The use of "ketofol" (ketamine-propofol admixture) infusion in conjunction with regional anaesthesia

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.

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.

De-mystifying the "Mixifusor"

Total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) using a mixture of propofol and remifentanil in the same syringe has become an accepted technique in Pediatric Anesthesia. A survey by a group of respected UK anesthetists demonstrated a low incidence of serious complications, related to the pharmacology and dose of the drugs. However, a current guideline for the safe use of TIVA recommends against this practice. Pharmaceutical concerns include the physical stability of the emulsion when remifentanil is mixed with propofol; changes in drug concentration over time; nonuniform mixing of propofol and remifentanil; the risk of bacterial contamination; and the potential for drug administration errors. Propofol and remifentanil have markedly different pharmacokinetic profiles. When remifentanil is mixed with propofol and delivered as a target-controlled infusion (TCI) of propofol, remifentanil delivery is not target-controlled but passively follows the variable infusion rates calculated by the syringe driver to deliver predicted plasma or effect-site concentrations of propofol. The pharmacokinetic consequences can be illustrated using pharmacokinetic modeling similar to that used in TCI pumps. The clinical consequences reflect the dose-dependent pharmacodynamics of remifentanil. Increasing the target propofol concentration produces a rapid increase and peak in remifentanil concentration that risks apnea, bradycardia, and hypotension, especially with higher concentrations of remifentanil. The faster decline in remifentanil concentration with falling propofol concentrations risks inadequate narcosis and unwanted responses to surgical stimuli. Remifentanil delivery is inflexible and dosing cannot be adjusted to the clinical need and responses of individual patients. The medicolegal considerations are stark. In UK and EU Law, mixing propofol and remifentanil creates a new, unlicensed drug and the person mixing takes on the responsibilities of manufacturer. If a patient receiving anesthesia in the form of a mixed propofol-remifentanil infusion suffered a critical incident or actual harm, the clinician's practice may come under scrutiny and criticism, potentially involving a legal challenge and the Medical Regulator.

Comparison of Ketofol (Combination of Ketamine and Propofol) and Propofol Anesthesia in Aneurysmal Clipping Surgery: A Prospective Randomized Control Trial

Background:

The maintenance of hemodynamic stability is of pivotal importance in aneurysm surgeries. While administering anesthesia in these patients, the fluctuations in blood pressure may directly affect transmural pressure, thereby precipitating rupture of aneurysm and various other associated complications. We aimed to compare the effects of ketofol with propofol alone when used as an induction and maintenance anesthetic agent during surgical clipping of intracranial aneurysms.

Materials and Methods:

Forty adult, good-grade aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage patients posted for aneurysm neck clipping were included in the study. The patients were randomized into two groups. One group received a combination of ketamine and propofol (1:5 ratio) and the other group received propofol for induction and maintenance of anesthesia. Intraoperative hemodynamic stability, intraventricular pressure, and quality of brain relaxation were studied in both the groups.

Results:

The patients were comparable with respect to demographic profile, Hunt and Hess grade, world federation of neurological surgeons (WFNS) grade, Fisher grade, duration of anesthesia, duration of surgery, optic nerve sheath diameter, and baseline hemoglobin. Intraoperative hemodynamics were better maintained in the ketofol group during induction, with only 15% of patients having >20% fall in mean arterial pressure (from baseline) intraoperatively, compared to 45% of patients receiving propofol alone (P = 0.038). The mean intraventricular pressure values in both the groups were in the normal range and the quality of brain relaxation was similar, with no significant difference (P > 0.05).

Conclusion:

Ketofol combination (1:5) as compared to propofol alone provides better hemodynamic stability on induction as well as maintenance anesthesia without causing an increase in intracranial pressure. Effect of ketofol on cerebral oxygenation and quality of emergence need to be evaluated further by larger multicentric, randomized control trials.

Comparison of ketamine-propofol mixture (ketofol) and midazolam-meperidine in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancretography (ERCP) for oldest old patients

Background and aim: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) requires moderate-to-deep conscious sedation. Combinations of ketamine and propofol (ketofol) and of midazolam and meperidine were analyzed using the bispectral index (BIS). There is no research on the use of ketofol on very elderly patients. The aim of this study is to use BIS and offer insight into the use and safety of ketofol sedation for oldest old patients undergoing ERCP.

