Adverse Events During a Randomized Trial of Ketamine Versus Co-Administration of Ketamine and Propofol for Procedural Sedation in a Pediatric Emergency Department

The impact of oral melatonin on pain and anxiety reduction during venipuncture in pediatric patients: a double-blind randomized clinical trial

Background

Pain resulting from therapeutic procedures and injections is a prevalent source of stress for children. Immediate side effects of pain in infants include syncope, irritability, sleep disturbances, and nutritional issues. This study aimed to investigate the effects of oral melatonin on alleviating pain and anxiety in pediatric patients undergoing venipuncture.

Methods

This double-blind, randomized controlled trial was conducted in the pediatric emergency ward. Patients were randomly assigned to one of two groups; the intervention group received 0.5 mg/kg of oral melatonin (maximum 5 mg) 30 min before venipuncture, while the placebo group received an equivalent amount of a placebo 30 min before the procedure. Using the Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability (FLACC) scale, postcanulation fear, pain severity, compliance, and potential side effects were evaluated.

Results

In total, 202 patients (113 male and 89 female) in the intervention and control groups were included in the analysis. The mean pain score during venipuncture was 1.52±3.04 in the intervention group and 2.04±6.57 in the control group (P<0.001). In the intervention group, only 19 (18.8%) patients reported pain during venipuncture, whereas 79 (78.2%) patients in the control group reported pain (P<0.001). Less than half (44.6%) of the patients in the intervention group experienced anxiety during venipuncture, while the majority (94.1%) of the patients in the control group exhibited anxiety (P<0.001). The venipuncture success rate was 60.4% in the intervention group and 51.5% in the control group (P=0.257).

Conclusion

Administering 0.5 mg/kg of oral Melatonin 30 min before venipuncture reduces procedure-related pain and anxiety in pediatric patients and may be associated with higher venipuncture success rates.

Pharmacological agents for procedural sedation and analgesia in the emergency department and intensive care unit: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised trials

BACKGROUND

We aimed to evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of various i.v. pharmacologic agents used for procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) in the emergency department (ED) and ICU. We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis to enable direct and indirect comparisons between available medications.

METHODS

We searched Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane, and PubMed from inception to 2 March 2023 for RCTs comparing two or more procedural sedation and analgesia medications in all patients (adults and children >30 days of age) requiring emergent procedures in the ED or ICU. We focused on the outcomes of sedation recovery time, patient satisfaction, and adverse events (AEs). We performed frequentist random-effects model network meta-analysis and used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to rate certainty in estimates.

RESULTS

We included 82 RCTs (8105 patients, 78 conducted in the ED and four in the ICU) of which 52 studies included adults, 23 included children, and seven included both. Compared with midazolam-opioids, recovery time was shorter with propofol (mean difference 16.3 min, 95% confidence interval [CI] 8.4-24.3 fewer minutes; high certainty), and patient satisfaction was better with ketamine-propofol (mean difference 1.5 points, 95% CI 0.3-2.6 points, high certainty). Regarding AEs, compared with midazolam-opioids, respiratory AEs were less frequent with ketamine (relative risk [RR] 0.55, 95% CI 0.32-0.96; high certainty), gastrointestinal AEs were more common with ketamine-midazolam (RR 3.08, 95% CI 1.15-8.27; high certainty), and neurological AEs were more common with ketamine-propofol (RR 3.68, 95% CI 1.08-12.53; high certainty).

CONCLUSION

When considering procedural sedation and analgesia in the ED and ICU, compared with midazolam-opioids, sedation recovery time is shorter with propofol, patient satisfaction is better with ketamine-propofol, and respiratory adverse events are less common with ketamine.

Ketamine-propofol (ketofol) in procedural sedation: a narrative review

Sedation methods for dental treatment are increasingly explored. Recently, ketofol, which is a combination of ketamine and propofol, has been increasingly used because the advantages and disadvantages of propofol and ketamine complement each other and increase their effectiveness. In this review, we discuss the pharmacology of ketamine and propofol, use of ketofol in various clinical situations, and differences in efficacy between ketofol and other sedatives.

