右美托咪定联合氯胺酮与水合氯醛用于小儿手术镇静的比较:一项随机对照试验。

IF 4.2 4区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Young-Eun Jang, Eun-Young Joo, Jung-Bin Park, Sang-Hwan Ji, Eun-Hee Kim, Ji-Hyun Lee, Hee-Soo Kim, Jin-Tae Kim
{"title":"右美托咪定联合氯胺酮与水合氯醛用于小儿手术镇静的比较:一项随机对照试验。","authors":"Young-Eun Jang, Eun-Young Joo, Jung-Bin Park, Sang-Hwan Ji, Eun-Hee Kim, Ji-Hyun Lee, Hee-Soo Kim, Jin-Tae Kim","doi":"10.4097/kja.24815","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We hypothesized that intranasal combination of dexmedetomidine (2 μg/kg) and ketamine (3 mg/kg) (IN DEXKET) improves the success rate of sedation in pediatric patients compared with chloral hydrate (CH; 50 mg/kg).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective, two-center, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial involved 136 pediatric patients (aged < 7 years) requiring procedural sedation. The participants were randomized to receive CH or IN DEXKET via a mucosal atomizer device. The primary outcome was the success rate of sedation (Pediatric Sedation State Scale, scores 1-3) within 15 min. The secondary outcomes included sedation failure at 30 min and overall complications of first-attempt sedation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After excluding eight patients, 128 were included (CH = 66, IN DEXKET = 62). IN DEXKET showed a similar sedation success rate (75.8% [47/62] vs. 66.7% [44/66]; P = 0.330) but a lower complication rate (3.2% [2/62] vs. 16.7% [11/66]; P = 0.017) than CH. In the subgroup analysis for patients aged < 1 year, IN DEXKET showed a reduced complication rate than CH (2.6% [1/38] vs. 22.9% [8/35]; P = 0.012). In the subgroup analysis of children aged 1-7 years, IN DEXKET showed a higher sedation success rate within 15 min (79.2% [19/24] vs. 51.6% [16/31]; P = 0.049) and a lower sedation failure after 30 min (0% vs. 29.0% [9/31]; P = 0.003) than CH.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The intranasal combination of dexmedetomidine (2 μg/kg) and ketamine (3 mg/kg) is a safe and effective alternative to CH (50 mg/kg) for sedation in pediatric patients aged < 7 years.</p>","PeriodicalId":17855,"journal":{"name":"Korean Journal of Anesthesiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of combined intranasal dexmedetomidine and ketamine versus chloral hydrate for pediatric procedural sedation: a randomized controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"Young-Eun Jang, Eun-Young Joo, Jung-Bin Park, Sang-Hwan Ji, Eun-Hee Kim, Ji-Hyun Lee, Hee-Soo Kim, Jin-Tae Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.4097/kja.24815\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We hypothesized that intranasal combination of dexmedetomidine (2 μg/kg) and ketamine (3 mg/kg) (IN DEXKET) improves the success rate of sedation in pediatric patients compared with chloral hydrate (CH; 50 mg/kg).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective, two-center, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial involved 136 pediatric patients (aged < 7 years) requiring procedural sedation. The participants were randomized to receive CH or IN DEXKET via a mucosal atomizer device. The primary outcome was the success rate of sedation (Pediatric Sedation State Scale, scores 1-3) within 15 min. The secondary outcomes included sedation failure at 30 min and overall complications of first-attempt sedation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After excluding eight patients, 128 were included (CH = 66, IN DEXKET = 62). IN DEXKET showed a similar sedation success rate (75.8% [47/62] vs. 66.7% [44/66]; P = 0.330) but a lower complication rate (3.2% [2/62] vs. 16.7% [11/66]; P = 0.017) than CH. In the subgroup analysis for patients aged < 1 year, IN DEXKET showed a reduced complication rate than CH (2.6% [1/38] vs. 22.9% [8/35]; P = 0.012). In the subgroup analysis of children aged 1-7 years, IN DEXKET showed a higher sedation success rate within 15 min (79.2% [19/24] vs. 51.6% [16/31]; P = 0.049) and a lower sedation failure after 30 min (0% vs. 29.0% [9/31]; P = 0.003) than CH.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The intranasal combination of dexmedetomidine (2 μg/kg) and ketamine (3 mg/kg) is a safe and effective alternative to CH (50 mg/kg) for sedation in pediatric patients aged < 7 years.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17855,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Korean Journal of Anesthesiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Korean Journal of Anesthesiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4097/kja.24815\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Journal of Anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4097/kja.24815","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:我们假设鼻内联合右美托咪定(2 μg/kg)和氯胺酮(3 mg/kg) (IN DEXKET)比水合氯醛(CH;50毫克/公斤)。方法:这项前瞻性、双中心、单盲、随机对照试验纳入136例需要程序性镇静的儿科患者(年龄< 7岁)。参与者通过粘膜雾化装置随机接受CH或IN DEXKET。主要结局是15分钟内镇静的成功率(儿科镇静状态量表,评分1-3)。次要结局包括30分钟镇静失败和首次镇静的总体并发症。结果:在排除8例患者后,纳入128例(CH = 66, IN DEXKET = 62)。IN DEXKET镇静成功率相似(75.8% [47/62]vs. 66.7% [44/66];P = 0.330),但并发症发生率较低(3.2% [2/62]vs. 16.7% [11/66];P = 0.017),小于1岁患者的亚组分析中,In DEXKET的并发症发生率低于CH (2.6% [1/38] vs. 22.9% [8/35];P = 0.012)。在1-7岁儿童亚组分析中,In DEXKET在15 min内镇静成功率更高(79.2% [19/24]vs. 51.6% [16/31];P = 0.049), 30 min后镇静失败率较低(0% vs. 29.0%) [9/31];结论:右美托咪定(2 μg/kg)与氯胺酮(3 mg/kg)鼻内联合应用可替代CH (50 mg/kg)用于7岁以下儿童镇静。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of combined intranasal dexmedetomidine and ketamine versus chloral hydrate for pediatric procedural sedation: a randomized controlled trial.

