Variation in the Diagnosis and Management of Appendicitis at Canadian Pediatric Hospitals

Objectives The objective was to characterize the variations in practice in the diagnosis and management of children admitted to hospitals from Canadian pediatric emergency departments (EDs) with suspected appendicitis, specifically the timing of surgical intervention, ED investigations, and management strategies. Methods Twelve sites participated in this retrospective health record review. Children aged 3 to 17 years admitted to the hospital with suspected appendicitis were eligible. Site-specific demographics, investigations, and interventions performed were recorded and compared. Factors associated with after-hours surgery were determined using generalized estimating equations logistic regression. Results Of the 619 children meeting eligibility criteria, surgical intervention was performed in 547 (88%). After-hours surgery occurred in 76 of the 547 children, with significant variation across sites (13.9%, 95% confidence interval = 7.1% to 21.6%, p \u3c 0.001). The overall perforation rate was 17.4% (95 of 547), and the negative appendectomy rate was 6.8% (37 of 547), varying across sites (p = 0.004 and p = 0.036, respectively). Use of inflammatory markers (p \u3c 0.001), blood cultures (p \u3c 0.001), ultrasound (p = 0.001), and computed tomography (p = 0.001) also varied by site. ED administration of narcotic analgesia and antibiotics varied across sites (p \u3c 0.001 and p = 0.001, respectively), as did the type of surgical approach (p \u3c 0.001). After-hours triage had a significant inverse association with after-hours surgery (p = 0.014). Conclusions Across Canadian pediatric EDs, there exists significant variation in the diagnosis and management of children with suspected appendicitis. These results indicate that the best diagnostic and management strategies remain unclear and support the need for future prospective, multicenter studies to identify strategies associated with optimal patient outcomes

Adaptive randomised controlled non-inferiority multicentre trial (the Ketodex Trial) on intranasal dexmedetomidine plus ketamine for procedural sedation in children: Study protocol

Introduction Up to 40% of orthopaedic injuries in children require a closed reduction, almost always necessitating procedural sedation. Intravenous ketamine is the most commonly used sedative agent. However, intravenous insertion is painful and can be technically difficult in children. We hypothesise that a combination of intranasal dexmedetomidine plus intranasal ketamine (Ketodex) will be non-inferior to intravenous ketamine for effective sedation in children undergoing a closed reduction. Methods and analysis This is a six-centre, four-arm, adaptive, randomised, blinded, controlled, non-inferiority trial. We will include children 4-17 years with a simple upper limb fracture or dislocation that requires sedation for a closed reduction. Participants will be randomised to receive either intranasal Ketodex (one of three dexmedetomidine and ketamine combinations) or intravenous ketamine. The primary outcome is adequate sedation as measured using the Paediatric Sedation State Scale. Secondary outcomes include length of stay, time to wakening and adverse effects. The results of both per protocol and intention-to-treat analyses will be reported for the primary outcome. All inferential analyses will be undertaken using a response-adaptive Bayesian design. Logistic regression will be used to model the dose-response relationship for the combinations of intranasal Ketodex. Using the Average Length Criterion for Bayesian sample size estimation, a survey-informed non-inferiority margin of 17.8% and priors from historical data, a sample size of 410 participants will be required. Simulations estimate a type II error rate of 0.08 and a type I error rate of 0.047. Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval was obtained from Clinical Trials Ontario for London Health Sciences Centre and McMaster Research Ethics Board. Other sites have yet to receive approval from their institutions. Informed consent will be obtained from guardians of all participants in addition to assent from participants. Study data will be submitted for publication regardless of results. Trial registration number NCT0419525

Adaptive randomised controlled non-inferiority multicentre trial (the Ketodex Trial) on intranasal dexmedetomidine plus ketamine for procedural sedation in children: Study protocol

