No abstract

Antihistamines are used frequently in adult and pediatric patients as first-line treatment for both allergic rhinitis and urticaria. There are several different antihistamines on the market, generally divided into first- and second-generation products. Although many of these show efficacy, there are significant differences in the side effect profiles of these medications, with resultant differences in their effect on quality of life and other outcomes. Although the most significant differences are between generations, there are considerations even within generations, especially regarding sedation and possible effects on learning. Other than specific situations in which sedation may be a desired effect, the second-generation antihistamines generally are preferred and the risks and benefits of individual drugs within this group need to be considered for each patient's specific circumstances.

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) are the preferred first-line preventative therapy for asthma of all severity levels. Although these drugs have been proven efficacious, concerns of adverse systemic affects due to both long- and short-term use continue to limit patient compliance with dosing regimens. Deficits in bone growth, bone density, and hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function, in addition to cataract formation and elevated intraocular pressure/glaucoma, have been associated with ICS use in some studies. Although some of these studies were flawed, featured drugs that are less commonly prescribed today, or both, adverse effects from chronic ICSs use are still a cause of concern today. Current therapies are designed to be efficacious at minimal doses, limiting potential side effects, increasing adherence, and improving asthma control.

Lower-extremity ischemia is a significant complication in children on femoral venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA ECMO). Our institution currently routinely uses distal perfusion catheters (DPCs) in all femoral arterial cannulations in attempts to reduce ischemia. We performed a single-center, retrospective review of pediatric patients supported with femoral VA ECMO from January 2005 to November 2015. The outcomes of patients with prophylactic DPC placement at cannulation (prophylactic DPC) were compared to a historical group with DPCs placed in response only to clinically evident ischemic changes (reactive DPC). Ischemic complication requiring invasive intervention (fasciotomy or amputation) was the primary outcome. Twenty-nine patients underwent a total of 31 femoral arterial cannulations, 17 with prophylactic DPC and 14 with reactive DPC. Ischemic complications requiring invasive intervention developed in 2 of 17 (12%) prophylactic DPC patients versus 4 of 14 (29%) reactive DPC. In the reactive DPC group, 7 of 14 (50%) had ischemic changes postcannulation, six underwent DPC placement, and three out of six of these patients still required invasive intervention. One of the seven patients had ischemic changes, did not undergo DPC, and required amputation. While a greater percentage of patients in the prophylactic group was cannulated during extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR), statistical significance was not otherwise demonstrated. We demonstrate feasibility of superficial femoral artery (SFA) access in pediatric patients. We note fewer ischemic complications with prophylactic DPC placement, and observe that salvaging a limb with a reactive DPC was only successful 50% of the time. Although there was no statistical difference in the primary outcome between the two groups, limitations and confounding factors include small sample size and a greater percentage of patients in the prophylactic DPC group cannulated with ECPR in progress.