OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and adverse effects of chloral hydrate as a sedative agent for non-invasive neurodiagnostic procedures in children.
SEARCH METHODS: We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Epilepsy Group. We searched MEDLINE (OVID SP) (1950 to July 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, Issue 7, 2017), Embase (1980 to July 2017), and the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register (via CENTRAL) using a combination of keywords and MeSH headings.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials that assessed chloral hydrate agent against other sedative agent(s), non-drug agent(s), or placebo for children undergoing non-invasive neurodiagnostic procedures.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the studies for their eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Results were expressed in terms of risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data, mean difference (MD) for continuous data, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
MAIN RESULTS: We included 13 studies with a total of 2390 children. The studies were all conducted in hospitals that provided neurodiagnostic services. Most studies assessed the proportion of sedation failure during the neurodiagnostic procedure, time for adequate sedation, and potential adverse effects associated with the sedative agent.The methodological quality of the included studies was mixed, as reflected by a wide variation in their 'Risk of bias' profiles. Blinding of the participants and personnel was not achieved in most of the included studies, and three of the 13 studies had high risk of bias for selective reporting. Evaluation of the efficacy of the sedative agents was also underpowered, with all the comparisons performed in single small studies.Children who received oral chloral hydrate had lower sedation failure when compared with oral promethazine (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.82; 1 study, moderate-quality evidence). Children who received oral chloral hydrate had a higher risk of sedation failure after one dose compared to those who received intravenous pentobarbital (RR 4.33, 95% CI 1.35 to 13.89; 1 study, low-quality evidence), but after two doses there was no evidence of a significant difference between the two groups (RR 3.00, 95% CI 0.33 to 27.46; 1 study, very low-quality evidence). Children who received oral chloral hydrate appeared to have more sedation failure when compared with music therapy, but the quality of evidence was very low for this outcome (RR 17.00, 95% CI 2.37 to 122.14; 1 study). Sedation failure rates were similar between oral chloral hydrate, oral dexmedetomidine, oral hydroxyzine hydrochloride, and oral midazolam.Children who received oral chloral hydrate had a shorter time to achieve adequate sedation when compared with those who received oral dexmedetomidine (MD -3.86, 95% CI -5.12 to -2.6; 1 study, moderate-quality evidence), oral hydroxyzine hydrochloride (MD -7.5, 95% CI -7.85 to -7.15; 1 study, moderate-quality evidence), oral promethazine (MD -12.11, 95% CI -18.48 to -5.74; 1 study, moderate-quality evidence), and rectal midazolam (MD -95.70, 95% CI -114.51 to -76.89; 1 study). However, children with oral chloral hydrate took longer to achieve adequate sedation when compared with intravenous pentobarbital (MD 19, 95% CI 16.61 to 21.39; 1 study, low-quality evidence) and intranasal midazolam (MD 12.83, 95% CI 7.22 to 18.44; 1 study, moderate-quality evidence).No data were available to assess the proportion of children with successful completion of neurodiagnostic procedure without interruption by the child awakening. Most trials did not assess adequate sedation as measured by specific validated scales, except in the comparison of chloral hydrate versus intranasal midazolam and oral promethazine.Compared to dexmedetomidine, chloral hydrate was associated with a higher risk of nausea and vomiting (RR 12.04 95% CI 1.58 to 91.96). No other adverse events were significantly associated with chloral hydrate (including behavioural change, oxygen desaturation) although there was an increased risk of adverse events overall (RR 7.66, 95% CI 1.78 to 32.91; 1 study, low-quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The quality of evidence for the comparisons of oral chloral hydrate against several other methods of sedation was very variable. Oral chloral hydrate appears to have a lower sedation failure rate when compared with oral promethazine for children undergoing paediatric neurodiagnostic procedures. The sedation failure was similar for other comparisons such as oral dexmedetomidine, oral hydroxyzine hydrochloride, and oral midazolam. When compared with intravenous pentobarbital and music therapy, oral chloral hydrate had a higher sedation failure rate. However, it must be noted that the evidence for the outcomes for the comparisons of oral chloral hydrate against intravenous pentobarbital and music therapy was of very low to low quality, therefore the corresponding findings should be interpreted with caution.Further research should determine the effects of oral chloral hydrate on major clinical outcomes such as successful completion of procedures, requirements for additional sedative agent, and degree of sedation measured using validated scales, which were rarely assessed in the studies included in this review. The safety profile of chloral hydrate should be studied further, especially the risk of major adverse effects such as bradycardia, hypotension, and oxygen desaturation.
PROCEDURE: Survivors of childhood ALL aged 4-18 years who had completed chemotherapy for 2 years or more were evaluated for VIPN using both the clinical Total Neuropathy Score (cTNS) and nerve conduction studies. Motor function and quality of life of the survivors were assessed via the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency Brief Form, Second Edition (BOT-2 Brief Form) and the Paediatric Quality of Life version 4.0 Generic Core Scales (PedsQL4.0) questionnaire, respectively.
RESULTS: One hundred and one survivors with a duration of follow-up ranging from 2.0 to 10.3 years were recruited. Twenty-seven (26.7%) had abnormal cTNS scores and 69 (68.3%) had electrophysiological evidence of neuropathy. Of these, 16 (15.8%) had combined clinical and electrophysiological neuropathy (VIPN). Those previously treated on the intermediate- or high-risk treatment stratification arms had a higher risk of developing VIPN (67.3 vs. 32.7%; odds ratio [OR]: 9.06, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.14-71.86; P = 0.014). Survivors with VIPN had significantly lower quality of life scores in the physical (P = 0.024) and social domains (P = 0.039) compared with peers without VIPN, but no association with poorer motor function was observed.
