The comparison of ketamine-dexmedetomidine (ketadex) and ketamine-propofol (ketofol) for procedural sedation in pediatric patients: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Observation on the Analgesic Effect of Different Doses of a Combination of Esketamine and Dexmedetomidine Administered for Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Discectomy: A Randomized, Double-Blind Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy (PETD) is an effective method for treating lumbar disc herniation, and is typically performed under local anesthesia. However, inadequate analgesia during the procedure remains a concern, prompting the search for a medication that can provide optimal pain control with minimal impact on the respiratory and circulatory systems.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to observe the effects of different doses of esketamine combined with dexmedetomidine on reducing visual analog scale (VAS) scores during surgical interventions.

METHODS

One hundred two patients who underwent PETD were randomly divided into a control group (group C: normal saline + dexmedetomidine), an E1 group (0.1 mg kg-1 esketamine + dexmedetomidine), and an E2 group (0.2 mg kg-1 esketamine + dexmedetomidine). The primary outcome was the maximum visual analogue scale (VAS) (score: 0 = no pain and 10 = worst pain) at six time points. The secondary outcomes included the Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale (OAA/S) score and mean arterial pressure (BP), heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR), and oxygen saturation (SpO2) at 11 time points. The incidence of adverse reactions during and 24 h after the operation and patient satisfaction with the anesthesia were also recorded.

RESULTS

Compared with those in group C, the VAS scores of patients in groups E1 and E2 were lower at T6, T7, and T9 (P < 0.05). From T4 to T10, the OAA/S scores of the E1 and E2 groups were both lower than those of group C (P < 0.05), and at the T4-T6 time points, the OAA/S score of the E2 group was lower than that of group E1 (P < 0.05). At T4 and T5, the HR and BP of patients in groups E1 and E2 were greater than those in group C (P < 0.05). Compared with those in group C, the incidences of intraoperative illusion, floating sensation, postoperative dizziness, and hyperalgesia in groups E1 and E2 were significantly greater (P < 0.01). There was no significant difference in patient RR, SpO2, or postoperative satisfaction with anesthesia among the three groups (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The combination of esketamine and dexmedetomidine can reduce VAS scores during certain stages of this type of surgery; it has minimal impact on respiration and circulation. However, this approach is associated with increased incidences of postoperative dizziness and psychiatric side effects, which may also affect patients' compliance with surgical instructions from medical staff. Patient satisfaction was not greater with dexmedetomidine combined with esketamine than with dexmedetomidine alone.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

http://www.chictr.org.cn . Identifier: ChiCTR2300068206. Date of registration: 10 February 2023.

Efficacy and Safety of Ketamine-Dexmedetomidine Versus Ketamine-Propofol Combination for Periprocedural Sedation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The combination of ketamine with propofol and dexmedetomidine has gained popularity for sedation and general anesthesia in different populations. In our meta-nalysis, we helped the anesthesiologists to know the efficiency and the efficacy of both combinations in adult and pediatric patients.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and Scopus from inception to August 1, 2023. Our outcome parameters for efficacy were recovery time, pain score, and physician satisfaction while for safety were the related cardiorespiratory, neurological, and gastrointestinal adverse events.

RECENT FINDINGS

Twenty-two trials were included with a total of 1429 patients. We found a significantly longer recovery time in the ketadex group of 7.59 min (95% CI, 4.92, 10.26; I2 = 94%) and a significantly less pain score of - 0.72 (95% CI, - 1.10, - 0.34; I2 = 0%). Adults had a significantly better physician satisfaction score with the ketofol group, odds ratio of 0.29 (95% CI, 0.12, 0.71; I2 = 0%). Recovery agitations were higher in the ketofol group with an odds ratio of 0.48 (95% CI, 0.24, 0.98; I2 = 36%). Furthermore, we found a significant difference between the combinations with a higher incidence in the ketadex group with pooled odds ratio of 1.75 (95% CI, 1.06, 2.88; I2 = 15%). Ketadex was associated with lower pain scores, hypoxic events and airway obstruction, and emergence agitation. At the same time, ketofol had much more clinician satisfaction which might be attributed to the shorter recovery time and lower incidence of nausea and vomiting. Therefore, we suppose that ketadex is the better combination in periprocedural sedation for both adult and pediatric patients who are not at greater risk for postoperative nausea and vomiting.

Combination of high-flow nasal oxygen and ketamine/dexmedetomidine sedation for diagnostic catheterization in a child with pulmonary arterial hypertension: a case report

Pulmonary hypertension is associated with significant risk of perioperative life-threatening events. We present a case of a 12-year-old child with severe pulmonary arterial hypertension who successfully underwent diagnostic cardiac catheterization under ketamine and dexmedetomidine sedation with the support of high-flow nasal oxygen. Ketamine and dexmedetomidine are reported to have minimal effect on pulmonary vasculature in children with pulmonary hypertension and can be safely used in this population along with its lack of respiratory depression. Positive pressure generated by high-flow nasal oxygen improves upper airway patency, prevents micro-atelectasis, and is shown to improve the effectiveness of ventilation and oxygenation in patients under sedation breathing spontaneously. The presented strategy may contribute to enhancing the safety and effectiveness of procedural sedation for children with life-threatening pulmonary hypertension.