Introduction Up to 40% of orthopaedic injuries in children require a closed reduction, almost always necessitating procedural sedation. Intravenous ketamine is the most commonly used sedative agent. However, intravenous insertion is painful and can be technically difficult in children. We hypothesise that a combination of intranasal dexmedetomidine plus intranasal ketamine (Ketodex) will be non-inferior to intravenous ketamine for effective sedation in children undergoing a closed reduction. Methods and analysis This is a six-centre, four-arm, adaptive, randomised, blinded, controlled, non-inferiority trial. We will include children 4-17 years with a simple upper limb fracture or dislocation that requires sedation for a closed reduction. Participants will be randomised to receive either intranasal Ketodex (one of three dexmedetomidine and ketamine combinations) or intravenous ketamine. The primary outcome is adequate sedation as measured using the Paediatric Sedation State Scale. Secondary outcomes include length of stay, time to wakening and adverse effects. The results of both per protocol and intention-to-treat analyses will be reported for the primary outcome. All inferential analyses will be undertaken using a response-adaptive Bayesian design. Logistic regression will be used to model the dose-response relationship for the combinations of intranasal Ketodex. Using the Average Length Criterion for Bayesian sample size estimation, a survey-informed non-inferiority margin of 17.8% and priors from historical data, a sample size of 410 participants will be required. Simulations estimate a type II error rate of 0.08 and a type I error rate of 0.047. Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval was obtained from Clinical Trials Ontario for London Health Sciences Centre and McMaster Research Ethics Board. Other sites have yet to receive approval from their institutions. Informed consent will be obtained from guardians of all participants in addition to assent from participants. Study data will be submitted for publication regardless of results. Trial registration number NCT0419525

Multi-dose Oral Ondansetron for Pediatric Gastroenteritis: study Protocol for the multi-DOSE oral ondansetron for pediatric Acute GastroEnteritis (DOSE-AGE) pragmatic randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: There are limited treatment options that clinicians can provide to children presenting to emergency departments with vomiting secondary to acute gastroenteritis. Based on evidence of effectiveness and safety, clinicians now routinely administer ondansetron in the emergency department to promote oral rehydration therapy success. However, clinicians are also increasingly providing multiple doses of ondansetron for home use, creating unquantified cost and health system resource use implications without any evidence to support this expanding practice. METHODS/DESIGN: DOSE-AGE is a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, six-center, pragmatic clinical trial being conducted in six Canadian pediatric emergency departments (EDs). In September 2019 the study began recruiting children aged 6 months to 18 years with a minimum of three episodes of vomiting in the 24 h preceding enrollment,(1:1 allocation via an internet-based, third-party, randomization service) to receive a 48-h supply (i.e., six doses) of ondansetron oral solution or placebo, administered on an as-needed basis. All participants, caregivers and outcome assessors will be blinded to group assignment. Outcome data will be collected by surveys administered to caregivers 24, 48 and 168 h following enrollment. The primary outcome is the development of moderate-to-severe gastroenteritis in the 7 days following the ED visit as measured by a validated clinical score (the Modified Vesikari Scale). Secondary outcomes include duration and frequency of vomiting and diarrhea, proportions of children experiencing unscheduled health care visits and intravenous rehydration, caregiver satisfaction with treatment and safety. A preplanned economic evaluation will be conducted alongside the trial. DISCUSSION: Definitive data are lacking to guide the clinical use of post-ED visit multidose ondansetron in children with acute gastroenteritis. Usage is increasing, despite the absence of supportive evidence. The incumbent additional costs associated with use, and potential side effects such as diarrhea and repeat visits, create an urgent need to evaluate the effect and safety of multiple doses of ondansetron in children focusing on post-emergency department visit and patient-centered outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03851835. Registered on 22 February 2019

A pragmatic randomized controlled trial of multi-dose oral ondansetron for pediatric gastroenteritis (the DOSE-AGE study): statistical analysis plan.

BACKGROUND: Acute gastroenteritis is a leading cause of emergency department visits and hospitalizations among children in North America. Oral-rehydration therapy is recommended for children with mild-to-moderate dehydration, but children who present with vomiting are frequently offered intravenous rehydration in the emergency department (ED). Recent studies have demonstrated that the anti-emetic ondansetron can reduce vomiting, intravenous rehydration, and hospitalization when administered in the ED to children with dehydration. However, there is little evidence of additional benefit from prescribing ondansetron beyond the initial ED dose. Moreover, repeat dosing may increase the frequency of diarrhea. Despite the lack of evidence and potential adverse side effects, many physicians across North America provide multiple doses of ondansetron to be taken following ED disposition. Thus, the Multi-Dose Oral Ondansetron for Pediatric Gastroenteritis (DOSE-AGE) trial will evaluate the effectiveness of prescribing multiple doses of ondansetron to treat acute gastroenteritis-associated vomiting. This article specifies the statistical analysis plan (SAP) for the DOSE-AGE trial and was submitted before the outcomes of the study were available for analysis. METHODS/DESIGN: The DOSE-AGE study is a phase III, 6-center, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel design randomized controlled trial designed to determine whether participants who are prescribed multiple doses of oral ondansetron to administer, as needed, following their ED visit have a lower incidence of experiencing moderate-to-severe gastroenteritis, as measured by the Modified Vesikari Scale score, compared with a placebo. To assess safety, the DOSE-AGE trial will investigate the frequency and maximum number of diarrheal episodes following ED disposition, and the occurrence of palpitations, pre-syncope/syncope, chest pain, arrhythmias, and serious adverse events. For the secondary outcomes, the DOSE-AGE trial will investigate the individual elements of the Modified Vesikari Scale score and caregiver satisfaction with the therapy. DISCUSSION: The DOSE-AGE trial will provide evidence on the effectiveness of multiple doses of oral ondansetron, taken as needed, following an initial ED dose in children with acute gastroenteritis-associated vomiting. The data from the DOSE-AGE trial will be analyzed using this SAP. This will reduce the risk of producing data-driven results and bias in our reported outcomes. The DOSE-AGE study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov on February 22, 2019. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03851835 . Registered on 22 February 2019

