Characteristics of children aged 2–17 years undergoing anaesthesia in Danish hospitals 2005–2015: a national observational study

Abstract

Provision of paediatric anaesthesia requires careful consideration of the child's cognitive state, unique body composition and physiology. In an observational cohort study, we describe the population characteristics and conduct of anaesthesia in children aged 2-17 years from 1 January 2005 to 31 December 2015. Children were identified from the Danish Anaesthesia Database. We recorded the following variables: age; sex; comorbidities; indications for anaesthesia; practice of anaesthesia; and complications. Results are presented for two age groups: 2-5 and 6-17 years. In total, 32,840 (61% male) children aged 2-5 years received 50,484 anaesthesia episodes and 91,418 (54% male) children aged 6-17 years received 141,082 anaesthesia episodes. The younger children, compared with the older children, were more frequently anaesthetised at a university hospital (50% vs. 36%) and for non-surgical procedures (24% vs. 8%). For both age groups, general anaesthesia was the primary choice of anaesthesia regardless of the reason for anaesthesia. For surgery, general anaesthesia using inhalational agents in addition to intravenous agents or alone was more frequently used in younger children (49% vs. 15%), whereas older children commonly received total intravenous anaesthesia (50% vs. 83%). Regional anaesthesia was infrequently utilised. Complications occurred in 3.3% of anaesthesia episodes among 2-5 year olds compared with 3.7% of anaesthesia episodes among children aged 6-17 years. In conclusion, we found younger children (aged 2-5), compared with older children (aged 6-17) were more frequently anaesthetised for non-surgical reasons, at a university hospital and using inhalational agents. Complications were rare.

Full-body MR imaging: a retrospective study on a novel diagnostic approach for children sustaining high-energy trauma

“…However, young age, medical history, and physical condition were shown to be the risk factors for serious critical events due to anaesthesia. Strøm et al [ 37 ] analyzed the Danish data bank for pediatric anaesthesia (aged 2–17 years), showing serious adverse events in less than 0.3% of cases [ 37 ]. However, submitting 10% of the children to the risk of anaesthesia solely for the purpose of imaging needs to be opposed to the risks of radiation exposure through CT scans.…”

Comment on: Global mortality of children after perioperative cardiac arrest: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression

“…In addition, considering that the authors conducted a global review of perioperative cardiac arrests (Table 1), they did not include relevant and important articles found in the PubMed/Medline databases; examples include: Haché et al [ 21 ]; Jansen et al [ 22 ]; Kawashima et al [ 23 ]; Morita et al [ 24 ]; Strøm et al [ 25 ]; and Strøm et al [ 26 ].…”

“…2 and 3 are the same); examples include Boonmak et al [ 27 ], Habre et al [ 28 ], Haché et al [ 21 ], Jansen et al [ 22 ], Kawashima et al [ 23 ], Morita et al [ 24 ], Strøm al. [ 25 ], and Strøm et al [ 26 ].…”

Effects of Propofol Anesthesia on Pyroptosis and the Nod-Like Receptor Protein 3/Caspase-1 Pathway in the Neonatal Rat Hippocampus

“…Pediatric patients are unable to cooperate actively with anesthesia for their own reasons, resulting in pediatric surgery often requiring general anesthesia for surgical treatment [2] . However, the child's neurological function is in its developmental stage and inappropriate anesthesia will lead to neurological impairment, which will eventually affect long-term learning and memory function [3] . Studies have found that propofol causes apoptosis of neurons in the brain of animals during development, triggering cognitive dysfunction, but the specific mechanism of action is currently unknown [4] .…”