Safety and tolerability of intramuscular and sublingual ketamine for psychiatric treatment in the Roots To Thrive ketamine-assisted therapy program: a retrospective chart review

Background

In the last few years, ketamine is becoming increasingly common in the treatment of mental health conditions, but there is a lack of safety data informing intramuscular and sublingual dosing in a community-focused group psychotherapy setting. The Roots To Thrive ketamine-assisted therapy (RTT-KaT) program is a unique 12-week RTT-KaT program with 12 community of practice (a form of group therapy) sessions and three ketamine medicine sessions.

Objectives

This study reports on adverse effects of intramuscular and sublingual ketamine dosing in a community group psychotherapy setting among 128 participants across four cohorts.

Design

Retrospective chart review.

Methods

A chart review of the RTT-KaT Program was performed retrospectively on four cohorts (n = 128) that participated in 448 sessions running between September 2020 and December 2021. Baseline characteristics and adverse events were captured including medication administration before, during, and after RTT-KaT sessions. Analyses by session and by individual were conducted. Chi-square test with Yates' continuity correction was used to assess side effects in subgroups from ketamine administration.

Results

RTT-KaT was well tolerated with none of the 128 participants dropping out of the program. Primarily, of the 448 sessions, 49.16% had elevated blood pressures post-KaT session by session. In terms of other adverse effects, 12.05% of participant-sessions experienced nausea, 2.52% had an episode of vomiting, 3.35% had a headache, and seven participant-sessions experienced dizziness. Analysis by individual revealed congruent findings.

Conclusion

These findings suggest good safety and tolerability for RTT-KaT among individuals seeking treatment for mental health issues. The majority of participants did not experience adverse reactions and the adverse events that were recorded involved transient symptoms that were resolved with rest and/or medications. The group therapy model described provides a comprehensive approach and presents a promising model for operating a KaT program in a community setting.

Effect of oral esketamine on preoperative sedation and venipuncture analgesia in pediatric patients: a prospective randomized double-blind controlled clinical trial.. [DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-2323639/v1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0]

Background Anxiety and uncooperation are common among pediatric patients during the preoperative preparation, which requires adequate and appropriate analgesia and sedation. Methods We performed a prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial involving 1–6-year-old pediatric patients scheduled for elective tonsillectomy or adenoidectomy between December 2020 and May 2021. Patients were randomly assigned to control (group C), esketamine 1 mg.kg− 1 (group EK1), or esketamine 2 mg.kg− 1 (group EK2) group. Venipuncture analgesia, cooperation, and sedation, as well as satisfaction upon parent–child separation, cooperation, sedation, and adverse events, were compared among the three groups. Dynamic changes in the sedation score and vital signs were monitored. Results A total of 88 pediatric patients were analyzed, with 29, 29, and 30 patients in groups C, EK1, and EK2, respectively. Compared with group C, groups EK1 and EK2 both had better analgesia during venipuncture (P < 0.001). In addition, better cooperation and sedation was noticed in groups EK1 and EK2 during parent–child separation and venipuncture than in group C. Compared with the baseline, the mean respiratory rate had a significant decrease from 25.6 ± 0.3 to 24.6 ± 0.4 breaths/min at 30 min after the esketamine administration in group EK2, although it was still within normal limits (P = 0.030). There were no significant differences in adverse events among three groups. Conclusions Preoperative oral administration of 1 or 2 mg.kg− 1 esketamine in pediatric patients could achieve effective analgesia and sedation. Oral medication of 2 mg.kg− 1 esketamine had more pronounced effects. Trial registration : This clinical trial was registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2000040739) on 08/12/2020.

An Analytical Comparison Between Ketamine Alone and a Combination of Ketamine and Propofol (Ketofol) for Procedural Sedation and Analgesia From an Emergency Perspective: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) is a treatment approach involving treating patients with agents with dissociative, sedative, or analgesic properties to suppress their consciousness to variable levels. Ketamine and propofol have been used historically for PSA. Because they each have their demerits, it was postulated that combining both drugs (ketofol) would result in a mixture with additive properties and lessen or eliminate the demerits attributed to each drug. The primary objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare ketamine alone and a combination of ketamine and propofol (ketofol) for procedural sedation and analgesia from an emergency perspective.