CONCLUSIONS: Sixteen percent of ALL survivors had VIPN. VIPN should be increasingly recognised as a late effect of chemotherapy, as it significantly affects physical and social function quality of life.
RESEARCH QUESTION: The differential impact of frequently used CSs and their regimens on long-term (> 5 years) cardiorespiratory progression in children with DMD is unknown.
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a retrospective longitudinal study including children with DMD followed at Dubowitz Neuromuscular Centre, Great Ormond Street Hospital London, England, from May 2000 to June 2017. Patients enrolled in any interventional clinical trials were excluded. We collected patients' anthropometrics and respiratory (FVC, FVC % predicted and absolute FVC, and noninvasive ventilation requirement [NIV]) and cardiac (left ventricular shortening function [LVFS%]) function. CSs-naïve patients had never received CSs. Patients who were treated with CSs took either deflazacort or prednisolone, daily or intermittently (10 days on/10 days off) for > 1 month. Average longitudinal models were fitted for yearly respiratory (FVC % predicted) and cardiac (LVFS%) progression. A time-to-event analysis to FVC % predicted < 50%, NIV start, and cardiomyopathy (LVFS% < 28%) was performed in CS-treated (daily and intermittent) vs CS-naïve patients.
RESULTS: There were 270 patients, with a mean age at baseline of 6.2 ± 2.3 years. The median follow-up time was 5.6 ± 3.5 years. At baseline, 263 patients were ambulant. Sixty-six patients were treated with CSs daily, 182 patients underwent CSs intermittent > 60% treatment, and 22 were CS-naïve patients. Yearly FVC % predicted declined similarly from 9 years (5.9% and 6.9% per year, respectively; P = .27) in the CSs-daily and CSs-intermittent groups. The CSs-daily group declined from a higher FVC % predicted than the CSs-intermittent group (P < .05), and both reached FVC % predicted < 50% and NIV requirement at a similar age, > 2 years later than the CS-naïve group. LVFS% declined by 0.53% per year in the CSs-treated group irrespective of the CSs regimen, significantly slower (P < .01) than the CSs-naïve group progressing by 1.17% per year. The age at cardiomyopathy was 16.6 years in the CSs-treated group (P < .05) irrespective of regimen and 13.9 years in the CSs-naïve group.
INTERPRETATION: CSs irrespective of the regimen significantly improved respiratory function and delayed NIV requirement and cardiomyopathy.
OBJECTIVE: To better understand the presentation and clinical needs of the under-characterized extreme end of the congenital titinopathy severity spectrum.
METHODS: We comprehensively analyzed the clinical, imaging, pathology, autopsy, and genetic findings in 15 severely affected individuals from 11 families.
RESULTS: Prenatal features included hypokinesia or akinesia and growth restriction. Six pregnancies were terminated. Nine infants were born at or near term with severe-to-profound weakness and required resuscitation. Seven died following withdrawal of life support. Two surviving children require ongoing respiratory support. Most cohort members had at least 1 disease-causing variant predicted to result in some near-normal-length titin expression. The exceptions, from 2 unrelated families, had homozygous truncating variants predicted to induce complete nonsense mediated decay. However, subsequent analyses suggested that the causative variant in each family had an additional previously unrecognized impact on splicing likely to result in some near-normal-length titin expression. This impact was confirmed by minigene assay for 1 variant.
INTERPRETATION: This study confirms the clinical variability of congenital titinopathy. Severely affected individuals succumb prenatally/during infancy, whereas others survive into adulthood. It is likely that this variability is because of differences in the amount and/or length of expressed titin. If confirmed, analysis of titin expression could facilitate clinical prediction and increasing expression might be an effective treatment strategy. Our findings also further-support the hypothesis that some near-normal-length titin expression is essential to early prenatal survival. Sometimes expression of normal/near-normal-length titin is due to disease-causing variants having an additional impact on splicing. ANN NEUROL 2025.
METHODS: We identified 105 affected individuals, including 39 previously reported cases, and systematically analyzed detailed clinical and genetic data for all individuals. Additionally, we conducted knockdown experiments in neuronal cells to investigate the role of ACTL6B in ribosome biogenesis.
RESULTS: Biallelic variants in ACTL6B are associated with severe-to-profound global developmental delay/intellectual disability, infantile intractable seizures, absent speech, autistic features, dystonia, and increased lethality. De novo monoallelic variants result in moderate-to-severe global developmental delay/intellectual disability, absent speech, and autistic features, whereas seizures and dystonia were less frequently observed. Dysmorphic facial features and brain abnormalities, including hypoplastic corpus callosum, and parenchymal volume loss/atrophy, are common findings in both groups. We reveal that in the nucleolus, ACTL6B plays a crucial role in ribosome biogenesis, particularly in pre-rRNA processing.
CONCLUSION: This study provides a comprehensive characterization of the clinical spectrum of both autosomal recessive and dominant forms of ACTL6B-associated disorders. It offers a comparative analysis of their respective phenotypes provides a plausible molecular explanation and suggests their inclusion within the expanding category of "ribosomopathies."