Efficacy and Safety of Using Amplatzer Ductal Occluder for Transcatheter Closure of Perimembranous Ventricular Septal Defect in Pediatrics

Background: Perimembranous Ventricular Septal Defect (PMVSD) is the most common subtype of ventricular septal defects. Transcatheter closure of PMVSD is a challenging procedure in management of moderate or large defects. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to show that transcatheter closure of perimembranous ventricular septal defect with Amplatzer Ductal Occluder (ADO) is an effective and safe method. Patients and Methods: Between April 2012 and April 2013, 28 patients underwent percutaneous closure of PMVSD using ADO. After obtaining the size of VSD from the ventriculogram a device at least 2 mm larger than the narrowest diameter of VSD at right ventricular side was chosen. The device deployed after confirmation of its good position by echocardiography and left ventriculography. Follow up evaluations were done 1 month, 6 months, 12 months and yearly after discharge with transthoracic echocardiography and 12 lead electrocardiography. Results: The mean age of patients at procedure was 4.7 ± 6.3 (range 2 to 14) years, mean weight 14.7 ± 10.5 (range 10 to 40) kg. The mean defect size of the right ventricular side was 4.5 ± 1.6 mm. The average device size used was 7.3 ± 3.2mm (range 4 to 12 mm). The ADOs were successfully implanted in all patients. The VSD occlusion rate was 65.7% at completion of the procedure, rising up to 79.5% at discharge and 96.4% during follow-up. Small residual shunts were seen at completion of the procedure, but they disappeared during follow-up in all but one patient. The mean follow-up period was 8.3 ± 3.6 months (range 1 to 18 months). Complete atrioventricular block (CAVB), major complication or death was not observed in our study. Conclusions: Transcatheter closure of PMVSD with ADO in children is a safe and effective treatment associated with excellent success and closure rates, but long-term follow-up in a large number of patients would be warranted.

Efficacy and Safety of Orally Administered Intravenous Midazolam Versus a Commercially Prepared Syrup

Background: Among different categories of sedative agents, benzodiazepines have been prescribed for more than three decades to patients of all ages. The effective and predictable sedative and amnestic effects of benzodiazepines support their use in pediatric patients. Midazolam is one of the most extensively used benzodiazepines in this age group. Oral form of drug is the best accepted route of administration in children. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of a commercially midazolam syrup versus orally administered IV midazolam in uncooperative dental patients. Second objective was to determine whether differences concerning sedation success can be explained by child‘s behavioral problems and dental fear. Patients and Methods: Eighty eight uncooperative dental patients (Frankl Scales 1,2) aged 3 to 6 years, and ASA I participated in this double blind, parallel randomized, controlled clinical trial. Midazolam was administered in a dose of 0.5 mg/kg for children under the age 5 and 0.2 mg/kg in patients over 5 years of age. Physiologic parameters including heart rate, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation and blood pressure were recorded. Behavior assessment was conducted throughout the course of treatment using Houpt Sedation Rating Scale and at critical moments of treatment (injection and cavity preparation) by North Carolina Scale. Dental fear and behavioral problems were evaluated using Child Fear Schedule Survey-Dental Subscale (CFSS-DS), and Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). Independent t-test, Chi-Square, and Pearson correlation were used for statistical analysis. Results: Acceptable overall sedation ratings were observed in 90% and 86% of syrup and IV/Oral group respectively; Chi-Square P = 0.5. Other domains of Houpt Scale including: sleep, crying and movement were also not significantly different between groups. Physiological parameters remained in normal limits during study without significant difference between groups. Conclusions: “Orally administered IV midazolam” preparation can be used as an alternative for commercially midazolam syrup.

Clinical efficacy and safety of edaravone therapy in acute cerebral haemorrhage

Purpose: To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of edaravone in the treatment of acute cerebral haemorrhage (ACH). Methods: This study recruited 120 patients who developed ACH. The patients were divided into control and treatment groups with 60 patients per group. The control group underwent conventional treatment and the treatment group also received intravenous edaravone. The volumes of cerebral edema and cerebral hematoma, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels, and Chinese Stroke Scale (CSS) score before and after treatment were compared between the two groups. Results: The respective cerebral edema volumes of the control and treatment groups decreased from 20.99 ± 12.09 and 21.80 ± 12.01 mL on day 0 to 11.23 ± 6.34 and 12.11 ± 5.98 mL at day 7 and 4.69 ± 4.03 and 4.64 ± 3.9 mL on day 14 (P < 0.05). The respective cerebral hematoma volumes of the control and treatment groups decreased from 18.98 ± 12.04 and 18.97 ± 12.07 mL on day 0 to 12.34 ± 6.57 and 11.89 ± 4.01 mL at day 7 and 9.49 ± 3.95 and 9.52 ± 3.96 mL on day 14. Compared with pretreatment, hs-CRP and IL-6 levels and CSS score of the two groups decreased significantly following treatment (p < 0.05); the differences in the cerebral edema and hematoma volumes of the two groups on days 7 and 14 were not significant (p > 0.05). The hs-CRP and IL-6 levels and CSS scores of the treatment group decreased appreciably (p < 0.05), while the incidence of adverse reactions in the treatment and control groups was 16.67 and 13.33 %, respectively, but the difference was not significant (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Edaravone shows remarkable clinical efficacy and safety with no obvious adverse reactions in the treatment of ACH. Therefore, its use is recommended.

Safety and Efficacy of Intravenous Colistin in Neonates With Culture Proven Sepsis

Background: Although it is well described among adults, intravenous colistin use and its associated toxicities in newborns are poorly understood. Objectives: We present our experience of efficacy and safety of intravenous colistin in the treatment of sepsis in term and preterm neonates. Patients and Methods: The records of neonates who received colistin between January 2013 and February 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. All neonates with culture proven nosocomial infections due to multidrug resistant organisms and treated continuously with colistin for more than 72 hours were included in the study. Results: Patients were evaluated for clinical and microbiological response to the drug and its and side effects. Twelve newborn infants with mean 31.8 ± 3.5 weeks gestational age and median 1482 (810 - 3200) gram birth weight were included. 11/12 (91.7%) patients showed microbiological clearance with intravenous colistin. One patient who had recurrent cerebrospinal fluid positive culture was treated with intraventricular colistin. The major side effects observed was hyponatremia and hypokalemia in 2 (16.6%) patients, all infants required magnesium supplementation. Conclusions: Intravenous colistin administration appears to be safe and efficacious for multidrug-resistant gram-negative infections in neonates, including preterm infants. However, we believe that large prospective controlled studies are needed to confirm its efficacy and safety in neonates.