A systematic search was conducted on published studies from the databases of Scopus, ScienceDirect, PubMed, Google Scholar, APA PsycInfo, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trial (CENTRAL) until July 2022. The articles that were published on the online databases were authored between January 2007 and 2018. The selected papers were scanned and examined to check whether they met the eligibility criteria for the study.

The search produced six articles that were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. All six articles that passed the eligibility criteria were viable for the analysis. All the trials focused on the effectiveness of ketofol versus ketamine for PSA from an emergency perspective.

Ketofol was found to be safe and more effective in comparison to ketamine for PTA.

The Impact of a Dedicated Sedation Team on the Incidence of Complications in Pediatric Procedural Analgosedation

The number of pediatric procedural sedations for diagnostic and minor therapeutic procedures performed outside the operating room has increased. Therefore, we established a specialized interdisciplinary team of pediatric anesthesiologists and intensivists (Children’s Analgosedation Team, CAST) at our tertiary-care university hospital and retrospectively analyzed the first year after implementation of the CAST. Within one year, 784 procedural sedations were performed by the CAST; 12.2% of the patients were infants <1 year, 41.9% of the patients were classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade III or IV. Most children received propofol (79%) and, for painful procedures, additional esketamine (48%). Adverse events occurred in 51 patients (6.5%), with a lack of professional experience (OR 0.60; 95% CI 0.42−0.81) and increased propofol dosage (OR 1.33; 95% CI 1.17−1.55) being significant predictors. Overall, the CAST enabled safe and effective procedural sedation in children outside the operating room.

Ketofol for Procedural Sedation and Analgesia in the Pediatric Population

ABSTRACT

The combination of ketamine and propofol, commonly referred to as ketofol, is sometimes used for procedural sedation and analgesia in the pediatric emergency department. This article reviews the pharmacology, dosing, and indications, as well as adverse effects and contraindications of ketamine, propofol, and ketofol.

Incidence of Adverse Effects of Propofol for Procedural Sedation/Anesthesia in the Pediatric Emergency Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

To investigate the incidence of adverse effects of propofol among pediatric population for sedation or anesthesia.

METHODS

We performed Cochrane Library, PubMed, CNKI, VIP, and Wanfang databases to research relevant literature. We did sensitivity analysis to assess the incidence of adverse effects of propofol among pediatric population for sedation or anesthesia.

RESULTS

In 132 studies, eight RCTs were included in this analysis. The result showed that adverse events (bradypnea, hypotension, hypertension, and apnea) were significantly improved in the pediatric emergency population in the propofol group, but it had no effect on the incidence of cough attacks, desaturation, agitation, stridor, and laryngospasm. Furthermore, the subgroup analysis showed that those who received propofol for had decreased adverse effects compared with the patients who received ketamine treatment (SMD = 0.44, 95%CI = [0.28, 0.67], I 2 = 0%, and P = 0.0002), which demonstrated that propofol could decrease the incidence of adverse effects compared with ketamine and ketofol.

CONCLUSIONS

The study demonstrated that propofol may decrease the incidence of bradypnea, hypotension, hypertension, and apnea, but it had no effect on the incidence of cough attacks, desaturation, agitation, stridor, and laryngospasm. Furthermore, more large RCTs are needed to assess incidence of adverse effects of propofol among pediatric population.

Safety and Efficacy of the Combination of Propofol and Ketamine for Procedural Sedation/Anesthesia in the Pediatric Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Drugs such as propofol and ketamine are used alone or in combination to provide sedation for medical procedures in children. The purpose of this systematic review was to compare the safety and effectiveness of propofol and ketamine to other drug regimens.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), Web of Science, and the grey literature (meta-Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google Scholar) for randomized controlled studies comparing intravenous propofol and ketamine to any other single or combination drug regimen administered to children undergoing diagnostic or therapeutic procedures. Meta-analyses were performed for primary (hemodynamic and respiratory adverse events) and secondary outcomes using RevMan 5.3. We assessed the risk of bias and the certainty (quality) evidence for all outcomes using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies were included for analysis. Based on low-to-moderate quality evidence, we concluded that the use of propofol and ketamine may result in a slight-to-small reduction in the risk of hypotension, bradycardia, and apnea, and a slight increase in the risk of tachycardia, hypertension, and other respiratory adverse events, such as cough or laryngospasm. The ratio of propofol to ketamine and comparator drug regimen subgroups effects were important for desaturation and some secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of propofol and ketamine had a minimal effect on the incidence of adverse events and other secondary outcomes. Large-scale studies are required to more accurately estimate adverse event rates and the effects of propofol and ketamine on patient-important outcomes.