Background: We hypothesized that intranasal combination of dexmedetomidine (2 μg/kg) and ketamine (3 mg/kg) (IN DEXKET) improves the success rate of sedation in pediatric patients compared with chloral hydrate (CH; 50 mg/kg).

Methods: This prospective, two-center, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial involved 136 pediatric patients (aged < 7 years) requiring procedural sedation. The participants were randomized to receive CH or IN DEXKET via a mucosal atomizer device. The primary outcome was the success rate of sedation (Pediatric Sedation State Scale, scores 1-3) within 15 min. The secondary outcomes included sedation failure at 30 min and overall complications of first-attempt sedation.

Results: After excluding eight patients, 128 were included (CH = 66, IN DEXKET = 62). IN DEXKET showed a similar sedation success rate (75.8% [47/62] vs. 66.7% [44/66]; P = 0.330) but a lower complication rate (3.2% [2/62] vs. 16.7% [11/66]; P = 0.017) than CH. In the subgroup analysis for patients aged < 1 year, IN DEXKET showed a reduced complication rate than CH (2.6% [1/38] vs. 22.9% [8/35]; P = 0.012). In the subgroup analysis of children aged 1-7 years, IN DEXKET showed a higher sedation success rate within 15 min (79.2% [19/24] vs. 51.6% [16/31]; P = 0.049) and a lower sedation failure after 30 min (0% vs. 29.0% [9/31]; P = 0.003) than CH.

Conclusions: The intranasal combination of dexmedetomidine (2 μg/kg) and ketamine (3 mg/kg) is a safe and effective alternative to CH (50 mg/kg) for sedation in pediatric patients aged < 7 years.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
6.90%
发文量
84
审稿时长
16 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