Published online February 1, 2008
PEDIATRICS Vol. 121 No. 2 February 2008, pp. 448 (doi:10.1542/peds.2007-3132)
This Article
Right arrow Extract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Papoff, P.
Right arrow Articles by Moretti, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Papoff, P.
Right arrow Articles by Moretti, C.
Related Collections
Right arrow Respiratory Tract
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

LETTER TO THE EDITOR

Effectiveness and Safety of Propofol in Newborn Infants

Paola Papoff, MD, PhD
Michele Mancuso, MD
Elena Caresta, MD
Corrado Moretti, MD

Department of Pediatrics
Sapienza University of Rome
00161 Rome, Italy

To the Editor.—

We welcome the recent contribution by Ghanta et al,1 which showed the efficacy of propofol as an induction agent to facilitate neonatal endotracheal intubation. Their article provided convincing evidence that in neonates, as in adults and children, propofol without muscle relaxants provides optimal conditions for endotracheal intubation. Hence, skilled or less experienced physicians may be encouraged to sedate infants before semiurgent endotracheal intubation, a procedure that is still underused in most NICUs. Nevertheless, we would like to raise a note of caution regarding the use of propofol as a single agent before intubation in newborn infants. Because propofol is a hypnotic agent with no analgesic effect, propofol should be given with adjunctive analgesics for painful procedures. When given as a bolus in hypnotic doses, propofol commonly causes profound apnea. Although short-lasting (30–90 seconds), this effect may facilitate intubation but also delay adequate ventilation and oxygenation if intubation is unsuccessful, especially for infants with difficult airways. Propofol administration is frequently associated with cardiovascular changes, mainly hypotension. Hypotension can be particularly detrimental in newborn infants with pulmonary hypertension, because it favors right-to-left shunting and, thus, hypoxemia.2

With these concepts in mind, we conducted a pilot study on 21 consecutive term or near-term neonates with severe respiratory distress who were temporarily intubated to receive surfactant. We aimed to asses the effectiveness and safety of a combination of fentanyl and propofol to facilitate intubation. We used in sequence fentanyl (1.5 µg/kg intravenously over 1 minute) and propofol (2 mg/kg intravenously diluted 1:1 over 20 seconds, 2 minutes after fentanyl). A repeated dose of propofol was given if more than 1 attempted intubation was required. The quality of intubation conditions was graded by the attending physician with the Helbo-Hansen scoring system,3 which uses scores of 1 (easy) to 4 (difficult) on each of the following variables: ease of laryngoscopy, position of vocal cords, coughing on laryngoscopy or intubation, jaw relaxation, and limb movement. Intubation was considered easy if each variable score was ≤2. Successful intubation was attained at first attempt in 86% of the infants, and intubation was considered easy in all of them. Pulmonary artery pressure was higher than normal in 77% of the 18 infants who were screened before intubation. In the 3 infants who required a second attempt of intubation and in 4 of the remaining 18 patients, a brisk oxygen desaturation (not less than 60%) developed and, despite adequate chest excursion, responded slowly to bag-and-mask ventilation. In most infants, these desaturation events were associated with a transient decrease in systemic blood pressure that was treated with a bolus of 10 mL/kg crystalloid. None of the infants in the series experienced tachycardia or increased blood pressure, possibly because of adequate pain control.

We believe that our experience provides a timely complement to the data from Ghanta et al on the use of propofol for neonatal endotracheal intubation and suggests that propofol and fentanyl combined may be safe and appropriate for facilitating semiurgent or elective neonatal intubation.

REFERENCES

  1. Ghanta S, Abdel-Latif ME, Lui K, Ravindranathan H, Awad J, Oei J. Propofol compared with the morphine, atropine, and suxamethonium regimen as induction agents for neonatal endotracheal intubation: a randomized, controlled trial. Pediatrics. 2007;119 (6). Available at: www.pediatrics.org/cgi/content/full/119/6/e1248
  2. Williams GD, Jones TK, Hanson KA, Morray JP. The hemodynamic effects of propofol in children with congenital heart disease. Anesth Analg. 1999;89 (6):1411 –1416[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Helbo-Hansen S, Ravlo O, Trap-Andersen S. The influence of alfentanil on the intubating conditions after priming with vecuronium. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1988;32 (1):41 –44[Web of Science][Medline]

PEDIATRICS (ISSN 1098-4275). ©2008 by the American Academy of Pediatrics

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
NeoReviewsHome page
C. S. Greenwood and C. E. Colby
Pharmacology Review: Premedication for Endotracheal Intubation of the Neonate: What is the Evidence?
NeoReviews, January 1, 2009; 10(1): e31 - e35.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


This Article
Right arrow Extract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Papoff, P.
Right arrow Articles by Moretti, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Papoff, P.
Right arrow Articles by Moretti, C.
Related Collections
Right arrow Respiratory Tract
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?