Comparison of ketofol (ketamine and propofol) and etomidate in electro convulsive therapy: A double-blinded randomized controlled trial

IF 0.2 Q4 ANESTHESIOLOGY
C. Joshi, Thapisrija, Basavaraja Ayyanagouda, Narayan R. Mutalik, S. Hulakund, Harini Jalapati
{"title":"Comparison of ketofol (ketamine and propofol) and etomidate in electro convulsive therapy: A double-blinded randomized controlled trial","authors":"C. Joshi, Thapisrija, Basavaraja Ayyanagouda, Narayan R. Mutalik, S. Hulakund, Harini Jalapati","doi":"10.4103/TheIAForum.TheIAForum_98_20","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background and Aims: Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is the most effective treatment modality for severe and medication-resistant psychiatric disorders. ECT provokes generalized tonic-clonic seizures. Induction of optimal seizures (duration of motor seizures >15 s) is considered as an important goal during the ECT procedure. We compared ketofol and etomidate as induction agents in ECT with respect to the seizure duration and seizure threshold as there is less information available in the literature. Methods: One hundred and twenty patients posted for ECT were randomized into two groups. Group A received ketofol 1:1 (ketamine 0.5 mg/kg + propofol 0.5 mg/kg), while as Group B received etomidate 0.2 mg/kg. After administration of the muscle relaxant (succinylcholine 0.5 mg/kg) ECT was delivered. The primary outcome was seizure duration, and secondary outcomes such as seizure threshold, hemodynamic parameters, recovery profile, and any complications were noted. Motor seizure duration was recorded as the time interval between starting of the seizure episode until the cessation of tonic-clonic motor activity in the isolated upper limb. Data were entered in MS-Excel and analyzed in SPSS V22. Descriptive statistics were represented with percentages, and parametric data were represented with mean with standard deviation. The statistical analysis was carried out using the Chi-square test, independent t-test. A Probability (P) value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: There was a statistically significant difference in seizure duration between two groups with Group A having less meantime 38 ± 14.9 s compared to Group B 45.3 ± 17.5 s with P = 0.014. Seizure threshold, hemodynamic parameters, recovery profile, and complications except myoclonus were not statistically significant between the two groups. Conclusion: Etomidate has the definite advantage of longer seizure duration compared to ketofol, and hence, etomidate is a better induction agent in patients with psychiatric disorders undergoing ECT.","PeriodicalId":42359,"journal":{"name":"Indian Anaesthetists Forum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Anaesthetists Forum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/TheIAForum.TheIAForum_98_20","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background and Aims: Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is the most effective treatment modality for severe and medication-resistant psychiatric disorders. ECT provokes generalized tonic-clonic seizures. Induction of optimal seizures (duration of motor seizures >15 s) is considered as an important goal during the ECT procedure. We compared ketofol and etomidate as induction agents in ECT with respect to the seizure duration and seizure threshold as there is less information available in the literature. Methods: One hundred and twenty patients posted for ECT were randomized into two groups. Group A received ketofol 1:1 (ketamine 0.5 mg/kg + propofol 0.5 mg/kg), while as Group B received etomidate 0.2 mg/kg. After administration of the muscle relaxant (succinylcholine 0.5 mg/kg) ECT was delivered. The primary outcome was seizure duration, and secondary outcomes such as seizure threshold, hemodynamic parameters, recovery profile, and any complications were noted. Motor seizure duration was recorded as the time interval between starting of the seizure episode until the cessation of tonic-clonic motor activity in the isolated upper limb. Data were entered in MS-Excel and analyzed in SPSS V22. Descriptive statistics were represented with percentages, and parametric data were represented with mean with standard deviation. The statistical analysis was carried out using the Chi-square test, independent t-test. A Probability (P) value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: There was a statistically significant difference in seizure duration between two groups with Group A having less meantime 38 ± 14.9 s compared to Group B 45.3 ± 17.5 s with P = 0.014. Seizure threshold, hemodynamic parameters, recovery profile, and complications except myoclonus were not statistically significant between the two groups. Conclusion: Etomidate has the definite advantage of longer seizure duration compared to ketofol, and hence, etomidate is a better induction agent in patients with psychiatric disorders undergoing ECT.
酮康唑(氯胺酮和丙泊酚)与依托咪酯在电痉挛治疗中的比较:一项双盲随机对照试验
背景与目的:电休克治疗(ECT)是治疗严重和耐药精神疾病最有效的方法。电痉挛引起全身性强直阵挛性发作。诱发最佳癫痫发作(运动癫痫发作持续时间15s)被认为是电痉挛治疗过程中的一个重要目标。由于文献资料较少,我们比较了酮酚和依托咪酯作为电痉挛诱导剂在癫痫发作持续时间和癫痫发作阈值方面的影响。方法:120例接受电痉挛治疗的患者随机分为两组。A组给予酮酚1:1(氯胺酮0.5 mg/kg +异丙酚0.5 mg/kg), B组给予依托咪酯0.2 mg/kg。肌肉松弛剂(琥珀胆碱0.5 mg/kg)给予电痉挛治疗。主要结果是癫痫发作持续时间,次要结果如癫痫发作阈值、血流动力学参数、恢复情况和任何并发症被记录。运动癫痫发作持续时间记录为癫痫发作开始至孤立上肢强直-阵挛性运动活动停止的时间间隔。数据在MS-Excel中录入,在SPSS V22中分析。描述性统计数据以百分比表示,参数数据以平均值和标准差表示。统计学分析采用卡方检验、独立t检验。概率(P)值<0.05认为有统计学意义。结果:两组患者癫痫发作时间比较,差异有统计学意义,a组癫痫发作时间少于B组(45.3±17.5)s,差异有统计学意义(P = 0.014)。癫痫阈值、血流动力学参数、恢复情况和除肌阵挛外的并发症在两组之间无统计学意义。结论:与酮酚相比,依托咪酯具有更长的癫痫发作持续时间的明显优势,因此,依托咪酯是一种更好的精神障碍患者ECT诱导药物。
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
Indian Anaesthetists Forum
Indian Anaesthetists Forum ANESTHESIOLOGY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
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