Anteroposterior Airway Diameter during Sedation for Brain MRI in Children with and without Developmental Disabilities

作     者：Nirupama Kannikeswaran Swati Mody Xinguang Chen Marwan Zidan Lalitha Sivaswamy 

作者机构：Wayne State University School of Medicine Carman and Ann Adams Department of Pediatrics Division of Emergency Medicine Children’s Hospital of Michigan Detroit MI USA Wayne State University School of Medicine Carman and Ann Adams Department of Pediatrics Division of Neurology Children’s Hospital of Michigan Detroit MI USA Wayne State University School of Medicine Carman and Ann Adams Department of Pediatrics Division of Pediatric Radiology Children’s Hospital of Michigan Detroit MI USA Wayne State University School of Medicine Detroit MI USA Wayne State University Detroit MI USA 

出 版 物：《Open Journal of Anesthesiology》 (麻醉学期刊（英文）)

年 卷 期：2014年第4卷第8期

页      面：191-196页

学科分类：1002[医学-临床医学] 100214[医学-肿瘤学] 10[医学] 

主　　题：Sedation Magnetic Resonance Imaging Airway Diameter Developmental Disabilities Children 

摘      要：Objective: Our study objective was to compare the anteroposterior (AP) oropharyngeal airway diameter measured using static MRI images in children with and without developmental disabilities during sedation. Methods: We performed a secondary analysis on a prospective, observational age-matched, 1:2 case-control study of children aged 3 - 10 years who were sedated for brain MRI. AP airway diameters were determined at the level of soft palate (airway_SP) and tongue (airway_T) from midline sagittal images by a single blinded radiologist. Results: Airway diameter was evaluated in 134 controls (C) and 68 cases (D). There was no difference in the overall adverse events (D: 30% C: 32.9%;p = 0.7) as well as hypoxia (D: 10%;C: 9.3%, p = 0.9). There was no significant difference in mean airway_T (D: 10.62 ± 3.48 vs. C: 10.38 ± 3.47;p = 0.64) and airway_SP diameter (D: 4.59 ± 2.36 vs. C: 5.17 ± 3.9;p = 0.14) between the two groups. There was no significant difference in airway_T and airway_SP diameters amongst those who experienced and those who did not experience hypoxia in cases. Amongst controls however, the airway_SP was smaller in those who experienced hypoxia compared to those who did not experience hypoxia. Conclusions: There was no difference in the AP airway_T and airway_SP diameter during sedation using static MRI images in children with and without developmental disabilities. Changes in airway_SP was associated with hypoxia amongst controls in our study cohort.