The intranasal dexmedetomidine plus ketamine for procedural sedation in children, adaptive randomized controlled non-inferiority multicenter trial (Ketodex): a statistical analysis plan

Background: Procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) is frequently required to perform closed reductions for fractures and dislocations in children. Intravenous (IV) ketamine is the most commonly used sedative agent for closed reductions. However, as children find IV insertion a distressing and painful procedure, there is need to identify a feasible alternative route of administration. There is evidence that a combination of dexmedetomidine and ketamine (ketodex), administered intranasally (IN), could provide adequate sedation for closed reductions while avoiding the need for IV insertion. However, there is uncertainty about the optimal combination dose for the two agents and whether it can provide adequate sedation for closed reductions. The Intranasal Dexmedetomidine Plus Ketamine for Procedural Sedation (Ketodex) study is a Bayesian phase II/III, non-inferiority trial in children undergoing PSA for closed reductions that aims to address both these research questions. This article presents in detail the statistical analysis plan for the Ketodex trial and was submitted before the outcomes of the trial were available for analysis. Methods/design: The Ketodex trial is a multicenter, four-armed, randomized, double-dummy controlled, Bayesian response adaptive dose finding, non-inferiority, phase II/III trial designed to determine (i) whether IN ketodex is non-inferior to IV ketamine for adequate sedation in children undergoing a closed reduction of a fracture or dislocation in a pediatric emergency department and (ii) the combination dose for IN ketodex that provides optimal sedation. Adequate sedation will be primarily measured using the Pediatric Sedation State Scale. As secondary outcomes, the Ketodex trial will compare the length of stay in the emergency department, time to wakening, and adverse events between study arms. Discussion: The Ketodex trial will provide evidence on the optimal dose for, and effectiveness of, IN ketodex as an alternative to IV ketamine providing sedation for patients undergoing a closed reduction. The data from the Ketodex trial will be analyzed from a Bayesian perspective according to this statistical analysis plan. This will reduce the risk of producing data-driven results introducing bias in our reported outcomes. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04195256. Registered on December 11, 2019

Clinical risk score for persistent postconcussion symptomsamong children with acute concussion in the ED

IMPORTANCE Approximately one-third of children experiencing acute concussion experience ongoing somatic, cognitive, and psychological or behavioral symptoms, referred to as persistent postconcussion symptoms (PPCS). However, validated and pragmatic tools enabling clinicians to identify patients at risk for PPCS do not exist. OBJECTIVE To derive and validate a clinical risk score for PPCS among children presenting to the emergency department. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Prospective, multicenter cohort study (Predicting and Preventing Postconcussive Problems in Pediatrics [5P]) enrolled young patients (aged 5-\u3c18 years) who presented within 48 hours of an acute head injury at 1 of 9 pediatric emergency departments within the Pediatric Emergency Research Canada (PERC) network from August 2013 through September 2014 (derivation cohort) and from October 2014 through June 2015 (validation cohort). Participants completed follow-up 28 days after the injury. EXPOSURES All eligible patients had concussions consistent with the Zurich consensus diagnostic criteria. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcomewas PPCS risk score at 28 days, which was defined as 3 or more new or worsening symptoms using the patient-reported Postconcussion Symptom Inventory compared with recalled state of being prior to the injury. RESULTS In total, 3063 patients (median age, 12.0 years [interquartile range, 9.2-14.6 years]; 1205 [39.3%] girls) were enrolled (n = 2006 in the derivation cohort; n = 1057 in the validation cohort) and 2584 of whom (n = 1701 [85%] in the derivation cohort; n = 883 [84%] in the validation cohort) completed follow-up at 28 days after the injury. Persistent postconcussion symptoms were present in 801 patients (31.0%) (n = 510 [30.0%] in the derivation cohort and n = 291 [33.0%] in the validation cohort). The 12-point PPCS risk score model for the derivation cohort included the variables of female sex, age of 13 years or older, physician-diagnosed migraine history, prior concussion with symptoms lasting longer than 1 week, headache, sensitivity to noise, fatigue, answering questions slowly, and 4 or more errors on the Balance Error Scoring System tandem stance. The area under the curve was 0.71 (95%CI, 0.69-0.74) for the derivation cohort and 0.68 (95%CI, 0.65-0.72) for the validation cohort. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE A clinical risk score developed among children presenting to the emergency department with concussion and head injury within the previous 48 hours had modest discrimination to stratify PPCS risk at 28 days. Before this score is adopted in clinical practice, further research is needed for external validation, assessment of accuracy in an office setting, and determination of clinical utility

