• Record: found
  • Abstract: found
  • Article: found
Is Open Access

Intravenous infusion of ketamine-propofol can be an alternative to intravenous infusion of fentanyl-propofol for deep sedation and analgesia in paediatric patients undergoing emergency short surgical procedures

Read this article at

      There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.



      Paediatric patients often present with different painful conditions that require immediate surgical interventions. Despite a plethora of articles on the ketamine–propofol combination, comprehensive evidence regarding the suitable sedoanalgesia regime is lacking due to heterogeneity in study designs.


      This prospective, randomized, double-blind, active–controlled trial was conducted in 100 children, of age 3–14 years, American Society of Anesthesiologist physical status IE-IIE, posted for emergency short surgical procedures. Patients were randomly allocated to receive either 2 mL of normal saline (pre-induction) plus calculated volume of drug from the 11 mL of ketamine–propofol solution for induction (group PK, n=50) or fentanyl 1.5 μg/kg diluted to 2 mL with normal saline (pre-induction) plus calculated volume of drug from the 11 mL of propofol solution for induction (group PF, n=50). In both the groups, the initial bolus propofol 1 mg/kg i.v. (assuming the syringes contained only propofol, for simplicity) was followed by adjusted infusion to achieve a Ramsay Sedation Scale score of six. Mean arterial pressure (MAP) was the primary outcome measurement.


      Data from 48 patients in group PK and 44 patients in group PF were available for analysis. Hypotension was found in seven patients (14.6%) in group PK compared with 17 (38.6%) patients in group PF ( P=0.009). Intraoperative MAP was significantly lower in group PF than group PK when compared with baseline.


      The combination of low-dose ketamine and propofol is more effective and a safer sedoanalgesia regimen than the propofol–fentanyl combination in paediatric emergency short surgical procedures in terms of haemodynamic stability and lesser incidence of apnoea.

      Related collections

      Most cited references 20

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      The incidence and nature of adverse events during pediatric sedation/anesthesia with propofol for procedures outside the operating room: a report from the Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium.

      We used a large database of prospectively collected data on pediatric sedation/anesthesia outside the operating room provided by a wide range of pediatric specialists to delineate the nature and frequency of adverse events associated with propofol-based sedation/anesthesia care. Data were collected by the Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium, a collaborative group of institutions dedicated to improving sedation/anesthesia care for children internationally. Members prospectively enrolled consecutive patients receiving sedation or sedation/anesthesia for procedures. The primary inclusion criterion was the need for some form of sedation/anesthesia to perform a diagnostic or therapeutic procedure outside the operating room. There were no exclusion criteria. Data on demographics, primary illness, coexisting illness, procedure performed, medications used, procedure and recovery times, medication doses outcomes of anesthesia, airway interventions and adverse events were collected and reported using web-based data collection tool. For this study, we evaluated all instances where propofol was used as the primary drug in the sedation/anesthesia technique. Thirty-seven locations submitted data on 49,836 propofol sedation/anesthesia encounters during the study period from July 1, 2004 until September 1, 2007. There were no deaths. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation was required twice. Aspiration during sedation/anesthesia occurred four times. Less serious events were more common with O(2) desaturation below 90% for more than 30 s, occurring 154 times per 10,000 sedation/anesthesia administrations. Central apnea or airway obstruction occurred 575 times per 10,000 sedation/anesthesia administrations. Stridor, laryngospasm, excessive secretions, and vomiting had frequencies of 50, 96, 341, and 49 per 10,000 encounters, respectively. Unexpected admissions (increases in levels of care required) occurred at a rate of 7.1 per 10,000 encounters. In an unadjusted analysis, the rate of pulmonary adverse events was not different for anesthesiologists versus other providers. We report the largest series of pediatric propofol sedation/anesthesia for procedures outside the operating room. The data indicate that propofol sedation/anesthesia is unlikely to yield serious adverse outcomes in a collection of institutions with highly motivated and organized sedation/anesthesia services. However, the safety of this practice is dependent on a system's ability to manage less serious events. We propose that our data suggest variables for training and credentialing providers of propofol sedation/anesthesia and the system characteristics that promote safe use of this drug.
        • Record: found
        • Abstract: found
        • Article: not found

        Procedural sedation and analgesia in children.

        Procedural sedation and analgesia for children--the use of sedative, analgesic, or dissociative drugs to relieve anxiety and pain associated with diagnostic and therapeutic procedures--is now widely practised by a diverse group of specialists outside the operating theatre. We review the principles underlying safe and effective procedural sedation and analgesia and the spectrum of procedures for which it is currently done. We discuss the decision-making process used to determine appropriate drug selection, dosing, and sedation endpoint. We detail the pharmacopoeia for procedural sedation and analgesia, reviewing the pharmacology and adverse effects of these drugs. International differences in practice are described along with current areas of controversy and future directions.
          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The use of a ketamine-propofol combination during monitored anesthesia care.

          Supplemental analgesics are commonly used to enhance analgesia and improve patient comfort during procedures performed under local anesthesia and sedation. Because the use of ketamine as an analgesic adjunct to propofol sedation has not been well established, we evaluated its impact on analgesia, sedation, and recovery after ambulatory surgery. One hundred female outpatients undergoing breast biopsy procedures under local anesthesia participated in this randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study. After premedication with midazolam, 2 mg IV, patients received an infusion of a solution containing propofol (9.4 mg/mL) in combination with either placebo (saline) (Group 1) or ketamine, 0.94 mg/mL (Group 2), 1.88 mg/mL (Group 3), or 2.83 mg/mL (Group 4). The sedative infusion rate was varied to maintain a deep level of sedation (Observer Assessment of Alertness/Sedation score 4) and normal respiratory and hemodynamic functions. Sufentanil, 2.5 microg IV, "rescue" boluses were used as needed to treat patients' responses (if any) to local anesthetic infiltration or surgical stimulation. Ketamine produced a dose-dependent reduction in the "rescue" opioid requirements. However, there was an increase in postoperative nausea and vomiting, psychomimetic side effects, and delay in discharge times with the largest ketamine dosage (Group 4). The adjunctive use of ketamine during propofol sedation provides significant analgesia and minimizes the need for supplemental opioids. The combination of propofol (9.4 mg/mL)/ketamine (0.94-1.88 mg/mL) provides effective sedation/analgesia during monitored anesthesia care. Ketamine, when used in subhypnotic dosages, may be an useful adjuvant to propofol sedation.

            Author and article information

            Department of Anaesthesiology, North Bengal Medical College, P.O. Sushrutanagar, Darjeeling, West Bengal, India
            Author notes
            Address for correspondence: Dr. Mohan C Mandal, Department of Anaesthesiology, North Bengal Medical College, P.O. Sushrutanagar, Darjeeling - 734 012, West Bengal, India. E-mail: drmcmandal@
            Indian J Anaesth
            Indian J Anaesth
            Indian Journal of Anaesthesia
            Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd (India )
            Mar-Apr 2012
            : 56
            : 2
            : 145-150
            Copyright: © Indian Journal of Anaesthesia

            This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

            Clinical Investigation


            Comment on this article