Procedural Sedation Using a Propofol-Ketamine Combination (Ketofol) vs. Propofol Alone in the Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure (LEEP): A Randomized Controlled Trial

Effects of adding low-dose esketamine to sufentanil and propofol sedation during cervical conization: a single-centre, randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Cervical conization is a brief but painful procedure that can be performed under sufficient sedation with propofol and opioids. However, this sedation approach comes with a high risk of sedation-related adverse events (SRAEs). Esketamine, an N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonist, causes less cardiorespiratory depression than opioids. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of adding a low dose of esketamine to propofol and sufentanil sedation as an opioid-reduced regimen.

METHODS

A total of 122 consecutive patients with ASA I-II, body mass index < 30, and STOP-BANG score < 3 who underwent cervical conization were enrolled and randomly divided into Group S and Group ES. Using a closed-loop target-controlled infusion (TCI) pump with a target bispectral index (BIS) value of 60 ± 5, patients in Group S were sedated with 0.2 mcg·kg-1 sufentanil and propofol, while patients in Group ES were sedated with 0.15 mg·kg-1 esketamine, 0.1 mcg·kg-1 sufentanil and propofol. The primary outcome was the incidence and severity of SRAEs, while the secondary outcomes included effectiveness of sedation, awakening time, psychotomimetic side effects, postoperative pain, postoperative nausea and vomiting, and patient and gynaecologist satisfaction.

RESULTS

Data from 120 patients were analysed. The incidence of composite SRAEs was significantly higher in Group S than in Group ES (85.0% vs. 56.7%, P < 0.05). Furthermore, the severity of SRAEs was higher in Group S than in Group ES (P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the effectiveness of sedation, awakening time, psychotomimetic side effects, postoperative pain, postoperative nausea and vomiting, or patient and gynaecologist satisfaction between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Adding low-dose esketamine to propofol and sufentanil sedation reduces the incidence and severity of SRAEs in patients undergoing cervical conization, with equal sedation efficacy, recovery quality, and no additional psychomimetic side effects.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR2000040457 , 28/11/2020.

Comparison of Sedation With Ketamine-Propofol Versus Propofol-Fentanyl for Elderly Patients Undergoing Prostate Biopsy: A Retrospective Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Procedural sedation is increasingly used for elderly patients, but there is no established ideal method for elderly patients who are prone to respiratory and circulatory depression. This study aims to investigate the association of respiratory complications and the combination of ketamine-propofol versus fentanyl-propofol in elderly patients undergoing prostate biopsy requiring deep sedation.

METHODS

This was a single-center, retrospective, observational study conducted from April 2020 to March 2021. We included male patients aged 65 years and older scheduled for prostate biopsy under procedural sedation. Ketamine-propofol and fentanyl-propofol were administered at the discretion of the anesthesiologist. The primary outcome was the need for assisted ventilation. The secondary outcome was the duration of oxygen saturation (SpO2) below 90%.

RESULTS

We enrolled 120 patients over 65 years, and 92 patients were included in the final analysis. The anesthesiologist administered an initial dose of ketamine and propofol of 1:1 to 1:4 of 1.0 mg kg-1 (interquartile range: 0.98 to 1.17) or administered an initial dose of fentanyl of 0.05 to 0.1 mg and a target-controlled infusion of propofol of 2.8 μg ml-1 (interquartile range: 2.0 to 3.0) followed by additional doses at the discretion of the anesthesiologist. Ketamine-propofol was associated with a reduced need for assisted ventilation and a shorter duration of SpO2 below 90% than propofol-fentanyl (95.7% vs. 4.3%, P < 0.05; 0.64 minutes vs. 0.17 minutes, P = 0.26).

CONCLUSIONS

Ketamine-propofol is associated with a significantly reduced need for assisted ventilation compared to propofol-fentanyl during procedural sedation and analgesia for procedures requiring deep sedation for the elderly.

Laryngeal mask general anaesthesia versus spinal anaesthesia for promoting early recovery of cervical conisation: A randomised, controlled clinical study

Background

Although both spinal and general anaesthesia provides good anaesthesia for cervical conization, spinal anaesthesia delays the return of lower limb movements and urinary function, whereas general anaesthesia requires the patient to be unconscious. It is unclear which anaesthetic technique is more conducive to early postoperative recovery in patients undergoing cervical conization.