A comparison in a youth population between those with and without a history of concussion using biomechanical reconstruction

OBJECTIVE: Concussion is a common topic of research as a result of the short- and long-term effects it can have on the affected individual. Of particular interest is whether previous concussions can lead to a biomechanical susceptibility, or vulnerability, to incurring further head injuries, particularly for youth populations. The purpose of this research was to compare the impact biomechanics of a concussive event in terms of acceleration and brain strains of 2 groups of youths: those who had incurred a previous concussion and those who had not. It was hypothesized that the youths with a history of concussion would have lower-magnitude biomechanical impact measures than those who had never suffered a previous concussion. METHODS: Youths who had suffered a concussion were recruited from emergency departments across Canada. This pool of patients was then separated into 2 categories based on their history of concussion: those who had incurred 1 or more previous concussions, and those who had never suffered a concussion. The impact event that resulted in the brain injury was reconstructed biomechanically using computational, physical, and finite element modeling techniques. The output of the events was measured in biomechanical parameters such as energy, force, acceleration, and brain tissue strain to determine if those patients who had a previous concussion sustained a brain injury at lower magnitudes than those who had no previously reported concussion. RESULTS: The results demonstrated that there was no biomechanical variable that could distinguish between the concussion groups with a history of concussion versus no history of concussion. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that there is no measureable biomechanical vulnerability to head impact related to a history of concussions in this youth population. This may be a reflection of the long time between the previous concussion and the one reconstructed in the laboratory, where such a long period has been associated with recovery from injury

Integration of proteomics with CT-based qualitative and radiomic features in high-grade serous ovarian cancer patients: an exploratory analysis

Abstract: Objectives: To investigate the association between CT imaging traits and texture metrics with proteomic data in patients with high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC). Methods: This retrospective, hypothesis-generating study included 20 patients with HGSOC prior to primary cytoreductive surgery. Two readers independently assessed the contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) images and extracted 33 imaging traits, with a third reader adjudicating in the event of a disagreement. In addition, all sites of suspected HGSOC were manually segmented texture features which were computed from each tumor site. Three texture features that represented intra- and inter-site tumor heterogeneity were used for analysis. An integrated analysis of transcriptomic and proteomic data identified proteins with conserved expression between primary tumor sites and metastasis. Correlations between protein abundance and various CT imaging traits and texture features were assessed using the Kendall tau rank correlation coefficient and the Mann-Whitney U test, whereas the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was reported as a metric of the strength and the direction of the association. P values < 0.05 were considered significant. Results: Four proteins were associated with CT-based imaging traits, with the strongest correlation observed between the CRIP2 protein and disease in the mesentery (p < 0.001, AUC = 0.05). The abundance of three proteins was associated with texture features that represented intra-and inter-site tumor heterogeneity, with the strongest negative correlation between the CKB protein and cluster dissimilarity (p = 0.047, τ = 0.326). Conclusion: This study provides the first insights into the potential associations between standard-of-care CT imaging traits and texture measures of intra- and inter-site heterogeneity, and the abundance of several proteins. Key Points: • CT-based texture features of intra- and inter-site tumor heterogeneity correlate with the abundance of several proteins in patients with HGSOC. • CT imaging traits correlate with protein abundance in patients with HGSOC