Materials and methods: For the ERCP procedure, 168 patients aged 85+ years were enrolled in a 2-year retrospective single center study. Seventy-five patients received midazolam-meperidine (MM) sedation in 2016, while 75 patients received ketofol (KP) sedation in 2018.

The two groups were compared for patient data, procedure duration, Ramsay Sedation Score (RSS), heart rate (HR), blood pressure (BP), and pulse oximetry (SpO₂), BIS, facial pain score (FPS), time to achieve BIS, recovery time, and complications. The total amount of rescue medication was recorded.

Results: The two groups did not differ by patient data or procedure duration (p>0.05). Group KP had significantly higher systolic and diastolic BP, HR, and SpO₂ values and lower BIS scores than Group MM (p=0.0001). The two groups did not differ by time to achieve BIS scores (p>0.05). Group KP had significantly fewer complications and a shorter recovery time than Group MM (p<0.001).

Conclusion: Ketofol induced sedation results in more stable vital signs and fewer complications than the midazolam-meperidine sedation regimen during ERCP in oldest old patients, indicating that ketofol can be an alternative to midazolam-meperidine.

Comparison of Intravenous Dexmedetomidine-Propofol Versus Ketofol for Sedation During Awake Fiberoptic Intubation: A Prospective, Randomized Study

Background

Management of difficult airway due to laryngeal mass is a major challenge to the anesthesiologists, and awake fiberoptic intubation (AFOI) would be the technique of choice.

Objectives

The current study aimed at comparing the effects of administration of dexmedetomidine-propofol or ketofol for sedation during AFOI in terms of intubation conditions, hemodynamic stability, and patients and anesthesiologist’s satisfaction.

Methods

Eighty adult patients, 18 - 60 years old, ASA (the American Society of Anesthesiologists) physical status I-III, with difficult airway due to laryngeal mass and planned for AFOI were enrolled. Sedation was randomly given to the patients according to their assigned group by either dexmedetomidine-propofol (group D; n = 40) or ketofol (group K; n = 40). Outcome variables included time to reach Ramsay sedation scale (RSS) ≥ 3, intubation time, number of patients in need of rescue propofol, patient’s discomfort score, tolerance to endoscopy and intubation, hemodynamic parameters, patients and anesthesiologist’s satisfaction, and occurrence of side effects.

Results

Time to reach RSS ≥ 3 and intubation time were significantly shorter, and fewer patients required rescue propofol in the K group as compared to the D group (P = 0.000*, and 0.035*, respectively). Higher discomfort score and better tolerance to endoscopy and intubation were noticed in group K than group D, but with no statistical significance (P = 0.132, 0.137, and 0.211, respectively). Patients in group D had significantly lower mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) after the loading dose till five minutes after intubation (P = 0.000*). There was no significant difference in patients’ satisfaction between the two groups (P = 0.687), while anesthesiologist’s satisfaction was higher in group K compared with that of group D (P = 0.013*). Cough score as well as incidence of unfavorable respiratory outcomes were not significantly different between the two groups (P = 0.611, 0.348, respectively).

Conclusions

Ketofol and dexmedetomidine-propofol combination were suitable and satisfactory for AFOI. However, ketofol was more advantageous in offering faster onset of sedation, shorter intubation time, stable hemodynamic profile, as well as higher anesthesiologist’s satisfaction when compared to dexmedetomidine-propofol.

Antidepressant Effect of Combined Ketamine and Electroconvulsive Therapy on Patients With Major Depressive Disorder: A Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

One of the shortcomings of the available treatments for major depressive disorder (MDD) is the time delay between starting the treatment and achieving an antidepressant response.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to determine the effect of Ketamine as a synergistic antidepressant and anesthetic agent on MDD in electroconvulsive therapy (ECT).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Twenty-two patients with MDD received Ketamine and Propofol as anesthetic agents compared with 20 patients as the control group who received Propofol in a double-blind randomized clinical trial. The Hamilton rating scale for depression was used to determine the changes in symptoms severity during ECT and a 2-week follow-up.

RESULTS

Both groups showed a reduction in depression severity, but there was no significant difference between the groups in the recovery process (P = 0.92). However, the cognitive performance recovery time in the Ketamine group was lower than that in the control group (P = 0.042).

CONCLUSIONS

This study could not show the effect of Ketamine on depression recovery in a 2-week follow-up period. Nevertheless, Ketamine may provide a better cognitive performance in patients under ECT.

Propofol-ketamine combination: a choice with less complications and better hemodynamic stability compared to propofol? On a prospective study in a group of colonoscopy patients

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

In this study, we compared duration for reaching desired Ramsay Sedation Score (RSS) and postoperative recovery according to Modified Aldrete Score (MAS) of propofol and propofol-ketamine combination in a group of colonoscopy patients. Rates of cardiovascular, respiratory, laryngospasm, visual and nausea/vomiting complications were also compared as secondary outcomes.

METHODS

This is a double-blinded prospective randomized controlled trial. 95 patients were included and blocked randomized to either propofol (GroupP, n: 47) or propofol-ketamine (GroupPK, n: 48). GroupP patients received 0.5 mg/kg propofol and GroupPK received 0.5 mg/kg ketamine-propofol. Subjects were monitorized noninvasively preoperatively and every 5 min during procedure. RSS was recorded for every minute before starting procedure and for every 5 min during procedure. Recovery after colonoscopy was evaluated according to MAS. Same observer checked for MAS just after procedure in postoperative 1 min and for every 3 min during follow-up. Postoperative respiratory depression was defined as rate <10/min, hypercapnia/hypercarbia-arterial CO2 tension >50 mmHg or SO2 <90 while hypotension was defined as a decrease of 20 % in mean blood pressure compared to initial values.

RESULTS

GroupPK patients needed shorter duration for achieving RSS ≥ 4 (p: 0.038) but longer duration for achieving MAS ≥ 9 (p: 0.005). GroupP's intraoperative blood pressures and heart rates were significantly lower compared to initial values. We observed that respiratory depression (19.1 vs 0 %, p: 0.001), hypotension (29.8 vs 10.4 %, p: 0.018), and nausea/vomiting (17 vs 4.2 %, p: 0.041) were significantly more common in GroupP.

CONCLUSION

Propofol-ketamine combination is an advantageous choice in means of achieving sedation in a shorter period of time, a better hemodynamic stability, less nausea and vomiting and respiratory complication rates. Yet it seems that this choice might be related with longer recovery duration.

An Audit of the Haemodynamic and Emergence Characteristics of Single-Shot ‘ketofol’

‘Ketofol’, the single-syringe combination of ketamine and propofol (50 mg of ketamine and 90 mg of propofol in a 10 ml syringe) is becoming increasingly popular for short procedures, progressively replacing the more traditional use of ketamine and diazepam in some settings. This audit examined the haemodynamic, emergence and other characteristics of ketofol administration in 42, otherwise fit, women undergoing bilateral post-partum tubal ligation at Vila Central Hospital in Vanuatu. The combination of ketamine and propofol had no clinically important adverse haemodynamic effects. Wake-up from ketofol was favourable, with low rates of nausea and minimal emergence delirium. However, 43% of patients required airway support. For short procedures such as post-partum tubal ligation in fit patients, ketofol appears to have minimal adverse haemodynamic effects and favourable emergence characteristics.

A comparison of different proportions of a ketamine-propofol mixture administered in a single injection for patients undergoing colonoscopy

INTRODUCTION

In this study, we aimed to determine the appropriate proportion of ketamine-propofol (ketofol), which was prepared in two different proportions for colonoscopy procedures.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is a prospective and randomized trial. Group 1 was administered a mixture of 100 mg ketamine and 200 mg propofol. Group 2 was administered 50 mg ketamine and 200 mg propofol. Additional doses of 0.5 mg/kg bolus propofol without ketamine were administered to both groups to stabilize the bispectral index at 70-80 and with a Ramsey sedation score of 3-4. The pulse rate, mean arterial pressure (MAP), peripheral oxygen saturation values, colonoscopy period, adverse events, recovery time, discharge time, additional propofol doses, total propofol doses, colonoscopist and patient satisfaction were recorded.

RESULTS

In group 2, the 1 min MAP mean was significantly lower than the initial, 10, 15 and 20 min MAP means (p = 0.014, p = 0.002). The 20 min PR mean of group 2 was statistically significantly higher than group 1 (p = 0.045). The 15 min PR mean of group 2 was significantly lower than the initial and the 1 min PR means (p = 0.023, p = 0.006). The total propofol dose mean of group 2 was significantly higher than group 1 (p = 0.0001). The presence of adverse events in group 2 was significantly lower than that in group 1 (p = 0.0001). The mean colonoscopist satisfaction in group 2 was significantly lower than that in group 1 (p = 0.047).

CONCLUSIONS

In colonoscopy, a ketofol mixture prepared in the proportion 1 : 2 provides appropriate hemodynamic conditions and sufficient sedation.

Period Prevalence of Ketamine-Propofol Admixture "Ketofol" in the Operating Room among Anesthesia Providers at an Academic Medical Center

BACKGROUND

The primary aim of this study was to determine the period prevalence of the single-syringe ketamine-propofol admixture used for sedation and induction among anesthesia providers during a 5-year period before and after educational sessions addressing barriers to its use. Secondary aims were to determine barriers to its use and address the most prevalent concerns through educational sessions.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Surveys were administered to certified and student registered nurse anesthetists, anesthesia residents, and anesthesiologists at Mayo Clinic Rochester, MN before and after educational sessions addressing common barriers. Identified barriers were addressed by oral and/or electronic presentations with identical content.

RESULTS

Pre-education period prevalence for sedation was 110 (43%) and 64 (25%) for induction. Identified barriers were uncertainty of benefit in 62 respondents (23%), mixed controlled substance disposal in 48 (18%), regulatory/institutional policies in 20 (7%), and compatibility in 9 (3%). Post-education period prevalence for sedation was 102 (44%), and induction 63 (27%). No concerns were noted in 72% of the post-education group verses 42% in the pre-education group (p<0.01). No concerns were reported in 51% of the electronic only education group verses 64% in the oral education group (p<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The period prevalence of "ketofol" was greater for sedation than induction. The period prevalence following education showed a slight increase in both sedation and induction use. There was a significant reduction in barriers following education, with oral presentations being more effective than electronic only. Period prevalence was increasing following education; however, allowing more time may have shown a significant practice change.

Comparison of Propofol and Ketamine-Propofol Mixture (Ketofol) on Laryngeal Tube-Suction II Conditions and Hemodynamics: A Randomized, Prospective, Double-Blind Trial

OBJECTIVE

The aim of our study is to compare the effect of ketamine-propofol mixture (ketofol) and propofol on the laryngeal tube-Suction II (LTS II) insertion conditions and hemodynamics.

METHODS

Eighty American Society of Anesthesiologists class 1 and 2 patients were divided into 2 random groups to receive either 1 µg/kg remifentanil and propofol 2 mg/kg in Group P (n = 40), or 1 µg/kg remifentanil and ketofol (using a 1:1 single syringe mixture of 5 mg/mL ketamine and 5 mg/mL propofol) in Group K (n = 40) before induction of anesthesia. After induction, LTS II was inserted. Heart rate and noninvasive blood pressure were recorded before induction of anesthesia (t0); immediately following induction (t1); immediately after LTS II insertion (t2); and 3 minutes (t3), 5 minutes (t4), and 10 (t5) minutes after LTS II insertion. Conditions of insertion of LTS II were assessed and scored 1 to 3 using 6 variables as follows: mouth opening, swallowing, coughing, head and body movements, laryngospasm, and ease of LTS II insertion by the same experienced anesthesiologist who did not know the agents. LTS II insertion summed score was prepared depending upon these variables.

RESULTS

In regard to LTS II insertion summed score, Group K was more favorable than Group P (P < 0.05). Apnea duration was longer in Group P (385.0 seconds [range = 195.0-840.0 seconds]) compared with Group K (325.50 seconds [range = 60.0-840.0 seconds]) but this was not statically significant. The heart rate values were significantly lower at all measurement intervals in both groups compared with the baseline values (P < 0.05). There was no difference in heart rate between Group P and Group K. The mean arterial pressure values were significantly lower at all measurement intervals in Group P compared with baseline values (P < 0.05). In Group K, the mean arterial pressure values were significantly lower at all measurement intervals compared with the baseline values, except t2 (P < 0.05). There was a significant difference between Group P and Group K in terms of mean arterial pressure at t3 (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

We found that ketofol provided better insertion summed score for LTS II than propofol, with minimal hemodynamic changes.

The antimicrobial effects of ketamine combined with propofol: An in vitro study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Ketamine and propofol are the general anesthetics that also have antimicrobial and microbial growth-promoting effects, respectively. Although these agents are frequently applied together during clinical use, there is no data about their total effect on microbial growth when combined. In this study, we investigated some organisms' growth in a ketamine and propofol mixture.

METHOD

We used standard strains including Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Candida albicans in this study. Time-growth analysis was performed to assess microbial growth rates in 1% propofol. Antimicrobial activity of ketamine, alone and in propofol was studied with microdilution method.

RESULTS

In propofol, studied strains grew from 10(3)-10(4) cfu/mL to ≥10(5) cfu/mL concentrations within 8-16 hours depending on the type of organism. Minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) and minimal bactericidal concentration (MBC) (for candida, minimal fungicidal concentration) of ketamine were determined as follows (MIC, MBC): E.coli 312.5, 312.5 μg/mL; S.aureus 19.5, 156 μg/mL; P.aeruginosa 312.5, 625 μg/mL; and C.albicans 156, 156 μg/ml. In ketamine+propofol mixture, ketamine exhibited antimicrobial activity to E.coli, P.aeruginosa and C.albicans as MBCs at 1250, 625 and 625 μg/mL, respectively. Growth of S. aureus was not inhibited in this mixture (ketamine concentration=1250 μg/mL).

CONCLUSION

Ketamine has sustained its antimicrobial activity in a dose-dependent manner against some organisms in propofol, which is a strong microbial growth-promoting solution. Combined use of ketamine and propofol in routine clinical application may reduce the risk of infection caused by accidental contamination. However, one must keep in mind that ketamine cannot reduce all pathogenic threats in propofol mixture.

Addition of ketamine to propofol-alfentanil anesthesia may reduce postoperative pain in laparoscopic cholecystectomy

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess whether intravenous anesthesia supplemented with ketamine reduces postoperative pain after elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty patients were enrolled and randomized 1:1 into one of 2 groups: the propofol group (received propofol and alfentanil supplemented with saline) and the ketamine group (received propofol and alfentanil with ketamine). The study was double-blind. The number and amount of the intraoperative additional alfentanil doses were recorded. Pain assessments and cumulative analgesic consumption at postanesthesia care unit (PACU) admission, PACU discharge, postoperative 24th hour, and hospital discharge were recorded.

RESULTS

The visual analog scale scores at PACU admission, PACU discharge, postoperative 24th hour, and hospital discharge were significantly lower in the ketamine group than the propofol group. The pain visual analog scale ≥ 75 at the postoperative 24th hour for the propofol group was also significantly lower (P<0.035) than that of the ketamine group. The difference in analgesic consumption between groups was statistically significant (P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed that ketamine supplemented with propofol and alfentanil produced better analgesia intraoperatively and postoperatively and decreased analgesic consumption compared with the propofol group after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Effects of Ketamine-Propofol Mixture on Intraocular Pressure and Haemodynamics in Elderly Patients: A Randomised Double-Blind Trial

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of a ketamine-propofol mixture (ketofol) and propofol on intraocular pressure (IOP) and haemodynamics in elderly patients during anaesthetic management at each repeated measurement times.

METHODS

Forty elderly ASA I and II patients were divided into two random groups and received either propofol (1.5 mg kg(-1); group P, n=20) or ketofol (1:1 single syringe mixture of 5 mg mL(-1) ketamine and 5 mg mL(-1) propofol; group KP, n=20). A proseal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) was inserted 60 seconds after induction of anaesthesia. IOP, systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and heart rate (HR) values were recorded at preinduction (t0), immediately following induction (t1), and at 1 (t2), 3 (t3), and 5 (t4) minutes after induction. Haemodynamic complications and the need for ephedrine were also recorded.

RESULTS

Patient characteristics at the beginning of the procedure were similar between the groups. SBP and HR were significantly increased in group KP compared to group P at t1 and t4 (p=0.044). Induction of both anaesthetic agents significantly decreased the IOP values from the t0 (p=0.026). A significant decrease in IOP was found at t1 and t4 in group P compared to group KP (p=0.018). The total dose of ephedrine was statistically different in group P (p=0.034).

CONCLUSION

Ketofol can be an alternative agent to provide haemodynamic stability with a moderate decrease in IOP during anaesthesia induction in elderly patients.

Comparison of effects of propofol and ketamine-propofol mixture (ketofol) on laryngeal mask airway insertion conditions and hemodynamics in elderly patients: a randomized, prospective, double-blind trial

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to compare the effects of ketamine-propofol mixture (ketofol) and propofol on ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) insertion conditions and hemodynamics in elderly patients.

METHODS

Eighty elderly patients, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I and II, were randomly divided into two groups to receive either propofol 0.15 ml/kg (n = 40), or ketofol (using a 1:1 single-syringe mixture of 5 mg/ml ketamine and 5 mg/ml propofol) (n = 40) before induction of anesthesia. Sixty seconds after induction, the PLMA was inserted. Heart rate and arterial blood pressure (systolic [S] BP) were recorded prior to the induction of anesthesia, immediately following induction, immediately after PLMA insertion, and 5 and 10 min after PLMA insertion. PLMA insertion conditions were scored according to mouth opening, swallowing, coughing, head and body motion, laryngospasm, and ease of PLMA insertion by the same experienced anesthesiologist, who did not know which agents were used.

RESULTS

There were no differences in PLMA insertion conditions between the groups. The number of patients in need of ephedrine (P = 0.043) and the total dose of ephedrine (P = 0.022) were significantly lower, and apnea duration (P < 0.001) was significantly higher in the ketofol group compared with the propofol group. SBP was significantly higher in the ketofol group than in the propofol group immediately after PLMA insertion and 5 min after PLMA insertion.

CONCLUSIONS

The same PLMA insertion conditions were found with ketofol and propofol. The number of patients in need of ephedrine and the total ephedrine dose were lower and apnea duration was increased in the ketofol group.

Ketamine-propofol combination (ketofol) versus propofol alone for emergency department procedural sedation and analgesia: a randomized double-blind trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

We determine whether a 1:1 mixture of ketamine and propofol (ketofol) for emergency department (ED) procedural sedation results in a 13% or more absolute reduction in adverse respiratory events compared with propofol alone.

METHODS

Participants were randomized to receive either ketofol or propofol in a double-blind fashion. Inclusion criteria were aged 14 years or older and American Society of Anesthesiology class 1 to 3 status. The primary outcome was the number and proportion of patients experiencing an adverse respiratory event as defined by the Quebec Criteria. Secondary outcomes were sedation consistency, efficacy, and time; induction time; and adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 284 patients were enrolled, 142 per group. Forty-three (30%) patients experienced an adverse respiratory event in the ketofol group compared with 46 (32%) in the propofol group (difference 2%; 95% confidence interval -9% to 13%; P=.80). Three ketofol patients and 1 propofol patient received bag-valve-mask ventilation. Sixty-five (46%) patients receiving ketofol and 93 (65%) patients receiving propofol required repeated medication dosing or progressed to a Ramsay Sedation Score of 4 or less during their procedure (difference 19%; 95% confidence interval 8% to 31%; P=.001). Six patients receiving ketofol were treated for recovery agitation. Other secondary outcomes were similar between the groups. Patients and staff were highly satisfied with both agents.

CONCLUSION

Ketofol for ED procedural sedation does not result in a reduced incidence of adverse respiratory events compared with propofol alone. Induction time, efficacy, and sedation time were similar; however, sedation depth appeared to be more consistent with ketofol.

Combination of ketamine and propofol versus either agent alone for procedural sedation in the emergency department

PURPOSE

The safety of using ketamine-propofol combinations as an alternative to using either agent alone for procedural sedation is discussed.

SUMMARY

A total of 10 trials comparing the combination of ketamine and propofol with either agent alone for procedural sedation in the emergency department were examined. The evidence reviewed suggests that combining these agents may help to minimize adverse effects such as hypotension and respiratory depression. Ketamine is not commonly used as a single agent in adults because of the risk for emergence reactions; however, when combined with propofol, no significant increase in this adverse effect was found compared with propofol monotherapy. Administering ketamine and propofol can be accomplished by using a two-syringe technique or combining both medications into a single syringe. When two syringes are used, a ketamine 0.3-0.5-mg/kg i.v. bolus dose is administered, followed by a propofol 0.4-1-mg/kg i.v. bolus dose. Sedation is maintained with intermittent i.v. boluses of propofol 0.1-0.5 mg/kg. A 1:1 ratio of ketamine and propofol can also be combined into a single syringe by using the same concentration (10 mg/mL) and equal volumes of each drug, yielding a final concentration of 5 mg/mL for each component.

CONCLUSION

The combined use of ketamine and propofol is a reasonable alternative to propofol alone for procedural sedation in patients at higher risk for respiratory depression or hypotension. Use of the combination requires the development of standardized protocols for drug preparation and dosage to minimize the potential for errors.

Ketofol (mixture of ketamine and propofol) administration in electroconvulsive therapy

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of a ketamine:propofol combination ('ketofol') for electroconvulsive therapy on seizure activity, haemodynamic response and recovery parameters, and to compare with these with the effects of propofol alone. Twenty-four patients underwent a total of 144 electroconvulsive therapy sessions, allocated in this prospective, double-blind, crossover study. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 1 mg/kg ketofol (0.5 mg/kg propofol plus 0.5 mg/kg ketamine) or 1 mg/kg propofol 1% for anaesthesia induction. Seizure duration and quality, haemodynamic data, recovery parameters and side-effects were recorded and analysed between groups. Both motor and electroencephalography seizure durations in the ketofol group (29 ± 17 and 41 ± 17 seconds, respectively) were similar to that in the propofol group (28 ± 13 and 38 ± 16 seconds, respectively). Postictal suppression index was higher in the ketofol group (89.63 ± 7.88) than in the propofol group (79.74 ± 14.6) (P <0.05). In the ketofol group, heart rate after the seizure ended and mean arterial pressures, recorded at 0 and 5 minutes after the seizure ended, were higher than in the propofol group. Time to obeying commands was longer in the ketofol group (P <0.05). There were no untoward psychological reactions following ketofol. Although no superiority to propofol in terms of seizure duration, haemodynamic or recovery parameters was found, the ketofol mixture selected in our study provided better seizure quality than propofol. We conclude that ketofol can be an alternative strategy to enhance the seizure quality and clinical efficiency of electroconvulsive therapy.

A prospective case series of single-syringe ketamine-propofol (Ketofol) for emergency department procedural sedation and analgesia in adults

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to evaluate the effectiveness, recovery time, and adverse event profile of intravenous (IV) mixed 1:1 ketamine-propofol (ketofol) for adult procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) in the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

  Prospective data were collected on all PSA events over a 4.5-year period in a trauma-receiving suburban teaching hospital. PSAs using a 1:1 single-syringe mixture of 10 mg/mL ketamine and 10 mg/mL propofol in patients over 21 years of age were analyzed. Physiologic data, drug doses, adverse events, recovery time, patient satisfaction, and staff satisfaction were recorded.

RESULTS

Ketofol PSA was used in 728 patients for primarily orthopedic procedures. Median patient age was 53 years (range = 21 to 99 years, interquartile range [IQR] = 36-70 years). The median dose of ketamine and propofol was 0.7 mg/kg each (range =0.2 to 2.7 mg/kg, IQR = 0.5-0.9 mg/kg), and median recovery time was 14 minutes (range = 3 to 50 minutes, IQR = 10-17 minutes). PSA was effective in 717 cases (98%). Bag-mask ventilation occurred in 15 patients (2.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.0% to 3.1%). Recovery agitation occurred in 26 patients (3.6%; 95% CI = 2.2% to 4.9%), of whom 13 (1.8%; 95% CI = 0.8% to 2.7%) required treatment. One patient experienced vomiting and one patient was admitted to the hospital for monitoring of transient dysrhythmia and hypotension. No sequelae were identified. The median staff satisfaction scores were 10 (IQR = 9-10) on a scale of 1 to 10, and 97% of patients would have chosen the same method of PSA in the future.