Patients and methods

140 patients undergoing cervical conization underwent either laryngeal mask general anaesthesia (LMA, n = 70) or spinal anaesthesia (SA, n = 70). In the LMA group, an i-gel mask was used for airway management. In the SA group, spinal anaesthesia was received with 0.75% ropivacaine (15 mg) in the L3-4 interval. The quality of recovery score (QoR-15) was the primary endpoint of the study. Secondary endpoints included incidence of adverse 24-h analgesia (NRS>3); return of lower limb activity; first bed activity and feeding; and the number of catheters removed at 6, 12 and 24 h postoperatively.

Result

The LMA group significantly improved QoR-15 scores (136.62 ± 11.02 vs 119.97 ± 12.75; P < 0.001); and reduced the incidence of poor analgesia (NRS >3) within 24 h postoperatively (20% vs 42.8%, P = 0.006); reduced time in bed (15.62 ± 3.83 h vs 18.27 ± 5.57 vs, P = 0.001); improved patient satisfaction (86% vs 27%; P < 0.001); and catheters removal within 24 h (70/70 vs 42/70, P < 0.001).

Conclusion

LMA general anaesthesia can facilitate early postoperative recovery in patients undergoing cervical conization compared with conventional spinal anaesthesia.

Trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ID: ChiCTR1800019384), http://www.chictr.org.cn/listbycreater.aspx (08/11/2018).

Cardiopulmonary Adverse Events of Remimazolam versus Propofol During Cervical Conization: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

This study aimed to compare the cardiopulmonary safety of remimazolam and propofol in patients undergoing cervical conization.

Methods

This was a single-blind, parallel, randomized controlled study. A total of 204 patients scheduled for day surgery of cold knife cervical conization received either remimazolam-alfentanil anesthesia (remimazolam group) or propofol-alfentanil anesthesia (propofol group). The primary outcome was the incidence of intraoperative cardiopulmonary adverse events (a composite outcome of hypotension, bradycardia and hypoxemia). The occurrence of hypotension, bradycardia, hypoxemia and the degree of body movement were secondary outcomes, as well as the moment at which consciousness was lost, the interval between the end of anesthesia and the operating room's release of the patient, and the overall dosage of alfentanil administered during the procedure.

Results

The incidence of intraoperative cardiopulmonary adverse events was 45 (44.1%) in the remimazolam group and 72 (70.6%) in the propofol group (absolute risk difference [95% CI], -26.47% [-39.55% to -13.39%]; odds ratio (OR) [95% CI], 0.43 [0.28 to 0.65]; P < 0.001). The remimazolam group showed lower incidences of hypotension and hypoxemia compared to the propofol group (P = 0.01 for both). No significant differences were observed in the overall alfentanil dosages administered, bradycardia, bodily movement, or time to losing consciousness between the two groups.

Conclusion

In patients who underwent cold knife cervical conization, remimazolam-alfentanil anesthesia was associated with a reduced incidence of intraoperative cardiopulmonary adverse events compared with propofol-alfentanil anesthesia.

Procedural Sedation Using Two Different Proportions of Ketamine-Propofol Combination in Short Gynecological Procedures: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: Procedural sedation with a combination of propofol and ketamine for short-duration surgeries is a convenient technique of anesthesia as it has a faster recovery avoiding the side effects of general anesthesia. The aim of this study was to compare the sedative and analgesic effects of two different proportions of ketamine and propofol combination in patients undergoing short gynecological procedures.

Methods: A randomized double-blind study was conducted in 140 patients posted for elective gynecological procedures with a duration equal to or less than 30 minutes. After premedication of all participants, sedation was induced with bolus administration (0.1 mL/kg) of the study drugs to achieve desired Ramsay sedation score (RSS) of 6, followed by infusion at 0.3 mL/kg/h (Group A, ketamine:propofol in the ratio of 1:4 and Group B, ketamine:propofol in the ratio of 1:2). The adequacy of sedation, volume of drug to induce the patient, time to achieve desired RSS, time for first bolus dose, the total volume of the drugs, hemodynamic variables, awakening time, and side effects were observed.

Results: The incidence of movement of lower extremities was found to be significantly lower in the higher concentration ketamine group (Group B, P - 0.028). The volume of a drug for induction and the duration to reach RSS of 6 were significantly lower in Group B with P-values of 0.002 and <0.001, respectively. Hemodynamic variables, awakening time, and side effects were not statistically significant between the two groups.

