Comparing the hemodynamic effects of ketamine versus fentanyl bolus in patients with septic shock: a randomized controlled trial.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Journal of Anesthesia Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-18 DOI:10.1007/s00540-024-03383-9
Maha Mostafa, Ahmed Hasanin, Basant Reda, Mohamed Elsayad, Marwa Zayed, Mohamed E Abdelfatah
{"title":"Comparing the hemodynamic effects of ketamine versus fentanyl bolus in patients with septic shock: a randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Maha Mostafa, Ahmed Hasanin, Basant Reda, Mohamed Elsayad, Marwa Zayed, Mohamed E Abdelfatah","doi":"10.1007/s00540-024-03383-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Ketamine and fentanyl are commonly used for sedation and induction of anesthesia in critically ill patients. This study aimed to compare the hemodynamic effects of ketamine versus fentanyl bolus in patients with septic shock.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This randomized controlled trial included mechanically ventilated adults with septic shock receiving sedation. Patients were randomized to receive either 1 mg/kg ketamine bolus or 1 mcg/kg fentanyl bolus. Cardiac output (CO), stroke volume (SV), heart rate (HR), and mean arterial pressure (MAP) were measured at the baseline, 3, 6, 10, and 15 min after the intervention. Delta CO was calculated as the change in CO at each time point in relation to baseline measurement. The primary outcome was delta CO 6 min after administration of the study drug. Other outcomes included CO, SV, HR, and MAP.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty-six patients were analyzed. The median (quartiles) delta CO 6 min after drug injection was 71(37, 116)% in the ketamine group versus - 31(- 43, - 12)% in the fentanyl group, P value < 0.001. The CO, SV, HR, and MAP increased in the ketamine group and decreased in the fentanyl group in relation to the baseline reading; and all were higher in the ketamine group than the fentanyl group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In patients with septic shock, ketamine bolus was associated with higher CO and SV compared to fentanyl bolus.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial registration: </strong>Date of registration: 24/07/2023.</p><p><strong>Clinicaltrials: </strong>gov Identifier: NCT05957302. URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05957302 .</p>","PeriodicalId":14997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anesthesia","volume":" ","pages":"756-764"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11584442/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Anesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00540-024-03383-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Ketamine and fentanyl are commonly used for sedation and induction of anesthesia in critically ill patients. This study aimed to compare the hemodynamic effects of ketamine versus fentanyl bolus in patients with septic shock.

Methods: This randomized controlled trial included mechanically ventilated adults with septic shock receiving sedation. Patients were randomized to receive either 1 mg/kg ketamine bolus or 1 mcg/kg fentanyl bolus. Cardiac output (CO), stroke volume (SV), heart rate (HR), and mean arterial pressure (MAP) were measured at the baseline, 3, 6, 10, and 15 min after the intervention. Delta CO was calculated as the change in CO at each time point in relation to baseline measurement. The primary outcome was delta CO 6 min after administration of the study drug. Other outcomes included CO, SV, HR, and MAP.

Results: Eighty-six patients were analyzed. The median (quartiles) delta CO 6 min after drug injection was 71(37, 116)% in the ketamine group versus - 31(- 43, - 12)% in the fentanyl group, P value < 0.001. The CO, SV, HR, and MAP increased in the ketamine group and decreased in the fentanyl group in relation to the baseline reading; and all were higher in the ketamine group than the fentanyl group.

Conclusion: In patients with septic shock, ketamine bolus was associated with higher CO and SV compared to fentanyl bolus.

Clinical trial registration: Date of registration: 24/07/2023.

Clinicaltrials: gov Identifier: NCT05957302. URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05957302 .

Abstract Image

比较氯胺酮与芬太尼栓剂对脓毒性休克患者血液动力学的影响:随机对照试验。
背景:氯胺酮和芬太尼常用于重症患者的镇静和麻醉诱导。本研究旨在比较氯胺酮与芬太尼栓剂对脓毒性休克患者血液动力学的影响:这项随机对照试验包括接受镇静治疗的脓毒性休克成人机械通气患者。患者被随机分配接受 1 毫克/千克氯胺酮栓剂或 1 微克/千克芬太尼栓剂。分别在基线、干预后 3、6、10 和 15 分钟测量心输出量 (CO)、每搏量 (SV)、心率 (HR) 和平均动脉压 (MAP)。德尔塔一氧化碳的计算方法是每个时间点一氧化碳相对于基线测量值的变化。主要结果是服用研究药物 6 分钟后的一氧化碳δ值。其他结果包括 CO、SV、HR 和 MAP:对 86 名患者进行了分析。注射药物后 6 分钟,氯胺酮组的一氧化碳δ中位数(四分位数)为 71(37,116)%,而芬太尼组为-31(- 43,- 12)%,P 值 结论:在脓毒性休克患者中,氯胺酮和芬太尼对一氧化碳δ的治疗效果最佳:在脓毒性休克患者中,氯胺酮栓剂与芬太尼栓剂相比,具有更高的CO和SV:临床试验注册:NCT05957302:NCT05957302。URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05957302 .
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Anesthesia
Journal of Anesthesia 医学-麻醉学
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
7.10%
发文量
112
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Anesthesia is the official journal of the Japanese Society of Anesthesiologists. This journal publishes original articles, review articles, special articles, clinical reports, short communications, letters to the editor, and book and multimedia reviews. The editors welcome the submission of manuscripts devoted to anesthesia and related topics from any country of the world. Membership in the Society is not a prerequisite. The Journal of Anesthesia (JA) welcomes case reports that show unique cases in perioperative medicine, intensive care, emergency medicine, and pain management.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信