Key result
Ketamine-Dexmedetomidine resulted in a longer mean recovery time compared to Ketamine-Propofol in children undergoing minor cardiac procedures.
Why the study?
Anesthetic management in pediatric heart disease requires safe techniques providing cardiac stability, leading researchers to evaluate ketamine-dexmedetomidine versus ketamine-propofol for sedation during minor cardiac procedures.
Does a Ketamine-Dexmedetomidine combination compared to Ketamine-Propofol improve recovery time and hemodynamic stability in pediatric patients undergoing minor cardiac procedures?
RCT (n=80)
Computer generated random allocation numbers
No
Does a Ketamine-Dexmedetomidine combination compared to Ketamine-Propofol improve recovery time and hemodynamic stability in pediatric patients undergoing minor cardiac procedures?
In pediatric patients undergoing cardiac catheterization, a ketamine-dexmedetomidine combination provides safe sedation with reduced need for additional ketamine boluses, though it results in a longer recovery time compared to ketamine-propofol.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Longer recovery with ketamine-dexmedetomidine warrants caution in pediatric cardiac sedation; leaves open optimal regimen pending higher-level trials.
Background: The management of children with heart diseases has been a major challenge for cardiac anesthetists. The anesthetic technique to be used should be easy, safer and provide cardiac stability throughout the operation. So cardiac interventionist prefer deep sedation with the patient breathing spontaneously and painlessly in the room. Propofol, Ketamine along with other combinations drugs have been used worldwide by cardiac anesthetists to achieve these goals. We carried out this study to evaluate the combination drugs for pediatric cardiac surgeries which are Ketamine – Dexmedetomidine (KD) and Ketamine – Propofol (KP). Methodology: This study was conducted in the Department of Cardiology. A total number of 80 cases were selected, 40 from each comparative groups of Ketamine – Dexmedetomidine (KD) and Ketamine – Propofol (KP). Patient data was categorized into age, sex, procedure done and recovery time, analgesic boluses required and hemodynamic parameters during the surgery. Results: Mean age in KD group was 5.24 ± 1.25 years and in KP group was 4.95 ± 1.86 years. There were 24 males (60%) and 16 females (40%) in KD group and 22 males (55%) and 18 females (45%) in KP group. Most common procedures done in both the groups was ASD for device closure done in 12 patients (30%) in KD group and 13 patients (32.5%) in KP group. There was significant difference between the mean recovery time and number of ketamine boluses consumption in both the groups. (p<0.05) Heart rate was significantly lower in KD group at 5, 10, 15 and 20 min post induction when compared to KP group. No statistically significance was found in difference between the Mean Respiratory rate and MAP. Conclusion: Our study concludes that the use of KD combination is relatively safe, practical alternative, we did not find any hemodynamic or respiratory effects during the cardiac procedures but there was some delayed recovery.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mamde et al. (2021) conducted an RCT in Minor cardiac procedures (n=80). Ketamine-Dexmedetomidine vs. Ketamine-Propofol was evaluated on Mean recovery time (minutes) (p=< 0.001). Ketamine-Dexmedetomidine resulted in a longer mean recovery time compared to Ketamine-Propofol in children undergoing minor cardiac procedures.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: