J Pediatr Intensive Care 2016; 05(01): 001-006
DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1568152
Original Article
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Propofol-Based Procedural Sedation with or without Low-Dose Ketamine in Children

Sheikh Sohail Ahmed
1   Department of Pediatric Critical Care, Riley Hospital for Children at Indiana University Health, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States
,
Mara Nitu
1   Department of Pediatric Critical Care, Riley Hospital for Children at Indiana University Health, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States
,
Shawn Hicks
1   Department of Pediatric Critical Care, Riley Hospital for Children at Indiana University Health, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States
,
Lauren Hedlund
1   Department of Pediatric Critical Care, Riley Hospital for Children at Indiana University Health, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States
,
James E. Slaven
2   Department of Biostatistics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indiana University, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States
,
Mark R. Rigby
1   Department of Pediatric Critical Care, Riley Hospital for Children at Indiana University Health, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States
› Institutsangaben
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

17. November 2014

07. Mai 2015

Publikationsdatum:
18. November 2015 (online)

Preview

Abstract

Objective Examine comparative dosing, efficacy, and safety of propofol alone or with an initial, subdissociative dose of ketamine approach for deep sedation.

Background Propofol is a sedative-hypnotic agent used increasingly in children for deep sedation. As a nonanalgesic agent, use in procedures (e.g., bone marrow biopsies/aspirations, renal biopsies) is debated. Our intensivist procedural sedation team sedates using one of two protocols: propofol-only (P-O) approach or age-adjusted dose of 0.25 or 0.5 mg/kg intravenous ketamine (K + P) prior to propofol. With either approach, an initial induction dose of 1 mg/kg propofol is recommended and then intermittent dosing throughout the procedure to achieve adequate sedation to safely and effectively perform the procedure. Approach: Retrospective evaluation of 754 patients receiving either the P-O or K + P approach to sedation.

Results A total of 372 P-O group patients and 382 K + P group. Mean age (7.3 ± 5.5 years for P-O; 7.3 ± 5.4 years for K + P) and weight (30.09 ± 23.18 kg for P-O; 30.14 ± 24.45 kg for K + P) were similar in both groups (p = NS). All patients successfully completed procedures with a 16% combined incidence of hypoxia (SPO2 < 90%). Procedure time was 3 minutes longer for K + P group than P-O group (18.68 ± 15.13 minutes for K + P; 15.11 ± 12.77 minutes for P-O; p < 0.01), yet recovery times were 5 minutes shorter (17.04 ± 9.36 minutes for K + P; 22.17 ± 12.84 minutes for P-O; p < 0.01). Mean total dose of propofol was significantly greater in P-O than in K + P group (0.28 ± 0.20 mg/kg/min for K + P; 0.40 ± 0.26 mg/kg/min for P-O; p < 0.0001), and might explain the shorter recovery time.

Conclusion Both sedation approaches proved to be well tolerated and equally effective. Addition of ketamine was associated with reduction in the recovery time, probably explained by the statistically significant decrease in the propofol dose.