Evaluation of pediatric procedural sedation education in pediatric emergency medicine fellowships

ABSTRACT

Pediatric procedural sedation (PPS) is often performed outside of the operating room, and by various sub-specialty providers. There is no consistency in how pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) fellows are trained in PPS. The objective of this study was to survey PEM program directors (PDs) and PEM fellows about their current sedation teaching practices via a direct survey. While many fellowship programs train PEM fellows in PPS, we hypothesize that there is no consistent method of developing and measuring this skill.A 12-question survey was sent to PEM PDs directly via email. A separate 17-question survey was sent to current PEM fellows via their program coordinators by email. Each survey had multiple choice, yes-no and select-all program questions. Responses were collected in an online (REDCap) database and summarized as frequencies and percentages.Based on identifiable email, 67 programs were contacted, with a PD response rate of 46 (59%). Sixty-two program coordinators were contacted based on identifiable email with 78 fellow responses. We noted that 11/46 PD respondents offer a formal PPS rotation. Thirty programs report using propofol in the emergency department and 93% of PD respondents (28/30) actively train fellows in the use of propofol. Approximately 62% of PEM fellow respondents (48/78) report sedating without any attending oversight. Twenty-eight percent of PEM fellow respondents report using simulation as a component of their sedation training.PPS is a critical skill. However, there is a lack of consistency in both education and evaluation of competency in this area. An organized PPS rotation would improve PPS case exposure and PPS skills.

A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial Using Propofol or Dexmedetomidine for Conscious Sedation in Pediatric Patients Undergoing Sclerotherapy

Aim:

Sodium tetradecyl sulfate (STS) sclerotherapy in pediatric patients is usually undertaken under sedation inside digital subtraction angiography (DSA) suite. These patients are day-care patients and need adequate sedation for small duration. We performed this study to compare propofol and dexmedetomidine as sedative agents in these patients.

Materials and Methods:

Seventy American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I patients scheduled to undergo sclerotherapy for low-flow venous malformations under sedation were randomized to be administered either dexmedetomidine (Group D) or propofol (Group P). In Group D, initially 2 µg/kg of dexmedetomidine was administered over 10min (or till attainment of a Ramsay sedation score [RSS] of 5), followed by an infusion at the rate of 0.3 µg/kg/h. In Group P, propofol 1mg/kg bolus followed by an infusion at 100 µg/kg/min was administered, titrated to an RSS of 5. We measured intraoperative heart rate, blood pressure, respiratory rate, duration of procedure, and incidence of arterial desaturation, bradycardia, and respiratory depression in the two groups.

Results:

All the patients in both groups completed the procedure. The mean anesthesia time was significantly longer in Group D. Intraoperative heart rates remained comparable in the two groups, whereas systolic and diastolic BP were significantly higher in Group D throughout the procedure. No patient in Group D experienced arterial desaturation, whereas five patients in Group P reported a SpO₂ of <90%.

Conclusion:

Both propofol and dexmedetomidine can be used for administering sedation in pediatric patients undergoing sclerotherapy for superficial venous malformations in DSA suite. Although propofol provides a rapid onset and reduced duration of action, dexmedetomidine provides reduced episodes of arterial desaturation and respiratory depression.

Ketamine-propofol (Ketofol) for procedural sedation and analgesia in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives

The aim of this review is to elucidate the efficacy and side effects of ketofol in comparison to other anaesthetic agents during procedural sedation and analgesia.

Method

The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (1996 to Feb 2019) and MEDLINE (1966 to Feb 2019) were searched, including the related randomised control trials and reviewed articles to find unpublished trials or trials not obtained via electronic searches. Inclusion criteria for the studies included comparing recovery time, recording clinician satisfaction, and assessing the adverse effects of ketofol.