Conclusion: Ketamine-propofol combination in the ratio 1:2 provides better sedation and analgesia with no increased side-effects compared to ketamine-propofol in the ratio 1:4 for short outpatient gynecological procedures.

Is there any difference between oral preemptive pregabalin vs. placebo administration on response to EBUS-TBNA under sedation?

Background/aim

The aim of this study is to evaluate the effects of preemptive oral pregabalin on hemodynamic response, anxiety, sedation, and recovery in patients who underwent endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) under sedation with intravenous ketamine-propofol combination.

Materials and methods

Sixty patients were included in this study, and patients were randomly divided into two equal groups to receive the placebo (Group 1) versus pregabalin 150 mg (Group 2) one hour prior to EBUS- TBNA procedure. Patients received 0.25 mg kg^-1 ketamine and 0.25 mg kg^-1 propofol mixture (ketofol) for sedation. Timing of the parameters was defined as follows; T0: in hospital ward before pregabalin or placebo administration, T1: premedication, T2: in operating room, T3: before the procedure, T4: initiation, T5: 3 min after induction, T6: 6 min after induction, T7: 9 min after induction, and T8: 12 min after induction. Hemodynamic parameters, severity of coughing, sedation and anxiety scores, and complications were recorded. The level of satisfaction of the bronchoscopist and the patients were evaluated at the end of the procedure.

Results

The heart rate and mean arterial pressure were significantly higher in Group 1 (P = 0.008, P = 0.04). Total doses of anesthetics, recovery time, and desaturation rate were significantly higher in Group 1 (P = 0.014, P = 0.001, P = 0.045). In Group 2, SpO₂ level was significantly higher at various time periods (T1; P = 0.025, T4; P =0.043, T6; P = 0.001, T7; P = 0.003, T8; P < 0.001). The severity of coughing was found significantly lower in Group 2 (T4; P = 0.011, T5; P = 0.01, T6; P = 0.02, T7; P = 0.03, T8; P < 0.01). Anxiety scores were significantly lower in Group 2 (P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Preemptive oral pregabalin, in addition to sedation with ketamine-propofol combination, was effective in providing limited hemodynamic response, restricted coughing reflex, and lower anxiety during EBUS-TBNA. Besides, with pregabalin usage, decreased anesthetics consumption, lower complication rate, and shorter recovery time might have contributed to safety of the procedure and comfort of the bronchoscopist.

Ketofol performance to reduce postoperative emergence agitation in children undergoing adenotonsillectomy

Background: Emergence agitation is a reformed state of mindfulness, which starts with a sudden form of anesthesia and progresses through the early repossession age. Thus, the purpose of this study is to evaluate 1:3 ketofol performance on children 3–15 years old undergoing adenotonsillectomy.Methods: A total of 60 children aged 3–15 years undergoing adenotonsillectomy were randomly allocated to receive low-dose ketamine 0.15 mg/kg followed by propofol 0.45 mg/kg i.v. ketofol (1:3) about 10 min before the end of surgery in comparison to 60 children aged 3–15 years who received only normal saline and dextrose. Anesthesia was induced and maintained with sevoflurane. Postoperative pain and EA were assessed with objective pain score (OPS) and the Pediatric Anesthesia Emergence Delirium (PAED) scale, respectively. EA was defined as a PAED 10 points. Recovery profile and postoperative complications were also recorded.Results: The incidence and severity of EA were found significantly lower in the ketofol group in comparison to the control group with a percentage of (13.33% vs 48.33%) (8% vs 15%) respectively (P < 0.05). Also, the time for interaction from anesthetic tainted to extubating in the ketofol set was significantly less than in the control group (P < 0.05). Interestingly, there are no opposing events such as nausea, laryngospasm, bronchospasm, hypotension, bradycardia, bleeding, or postoperative respiratory depression (respiratory rate: <16) were noticed in the ketofol supervision (P > 0.05). Moreover, the heart rate was meaningfully higher in the control group starting at the time of tracheal extubating in comparison to the children undergone ketofol (P < 0.05). Alert score and time from painkilling tainted till liberation from PACU showed substantial significant changes at ketofol set (P < 0.05).Conclusion: Ketofol (1:3) shows significant performance to reduce postoperative agitation in the children undergone adenotonsillectomy.