BackgroundAtropine has is currently recommended to facilitate haemodynamic stability during critical care intubation. Our objective was to determine whether atropine use at induction influences ICU mortality.Methodology/Principal FindingsA 2-year prospective, observational study of all first non-planned intubations, September 2007–9 in PICU and Intensive Care Transport team of Hôpital Robert Debré, Paris, 4 other PICUs and 5 NICUs in the Paris Region, France. Follow-up was from intubation to ICU discharge. A propensity score was used to adjust for patient specific characteristics influencing atropine prescription. 264/333 (79%) intubations were included. The unadjusted ICU mortality was 7.2% (9/124) for those who received atropine compared to 15.7% (22/140) for those who did not (OR 0.42, 95%CI 0.19–0.95, p = 0.04). One child died during intubation (1/264, 0.4%). Two age sub-groups of neonates (≤28 days) and older children (>28 days, <8 years) were examined. This difference in mortality arose from the higher mortality in children aged over one month when atropine was not used (propensity score adjusted OR 0.22, 95%CI 0.06–0.85, p = 0.028). No effect was seen in neonates (propensity score adjusted OR 1.3, 95%CI 0.31–5.1 p = 0.74). Using the propensity score, atropine maintained the mean heart rate 45.9 bpm above that observed when no atropine was used in neonates (95%CI 34.3–57.5, p<0.001) and 43.5 bpm for older children (95%CI 25.5–61.5 bpm, p<0.001).Conclusions/SignificanceAtropine use during induction was associated with a reduction in ICU mortality in children over one month. This effect is independent of atropine’s capacity to attenuate bradycardia during intubation which occurred similarly in neonates and older children. This result needs to be confirmed in a study using randomised methodology.
ObjectivesPremedication practices for neonatal tracheal intubations have not yet been described for neonatal transport teams. Our objective is to describe the use of sedation/analgesia (SA) for tracheal intubations and to assess its tolerance in neonates transported by medical transport teams in France.SettingThis prospective observational study was part of the EPIPPAIN 2 project and collected around-the-clock data on SA practices in neonates intubated by all five paediatric medical transport teams of the Paris region during a 2-month period. Intubations were classified as emergent, semiemergent and non-emergent. Sedation level and conditions of intubation were assessed with the Tonus, Reactivity, Awareness and Conditions of intubation to Help in Endotracheal intubation Assessment (TRACHEA score). The scores range from 0 to 10 representing an increasing ladder from adequate to inadequate sedation, and from excellent to very poor conditions of intubation.Participants40 neonates intubated in 28 different centres.ResultsThe mean (SD) age was 34.9 (3.9) weeks, and 62.5% were intubated in the delivery room. 30/40 (75%) of intubations were performed with the use of SA. In 18/30 (60.0%) intubations performed with SA, the drug regimen was the association of sufentanil and midazolam. Atropine was given in 19/40 intubations. From the 16, 21 and 3 intubations classified as emergent, semiemergent and non-emergent, respectively, 8 (50%), 19 (90.5%) and 3 (100%) were performed with SA premedication. 79.3% of intubations performed with SA had TRACHEA scores of 3 or less. 22/40 (55%) infants had at least one of the following adverse events: muscle rigidity, bradycardia below 100/min, desaturation below 80% and nose or pharynx–larynx bleeding. 7/24 (29.2%) of those who had only one attempt presented at least one of these adverse events compared with 15/16 (93.8%) of those who needed two or more attempts (p<0.001).ConclusionSA premedication is largely feasible for tracheal intubations performed in neonates transported by medical transport teams including intubations judged as emergent or semiemergent.Trial registration number
NCT01346813; Results.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.