Beneficial Effects of Low-Dose Intravenous Dexmedetomidine Premedication in Patient Undergoing Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Under General Anesthesia: A Prospective, Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

Dexmedetomidine (Dex) is a potent and highly selective α2-adrenergic receptor agonist. Within an appropriate dose range, Dex can effectively attenuate the surgical stress response, provide intraoperative hemodynamic stability, and improve the patient recovery quality. High-dose Dex can delay patient awakening from anesthesia and increase the incidence of bradycardia. This randomized controlled trial aimed to investigate the effects of low-dose intravenous Dex premedication in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

Material and Methods

In total, 100 patients undergoing LC were equally randomized into Group C (premedication with saline) and Group D (premedication with 0.5 µg/kg Dex). The patients were premedicated with saline or Dex, depending on the group, before anesthesia induction. Following this, anesthesia induction and endotracheal intubation was performed, and anesthesia was maintained during surgery. Following the completion of the surgery, the patients were transferred the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) and stayed there until they met the PACU discharge criteria. The hemodynamic parameters, consumption of anesthetics, surgical duration, postoperative awakening time, extubation time, postoperative pain, and complications were recorded.

Results

No significant differences were observed in the heart rate (HR) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) between the two groups before premedication (P>0.05). The MAP and HR immediately after endotracheal intubation and immediately after extubation were significantly lower in Group D than in Group C (P<0.05 for both). The incidence of bradycardia was significantly higher in Group D than in Group C (P<0.05), while atropine was used in neither group. Propofol and remifentanil consumption was significantly lower in Group D than in Group C (P<0.05). The postoperative awakening and extubation times were significantly shorter in Group D than in Group C (P<0.05). The postoperative visual analog scale scores for pain and incidence of nausea, vomiting, and cough were significantly lower in Group D than in Group C (P<0.05 for all).

Conclusion

Our data suggest that premedication with dexmedetomidine (0.5 µg/kg) before general anesthesia induction can effectively attenuate intraoperative stress response and postoperative pain, maintain perioperative hemodynamic stability, and decrease the incidence of adverse events, which might be an effective and safe anesthetic protocol during LC worthy of further clinical application.

Dexmedetomidine versus propofol: An effective combination with ketamine for adult procedural sedation: A randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Recently, drug combination protocols have been preferred over single drugs in procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA). This study aimed to compare the effectiveness and hemodynamic profile of ketamine-dexmedetomidine (ketodex) and ketofol as drug combinations with ketamine as a single medication for PSA in the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

This prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial was performed among adult patients (≥18 years) requiring PSA for a painful procedure in the ED. 135 patients were enrolled and assigned into three equal groups to receive either ketodex, ketofol, or ketamine. Additional ketamine was used as a rescue agent for inadequate sedation in three groups. Oxygen saturation, heart rate, and blood pressure were recorded from baseline until 120 min after induction of PSA. Adverse events, hemodynamic variables, induction, and recovery time were recorded and compared between groups.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 38.16 ± 19.09 years and no differences were observed between the three groups in terms of demographic variables, pain scores, and procedures between the three groups. Respiratory events had similar incidences between the three groups. The O2 reduction was less in the Ketodex group in comparison with Ketofol and Ketamine groups (1.9%, 6.5%, and 3.8%, P = 0.015). No patient needed endotracheal intubation. Changes in mean arterial pressure from the baseline in Ketamine and Ketofol groups compared to Ketodex was higher (difference was 12.9 mmHg [95% CI, 9.5 to 20.3] and 8.6 mmHg [95% CI, 3.4 to 13.7]. Tachycardia in the Ketamine group had a significantly higher incidence. The recovery time was statistically shorter in the Ketofol group in comparison with other groups. The differences between Ketofol with Ketamine and Ketodex groups were 9.8 min (95% CI, [2.5 to 17.1]) and 8.3 min (95% CI, [1.5 to 15.1]).

CONCLUSION

Ketodex, as well as ketofol, were effective and safe combinations with good recovery profiles and hemodynamic stability for adult PSA in ED.

Safety and quality in paediatric procedural sedation: what really matters?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review gives an overview of the safety aspects for paediatric procedural sedation and a discussion of possibilities for optimizing structure, processes and outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Procedural sedation in paediatric patients is performed by providers of different specialties and compliance with safety standards is a basic requirement regardless of provider specialty. This includes preprocedural evaluation, monitoring, equipment and profound expertise of sedation teams. The choice of sedative medications and the possibility of incorporating nonpharmacological methods play an important role for optimal outcome. In addition, an ideal outcome from the patient's perspective includes optimized processes and clear and empathetic communication.

SUMMARY

Institutions providing paediatric procedural sedation must ensure the comprehensive training of sedations teams. Furthermore, institutional standards for equipment, processes and optimal choice of medication depending on performed procedure and comorbidities of the patient must be established. At the same time, organizational and communication aspects should be considered.

Uncovering the Benefits of the Ketamine-Dexmedetomidine Combination for Procedural Sedation during the Italian COVID-19 Pandemic

This retrospective observational study evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ketamine and dexmedetomidine combination (keta-dex) compared to ketamine or dexmedetomidine alone for sedation of patients with acute respiratory distress due to COVID-19 pneumonia who require non-invasive ventilation. The following factors were assessed: tolerance to the ventilation, sedation level on the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS), hemodynamic and saturation profile, adverse effects, and discontinuation or mortality during ventilation. The study included 66 patients who underwent sedation for non-invasive ventilation using keta-dex (KETA-DEX group, n = 22), ketamine (KET group, n = 22), or dexmedetomidine (DEX group, n = 22). The DEX group showed a slower sedation rate and a significant reduction in blood pressure compared to the KETA-DEX group (p < 0.05). An increase in blood pressure was recorded more frequently in the KET group. No reduction in oxygen saturation and no deaths were observed in any of the groups. None of the patients discontinued ventilation due to intolerance. The mean duration of sedation was 28.12 h. No cases of delirium were observed in any of the groups. Overall, keta-dex was associated with faster sedation rates and better hemodynamic profiles compared to dexmedetomidine alone. Keta-dex is effective and safe for sedation of uncooperative patients undergoing non-invasive ventilation.