CONCLUSIONS

  Ketofol is an effective PSA agent in adult ED patients. Recovery times are short and adverse events are few. Patients and ED staff were highly satisfied.

Use of ketofol for procedural sedation and analgesia in children with hematological diseases

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of intravenous ketamine-propofol admixture ("ketofol") in the same syringe for procedural sedation and analgesia in children undergoing bone marrow aspiration.

METHODS

This was a prospective, observational pilot study. Patients aged between 4 and 12 years requiring sedation for bone marrow aspiration were included. Ketofol (1:1 mixture of ketamine 10 mg/mL and propofol 10 mg/mL) was given intravenously in 0.5 mg/kg aliquots each with a 1-min interval and titrated to reach sedation levels of 3 or 4 (Ramsay score). The primary outcome was patient satisfaction with the degree of sedation. Secondary outcomes included injection pain, total sedation time, recovery time, hemodynamic and respiratory parameters, and adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 20 patients were enrolled in the study. The median total dose of ketofol administered was 1.25 mg/kg each of propofol and ketamine (95%CI 0.77-2 mg/kg). The median score on the visual analog scale was 0 (extremely comfortable) (0-1.5; 95%CI 0.2-2.2). Median recovery time was 23 min (20.5-28 min; 95%CI 17.1-51.2). The incidence of injection pain was 2/20. Two patients had transient diplopia and one child reported dreams. No patients had hypotension, vomiting or required airway intervention.

CONCLUSION

Ketofol provided effective sedation, which was reflected in the high degree of satisfaction recorded by children requiring procedural sedation and analgesia for bone marrow aspiration. We also observed rapid recovery and no clinically significant complications. A large number of patients is required to evaluate and validate these findings.

Experience with a propofol-ketamine mixture for sedation during pediatric orthopedic surgery

BACKGROUND

Various combinations of propofol and ketofol have been described for the provision of procedural sedation in both adults and children. Utilization of 'ketofol' for deep sedation during prolonged pediatric orthopedic procedures has not previously been described.

METHODS

During an orthopedic aid trip, a 1:1 mixture of propofol and ketamine (200 mg of each drawn up to 22 ml) was utilized to provide deep sedation or general anesthesia as an adjunct to regional analgesia for lower limb surgery. Details for 18 patients having a total of 19 procedures were recorded with a record of intraoperative and postoperative parameters including initial bolus doses and infusion rates of ketofol required to produce deep sedation.

RESULTS

Mean operating time was 153.7 min (range 64-241 min). The mean initial bolus dose of ketofol was 0.19 ml·kg(-1) (range 0.1-0.5 ml·kg(-1) ) or 1.7 mg·kg(-1) each of propofol and ketamine (range 0.9-4.5 mg·kg(-1) ). The mean upper limit of the infusion rate required to maintain deep sedation was 0.19 ml·kg(-1) ·h(-1) (range 0.07-0.26 ml·kg(-1) ·h(-1) ) or 1.7 mg·kg(-1) ·h(-1) (range 0.6-2.4 mg·kg(-1) ·h(-1) ) and the mean lower limit of the infusion rate was 0.08 ml·kg(-1) ·h(-1) (range 0.02-0.13 ml·kg(-1) ·h(-1) ) or 0.7 mg·kg(-1) ·h(-1) (range 0.2-1.2 mg·kg(-1) ·h(-1) ). The mean initial bolus dose of ketofol was 0.19 ml·kg(-1) (range 0.1-0.5 ml·kg(-1) ). There were no episodes of hypo- or hypertension or of desaturation. Mean time to eye opening after infusion cessation was 5.1 min (median 2 min; range 0-17 min).

CONCLUSION

Ketofol successfully produced deep sedation for prolonged pediatric orthopedic procedures in conjunction with regional analgesia. Further research to confirm its safety and applicability to a wider range of settings is required.