Results

Eleven trials consisting of a total of 1274 patients met our criteria and were included in this meta-analysis. Five trials compared ketofol with a single agent, while six trials compared ketofol with combined agents. While comparing between ketofol and a single agent (either ketamine or propofol), ketofol showed significant effect on recovery time (MD: -9.88, 95% CI: − 14.30 to − 5.46; P = 0.0003; I² = 92%). However, no significant difference was observed while comparing ketofol with combined agents (RR: 0.75, 95% CI: − 6.24 to 7.74; P < 0.001; I² = 98%). During single-agent comparison, ketofol showed no significant differences in terms of clinician satisfaction (RR: 2.86, 95% CI: 0.64 to 12.69; P = 0.001; I² = 90%), airway obstruction (RR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.35 to 11.48; P = 0.81; I² = 0%), apnoea (RR: 0.9, 95% CI: 0.33 to 2.44; P = 0.88; I² = 0%), desaturation (RR: 1.11, 95% CI: 0.64 to 1.94; P = 0.28; I² = 21%), nausea (RR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.91 to 1.41; P = 0.2; I² = 38%), and vomiting (RR: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.25 to 1.61; P = 0.18; I² = 42%). During comparison with combined agents, ketofol was more effective in reducing hypotension (RR: 4.2, 95% CI: 0.2 to 0.85; P = 0.76; I² = 0%), but no differences were observed in terms of bradycardia (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.14 to 03.63; P = 0.09; I² = 53%), desaturation (RR: 1.9, 95% CI: 0.15 to 23.6; P = 0.11; I² = 61%), and respiratory depression (RR: 1.98, 95% CI: 0.18 to 21.94; P = 0.12; I² = 59%).

Conclusion

There is low certainty of evidence that ketofol improves recovery time and moderate certainty of evidence that it reduces the frequency of hypotension. There was no significant difference in terms of other adverse effects when compared to other either single or combined agents.

Trial registration

PROSPERO CRD42019127278.

Ketamine Sedation and Hypoxia: A Quality Improvement Project to Reduce Respiratory Events Receiving Intervention

BACKGROUND

Ketamine is a well-studied and safe medication used for procedural sedation in the pediatric emergency department (ED). However, in our ED and urgent care (UC), we had higher rates of respiratory events receiving intervention (REs) than has been reported nationally.

OBJECTIVE

A quality improvement (QI) project was initiated to address this problem with the following aim: during a 24-month period, we aimed to decrease REs during i.v. ketamine sedation from > 10% to < 6% in our network of EDs and UCs.

METHODS

Inclusion criteria included patients in our EDs and UCs who received i.v. ketamine for procedural sedation. We organized a multidisciplinary team to identify key drivers for the primary outcome (i.e., REs) and establish interventions. We based process measures on key interventions and utilized 2 Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles, which we evaluated with Shewhart P (provost) charts. Balancing measures included length of sedation, success of sedation, and length of stay.

RESULTS

REs decreased from 11.4% to 4.9%; this rate was maintained for 12 months, starting 1 month after PDSA cycle 2 implementation. There was no difference in REs for length of stay, length of sedation, or success of sedation.

CONCLUSIONS

Using QI methodology, we reduced and maintained rates of RE to < 6%. Due to the nature of the project, it is difficult to link one intervention to the reduction in REs; however, a significant shift occurred just after PDSA cycle 2 interventions. This project can give a guideline for interventions to improve the safety of pediatric ketamine sedations.

Radiologic Imaging in Trauma Patients with Cervical Spine Immobilization at a Pediatric Trauma Center

BACKGROUND

Pediatric trauma patients with cervical spine (CS) immobilization using a cervical collar often require procedural sedation (PS) for radiologic imaging. The limited ability to perform airway maneuvers while CS immobilized with a cervical collar is a concern for emergency department (ED) staff providing PS.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the use of PS and analgesia for radiologic imaging acquisition in pediatric trauma patients with CS immobilization.

METHODS

Retrospective medical record review of all trauma patients with CS immobilization at a high-volume pediatric trauma center was performed. Patient demographics, imaging modality, PS success, sedative and analgesia medications, and adverse events were analyzed. Patients intubated prior to arrival to the ED were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 1417 patients with 1898 imaging encounters met our inclusion criteria. A total of 398 patients required more than one radiographic imaging procedure. The median age was 8 years (range 3.8-12.75 years). Computed tomography of the head was used in 974 of the 1898 patients (51.3%). A total of 956 of the 1898 patients (50.4%) required sedatives or analgesics for their radiographic imaging, with 875 (91.5%) requiring a single sedative or analgesic agent, and 81 (8.5%) requiring more than one medication. Airway obstruction was the most common adverse event, occurring in 5 of 956 patients (0.3%). All imaging procedures were successfully completed.

