2017•Annals of Cardiac AnaesthesiaOpen access

Comparison of dexmedetomidine and ketamine versus propofol and ketamine for procedural sedation in children undergoing minor cardiac procedures in cardiac catheterization laboratory

Vidya Sagar Joshi, SandeepS Kollu, RamMurti Sharma

Open full text 40 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The ideal anaesthetic technique for management of paediatric patients scheduled to undergo cardiac catheterisation is still not standardised. AIM: To compare the effects of ketamine-propofol and ketamine-dexmedetomidine combinations on hemodynamic parameters and recovery time in paediatric patients undergoing minor procedures and cardiac catheterisation under sedation for various congenital heart diseases. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 60 children of either sex undergoing cardiac catheterisation were randomly assigned into two groups Dexmedetomidine-ketamine group (DK) and Propofol-ketamine (PK) of 30 patients each. All patients were premedicated with glycopyrrolate and midazolam (0.05mg/kg) intravenously 5-10 min before anaesthetic induction. Group 'DK'received dexmedetomidineiv infusion 1 μg/kg over 10 min + ketamine1mg/kg bolus, followed by iv infusion of dexmedetomidine 0.5μg/kg/hr and of ketamine1 mg/kg/hr. Group 'PK' received propofol 1mg/kg and ketamine 1mg/kg/hr for induction followed by iv infusion of propofol 100 μg/kg/hr and ketamine 1 mg/kg/hr for maintenance. Haemodynamic parameters and recovery time was recorded postoperatively. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Independent sample t test was used to compare the statistical significance of continuous variables of both the groups.Chi square test was used for numerical data like gender.Fischer exact test was applied for non parametric data like ketamine consumption. RESULTS: We observed that heart rate in dexmedetomidine (DK) group was significantly lower during the initial 25 mins after induction compared to the propofol (PK) group. Recovery was prolonged in the DK group compared to the PK group (40.88 vs. 22.28 min). Even ketamine boluses consumption was higher in DK group. CONCLUSION: Use of dexmedetomidine-ketamine combination is a safe alternative, without any hemodynamic orrespiratory effects during the cardiac catheterization procedure but with some delayed recovery.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

BACKGROUND: The ideal anaesthetic technique for management of paediatric patients scheduled to undergo cardiac catheterisation is still not standardised. AIM: To compare the effects of ketamine-propofol and ketamine-dexmedetomidine combinations on hemodynamic parameters and recovery time in paediatric patients undergoing minor procedures and cardiac catheterisation under sedation for various congenital heart diseases. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 60 children of either sex undergoing cardiac catheterisation were randomly assigned into two groups Dexmedetomidine-ketamine group (DK) and Propofol-ketamine (PK) of 30 patients each. All patients were premedicated with glycopyrrolate and midazolam (0.05mg/kg) intravenously 5-10 min before anaesthetic induction. Group 'DK'received dexmedetomidineiv infusion 1 μg/kg over 10 min + ketamine1mg/kg bolus, followed by iv infusion of dexmedetomidine 0.5μg/kg/hr and of ketamine1 mg/kg/hr. Group 'PK' received propofol 1mg/kg and ketamine 1mg/kg/hr for induction followed by iv infusion of propofol 100 μg/kg/hr and ketamine 1 mg/kg/hr for maintenance. Haemodynamic parameters and recovery time was recorded postoperatively. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Independent sample t test was used to compare the statistical significance of continuous variables of both the groups.Chi square test was used for numerical data like gender.Fischer exact test was applied for non parametric data like ketamine consumption. RESULTS: We observed that heart rate in dexmedetomidine (DK) group was significantly lower during the initial 25 mins after induction compared to the propofol (PK) group. Recovery was prolonged in the DK group compared to the PK group (40.88 vs. 22.28 min). Even ketamine boluses consumption was higher in DK group. CONCLUSION: Use of dexmedetomidine-ketamine combination is a safe alternative, without any hemodynamic orrespiratory effects during the cardiac catheterization procedure but with some delayed recovery.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 40 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

BACKGROUND: The ideal anaesthetic technique for management of paediatric patients scheduled to undergo cardiac catheterisation is still not standardised. AIM: To compare the effects of ketamine-propofol and ketamine-dexmedetomidine combinations on hemodynamic parameters and recovery time in paediatric patients undergoing minor procedures and cardiac catheterisation under sedation for various congenital heart diseases. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 60 children of either sex undergoing cardiac catheterisation were randomly assigned into two groups Dexmedetomidine-ketamine group (DK) and Propofol-ketamine (PK) of 30 patients each. All patients were premedicated with glycopyrrolate and midazolam (0.05mg/kg) intravenously 5-10 min before anaesthetic induction. Group 'DK'received dexmedetomidineiv infusion 1 μg/kg over 10 min + ketamine1mg/kg bolus, followed by iv infusion of dexmedetomidine 0.5μg/kg/hr and of ketamine1 mg/kg/hr. Group 'PK' received propofol 1mg/kg and ketamine 1mg/kg/hr for induction followed by iv infusion of propofol 100 μg/kg/hr and ketamine 1 mg/kg/hr for maintenance. Haemodynamic parameters and recovery time was recorded postoperatively. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Independent sample t test was used to compare the statistical significance of continuous variables of both the groups.Chi square test was used for numerical data like gender.Fischer exact test was applied for non parametric data like ketamine consumption. RESULTS: We observed that heart rate in dexmedetomidine (DK) group was significantly lower during the initial 25 mins after induction compared to the propofol (PK) group. Recovery was prolonged in the DK group compared to the PK group (40.88 vs. 22.28 min). Even ketamine boluses consumption was higher in DK group. CONCLUSION: Use of dexmedetomidine-ketamine combination is a safe alternative, without any hemodynamic orrespiratory effects during the cardiac catheterization procedure but with some delayed recovery.

Key concepts: Medicine, Dexmedetomidine, Ketamine, Sedation, Propofol, Cardiac catheterization, Anesthesia, Cardiac surgery

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparison of dexmedetomidine and ketamine versus propofol and ketamine for procedural sedation in children undergoing minor cardiac procedures in cardiac catheterization laboratory — Research Paper | ScholarLens