Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Children undergoing diagnostic and interventional radiology procedures often require sedation to achieve immobility and analgesia if the procedure is painful. In the past decades, leading scientific organizations have developed evidence-based guidelines for procedural sedation and analgesia in children outside of the operating room. Their recommendations are being applied to procedural sedation in radiology. However, some questions remain open regarding specific aspects contextualized to the radiology setting, such as elective prone sedation, the urgency of the procedure, when venous access or airway protection is required, and others.
OBJECTIVE: To address the unresolved issues of procedural sedation and analgesia in pediatric diagnostic and interventional radiology.
METHODS: An expert panel of pediatricians, pediatric anesthesiologists, intensivists, and neuroradiologists selected topics representative of current controversies and formulated research questions. Statements were developed by reviewing the literature for new evidence, comparing expertise and experience, and expressing opinions. Panelists\' agreement with the statements was collected anonymously using the DELPHI method.
RESULTS: Twelve evidence-based or expert opinion incorporate are presented, considering risks, benefits, and applicability.
CONCLUSIONS: This consensus document, developed by a multidisciplinary panel of experts involved in the field, provides statements to improve the quality of decision-making practice in procedural sedation and analgesia in pediatric radiology.
OBJECTIVE: To address the unresolved issues of procedural sedation and analgesia in pediatric diagnostic and interventional radiology.
METHODS: An expert panel of pediatricians, pediatric anesthesiologists, intensivists, and neuroradiologists selected topics representative of current controversies and formulated research questions. Statements were developed by reviewing the literature for new evidence, comparing expertise and experience, and expressing opinions. Panelists\' agreement with the statements was collected anonymously using the DELPHI method.
RESULTS: Twelve evidence-based or expert opinion incorporate are presented, considering risks, benefits, and applicability.
CONCLUSIONS: This consensus document, developed by a multidisciplinary panel of experts involved in the field, provides statements to improve the quality of decision-making practice in procedural sedation and analgesia in pediatric radiology.
摘要：
背景：接受诊断和介入放射学程序的儿童通常需要镇静以实现固定和镇痛，如果程序疼痛。在过去的几十年里，领先的科学组织已经为手术室外儿童的手术镇静和镇痛制定了循证指南.他们的建议正应用于放射学中的程序性镇静。然而,关于放射学背景的具体方面，一些问题仍然悬而未决，例如选择性倾向镇静，程序的紧迫性，当需要静脉通路或气道保护时，和其他人。
目的：解决儿科诊断和介入放射学中程序镇静和镇痛尚未解决的问题。
方法：儿科医生专家小组，儿科麻醉师,密集主义者，神经放射学家选择了代表当前争议的主题并提出了研究问题。陈述是通过回顾文献寻找新的证据而形成的，比较专业知识和经验，并表达意见。使用DELPHI方法匿名收集小组成员与陈述的协议。
结果：提出了12项基于证据或专家意见的整合，考虑到风险，好处,和适用性。
结论：本共识文件，由参与该领域的多学科专家小组开发，提供声明，以提高儿科放射学中程序镇静和镇痛的决策实践质量。
目的：解决儿科诊断和介入放射学中程序镇静和镇痛尚未解决的问题。
方法：儿科医生专家小组，儿科麻醉师,密集主义者，神经放射学家选择了代表当前争议的主题并提出了研究问题。陈述是通过回顾文献寻找新的证据而形成的，比较专业知识和经验，并表达意见。使用DELPHI方法匿名收集小组成员与陈述的协议。
结果：提出了12项基于证据或专家意见的整合，考虑到风险，好处,和适用性。
结论：本共识文件，由参与该领域的多学科专家小组开发，提供声明，以提高儿科放射学中程序镇静和镇痛的决策实践质量。