CONCLUSION

Only 50% of CS immobilized, nonintubated patients required a single sedative or analgesic medication for their radiologic imaging. Procedural success was high, with few adverse events.

A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials: combination of ketamine and propofol versus ketamine alone for procedural sedation and analgesia in children

Although ketamine has been used for procedural sedation and analgesia, some researchers have assessed ketamine-propofol as a better alternative because of its reduced adverse events. The goal of this review was to compare adverse events between ketamine-propofol and ketamine for procedural sedation and analgesia in children. We searched the literature from their inception to May 2018 without the restriction of language. We included all randomized controlled trials comparing ketamine-propofol with ketamine for procedural sedation and analgesia in children. The meta-analysis was conducted using the Stata software. A total of six studies involving 693 individuals were included. Pooling of data showed that subjects with ketamine-propofol had similar incidence of respiratory adverse events compared to those with ketamine (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.68-1.98). However, ketamine-propofol was effective in reducing cardiovascular adverse events compared to ketamine (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.04-0.31). Ketamine-propofol was also effective in reducing psychomimetic adverse events compared to ketamine (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.16-0.93). In regard to nausea and vomiting, ketamine-propofol was significantly effective (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.25-0.74). In addition, we could not demonstrate differences in efficacious sedation between ketamine-propofol and ketamine. Although our study was not able to demonstrate differences in efficacious sedation between ketamine-propofol and ketamine, we confirmed that ketamine-propofol sedation had a lower frequency of adverse events compared to ketamine sedation in children.

Evaluation of the safety of using propofol for paediatric procedural sedation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Propofol is one of the most widely used drugs for paediatric procedural sedation owing to its known advantages, but some concerns remain regarding respiratory and/or cardiac complications in patients receiving propofol. Although a considerable number of randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) have been conducted to compare it with other sedative agents or opioids for children undergoing various procedures, propofol is still being used off-label for this indication in many countries. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of those RCTs to provide an overall summation of evidence that can potentially be considered for further regulatory decisions, including reimbursement policies. We searched for RCTs in MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from their inception to January 31, 2018. Our meta-analysis of 30 RCTs confirmed that propofol sedation had advantages in recovery time when compared with other drugs, without excessive concerns for cardiovascular or respiratory adverse events. Its safety profile regarding coughing, nausea or vomiting, and emergence delirium was also similar to that of other drugs. The overall evidence suggests that propofol sedation for paediatric procedures should be considered more positively in the context of regulatory decisions.

Low-dose intravenous ketamine versus intravenous ketorolac in pain control in patients with acute renal colic in an emergency setting: a double-blind randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

This study was conducted to compare the effectiveness of low-dose ketamine versus ketorolac in pain control in patients with acute renal colic presenting to the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

This is a double-blind randomized clinical trial. The initial pain severity was assessed using the numerical rating scale (NRS). Then, ketamine or ketorolac was administered intravenously at a dose of 0.6 mg/kg and 30 mg respectively. The pain severity and adverse drug reactions were recorded 5, 15, 30, 60, and 120 min thereafter.

RESULTS

The data of 62 subjects in the ketamine group and 64 patients in the ketorolac group were analyzed. The mean age of the patients was 34.2 ± 9.9 and 37.9 ± 10.6 years in the ketamine and ketorolac group, respectively. There was no significant difference in the mean NRS scores at each time point, except for the 5 min, between the two groups. Despite a marked decrease in pain severity in the ketamine group from drug administration at the 5 min, a slight increase in pain was observed from the 5 min to the 15 min. The rate of adverse drug reactions, including dizziness (P = 0.001), agitation (P = 0.002), increased systolic blood pressure (> 140 mmHg), and diastolic blood pressure (> 90 mmHg) was higher in the ketamine group.

CONCLUSIONS

Low dose ketamine is as effective as ketorolac in pain management in patients with renal colic presenting to the ED. However, it is associated with a higher rate of adverse drug reactions.