that reduces intra- and postoperative opioid consumption and facilitates pain management in adults. While it shows promise for use in the pediatric population, limited evidence is available. Objectives To determine if general anesthesia with intraoperative intravenous lidocaine infusion versus general anesthesia without intravenous lidocaine infusion in children undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy decreased opioid requirements intra- and postoperatively. Design A single-center parallel single-masked randomized controlled study. A computer-generated blocked randomization list was used to allocate participants. The study was conducted between March 2019 and January 2020. Setting: Pediatric teaching hospital in Poland. Participants Seventy-four patients aged between 18 months and 18 years undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy. Seventy-one patients fulfilled the study requirements. Intervention Intravenous lidocaine bolus of 1.5 mg/kg over 5 min before induction of anesthesia followed by lidocaine infusion at 1.5 mg/kg/h intraoperatively. The infusion was discontinued before the patients’ transfer to the postanesthesia care unit (PACU). Primary outcome measure The primary outcome measure was total nalbuphine requirement in milligrams during the first 24 h after surgery. Secondary outcome measures The secondary outcome measures were intraoperative fentanyl consumption, intraoperative sevoflurane consumption, time to the first rescue analgesic request, incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting during the first 24 h after surgery, frequency of side effects of lidocaine. Results Children (n = 74) aged 5–17 randomly allocated to receive intraoperative lidocaine infusion (n = 37) or no intervention (n = 37). Seventy-one were included in the analysis (35 in the study group and 36 in the control group). There was no difference in the cumulative dose of nalbuphine in the first 24 h after removal of the endotracheal tube between groups [median of 0.1061 (IQR: 0.0962–0.2222) mg/kg in the lidocaine group, compared to the control group median of 0.1325 (IQR: 0.0899–0.22020) mg/kg, p = 0.63]. Intraoperative fentanyl consumption was lower in the lidocaine group [median of 5.091 (IQR: 4.848–5.714) μg/kg] than in the control group [median of 5.969 (IQR: 5.000–6.748), p = 0.03]. Taking into account the additional doses administered based on clinical indications, the reduction in the requirement for fentanyl in the lidocaine group was even greater [median of 0.0 (IQR: 0.0–0.952) vs 0.99 (IQR: 0.0–1.809) μg/kg, p = 0.01]. No difference was observed in the sevoflurane consumption between the two groups [median of 32.5 ml (IQR 25.0–43.0) in the lidocaine group vs median of 35.0 ml (IQR: 23.5–46.0) in the control group, p = 0.56]. The time to first analgesic request in the lidocaine group was prolonged [median of 55 (IQR: 40–110) min in the lidocaine group vs median of 40.5 (IQR: 28–65) min in the control group, p = 0.05]. There was no difference in the frequency of PONV between the two groups (48.57% in the lidocaine group vs 61.11% in the control group, p = 0.29). No lidocaine related incidence of anaphylaxis, systemic toxicity, circulatory disturbances or neurological impairment was reported, during anesthesia or postoperative period. Conclusions Intraoperative systemic lidocaine administration reduced the intraoperative requirement for opioids in children undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy. This effect was time limited, and hence did not affect opioid consumption in the first 24 h following discontinuation of lidocaine infusion. Trial registration NCT03886896 .

Perioperative antithrombotic prophylaxis in adults is widely recommended. In the past, it was believed that this does not concern the paediatric population. Recently, however, there has been growing evidence that the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in children is increasing and is probably underestimated. This is a result of advances in treatment of previously lethal conditions, wide use of central venous catheters, and improved awareness and diagnosis of VTE complications. However, large clinical trials assessing the efficacy and safety of antithrombotic treatment in children have not been conducted and there are not widely accepted protocols of perioperative prophylaxis. At the same time, there is a growing awareness of its sequelae: compartment syndrome, pulmonary embolism, pulmonary hypertension, post-thrombotic syndrome, cost, length of hospital stay, and mortality. Local recommendations based on observational studies, individual experience, and extrapolation from data of adults have emerged.

Choosing the right anaesthetic technique and postoperative analgesia after major surgery can be a great challenge for paediatric anaesthetists, especially when younger children are concerned. The simultaneous use of systemic analgesics with adjuncts in combination with single-shot blocks performed at the right time may facilitate the patient’s recovery and result in a comfortable postoperative period.

Introduction: Epstein–Barr virus (EBV) usually causes mild, self-limiting, or asymptomatic infection in children, typically infectious mononucleosis. The severe course is more common in immunocompromised patients. Neurological complications of primary infection, reactivation of the latent infection, or immune-mediated are well-documented. However, few published cases of fatal EBV encephalitis exist. Case presentation We report a case of a 5.5-year-old immunocompetent girl with fulminant EBV encephalitis fulfilling the criteria for the recently proposed subtype Acute Fulminant Cerebral Edema: (AFCE). The child presented with fever, vomiting, altered mental status, and ataxia. Her initial brain CT (computed tomography) scan was normal. On day 2 she developed refractory status epilepticus requiring intubation, ventilation, and sedation for airway protection and seizure control. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan showed cytotoxic brain edema. Despite intensive treatment, including acyclovir, ceftriaxone, hyperosmotic therapy (3% NaCl), intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG), corticosteroids, as well as supportive management, on day 5 she developed signs of impending herniation. Intensification of therapy (hyperventilation, deepening sedation, mannitol) was ineffective, and a CT scan demonstrated generalized brain edema with tonsillar herniation. EBV primary infection was confirmed by serology and qPCR in blood samples and post-mortem brain tissue. An autopsy was consistent with the early phase of viral encephalitis. Conclusions This case confirms that normal or non-specific CT and MRI scans do not exclude encephalitis diagnosis if clinical presentation fulfills the diagnostic criteria. The implementation of prophylactic anticonvulsants could improve outcomes. Intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring should be considered in AFCE for better ICP management. Decompressive craniectomy might be a life-saving option in refractory cases. An encephalitis management algorithm is proposed.

SARS-CoV-2 infection in healthy children is usually benign. However, severe, life-threatening cases have previously been reported, notably in infants. We must be aware that data on the natural history of COVID-19 are still full of gaps, especially as far as the pediatric population is concerned. Therefore, it is important to describe rare manifestations of SARS-CoV-2 acute infection in children. Here we present the case of acute hemorrhagic necrotizing encephalitis (AHNE) in a previously healthy, 2-month-old male infant with SARS-CoV-2 infection. After 2 days of fever with signs of respiratory tract infection, neurological manifestations appeared: irritability, nystagmus, agitation then apathy. As a consequence of apnea, he required emergent intubation and was transferred to our PICU. Brain MRI revealed diffuse areas of oedema associated with numerous symmetrical changes with punctate hemorrhages in basal ganglia, thalami, brainstem, and cerebral gray matter. CSF was clear with pleocytosis 484 cells/µl, elevated lactic acid and protein. Despite broad microbiological testing, only SARS-CoV2 was detected in PCR nasal swab. Therefore, acute hemorrhagic necrotizing encephalitis (AHNE) as a result of COVID-19 was the most probable diagnosis. The outcome was unfavorable - brain death was confirmed, life support was withdrawn.