Comparison of Etomidate and Ketamine for Induction During Rapid Sequence Intubation of Adult Trauma Patients.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Induction doses of etomidate during rapid sequence intubation cause transient adrenal dysfunction, but its clinical significance on trauma patients is uncertain. Ketamine has emerged as an alternative for rapid sequence intubation induction. Among adult trauma patients intubated in the emergency department, we compare clinical outcomes among those induced with etomidate and ketamine.The study entailed a retrospective evaluation of a 4-year (January 2011 to December 2014) period spanning an institutional protocol switch from etomidate to ketamine as the standard induction agent for adult trauma patients undergoing rapid sequence intubation in the emergency department of an academic Level I trauma center. The primary outcome was hospital mortality evaluated with multivariable logistic regression, adjusted for age, vital signs, and injury severity and mechanism. Secondary outcomes included ICU-free days and ventilator-free days evaluated with multivariable ordered logistic regression using the same covariates.The analysis included 968 patients, including 526 with etomidate and 442 with ketamine. Hospital mortality was 20.4% among patients induced with ketamine compared with 17.3% among those induced with etomidate (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.41; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.92 to 2.16). Patients induced with ketamine had ICU-free days (adjusted OR 0.80; 95% CI 0.63 to 1.00) and ventilator-free days (adjusted OR 0.96; 95% CI 0.76 to 1.20) similar to those of patients induced with etomidate.In this analysis spanning an institutional protocol switch from etomidate to ketamine as the standard rapid sequence intubation induction agent for adult trauma patients, patient-centered outcomes were similar for patients who received etomidate and ketamine.
<h4>Study objective</h4>Induction doses of etomidate during rapid sequence intubation cause transient adrenal dysfunction, but its clinical significance on trauma patients is uncertain. Ketamine has emerged as an alternative for rapid sequence intubation induction. Among adult trauma patients intubated in the emergency department, we compare clinical outcomes among those induced with etomidate and ketamine.<h4>Methods</h4>The study entailed a retrospective evaluation of a 4-year (January 2011 to ...[more]
Project description:BackgroundKetamine and etomidate are commonly used as sedatives in rapid sequence intubation (RSI). However, there is no consensus on which agent should be favored when treating patients with trauma. This study aimed to compare the effects of ketamine and etomidate on first-pass success and outcomes of patients with trauma after RSI-facilitated emergency intubation.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed 944 patients who underwent endotracheal intubation in a trauma bay at a Korean level 1 trauma center between January 2019 and December 2021. Outcomes were compared between the ketamine and etomidate groups after propensity score matching to balance the overall distribution between the two groups.ResultsIn total, 620 patients were included in the analysis, of which 118 (19.9%) were administered ketamine and the remaining 502 (80.1%) were treated with etomidate. Patients in the ketamine group showed a significantly faster initial heart rate (105.0 ± 25.7 vs. 97.7 ± 23.6, p = 0.003), were more hypotensive (114.2 ± 32.8 mmHg vs. 139.3 ± 34.4 mmHg, p < 0.001), and had higher Glasgow Coma Scale (9.1 ± 4.0 vs. 8.2 ± 4.0, p = 0.031) and Injury Severity Score (32.5 ± 16.3 vs. 27.0 ± 13.3, p < 0.001) than those in the etomidate group. There were no significant differences in the first-pass success rate (90.7% vs. 90.1%, p > 0.999), final mortality (16.1% vs. 20.6, p = 0.348), length of stay in the intensive care unit (days) (8 [4, 15] (Interquartile range)), vs. 10 [4, 21], p = 0.998), ventilator days (4 [2, 10] vs. 5 [2, 13], p = 0.735), and hospital stay (days) (24.5 [10.25, 38.5] vs. 22 [8, 40], p = 0.322) in the 1:3 propensity score matching analysis.ConclusionIn this retrospective study of trauma resuscitation, those receiving intubation with ketamine had greater hemodynamic instability than those receiving etomidate. However, there was no significant difference in clinical outcomes between patients sedated with ketamine and those treated with etomidate.
Project description:The ideal induction agent for emergency airway management should be rapidly acting, permit optimum intubating conditions, and be devoid of significant side effects. This review was performed to ascertain whether etomidate should be the induction agent of choice for rapid sequence intubation (RSI) in the emergency department, specifically examining its pharmacology, haemodynamic profile, and adrenocortical effects. A search of Medline (1966-2002), Embase (1980-2002), the Cochrane controlled trials register, and CINAHL was performed. In addition, the major emergency medicine and anaesthesia journals were hand searched for relevant material. Altogether 144 papers were identified of which 16 were relevant. Most studies were observational studies or retrospective reviews with only one double blind randomised controlled trial and one un-blinded randomised controlled trial. Appraisal of the available evidence suggests that etomidate is an effective induction agent for emergency department RSI; it has a rapid onset of anaesthesia and results in haemodynamic stability, even in hypovolaemic patients or those with limited cardiac reserve. Important questions regarding the medium to long term effects on adrenocortical function (even after a single dose) remain unanswered.
Project description:BackgroundTracheal intubation is a high-risk intervention commonly performed in critically ill patients. Due to its favorable cardiovascular profile, ketamine is considered less likely to compromise clinical outcomes. This meta-analysis aimed to assess whether ketamine, compared with other agents, reduces mortality in critically ill patients undergoing intubation.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from inception until April 27, 2023, for randomized controlled trials and matched observational studies comparing ketamine with any control in critically ill patients as an induction agent. The primary outcome was mortality at the longest follow-up available, and the secondary outcomes included Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, ventilator-free days at day 28, vasopressor-free days at day 28, post-induction mean arterial pressure, and successful intubation on the first attempt. For the primary outcome, we used a Bayesian random-effects meta-analysis on the risk ratio (RR) scale with a weakly informative neutral prior corresponding to a mean estimate of no difference with 95% probability; the estimated effect size will fall between a relative risk of 0.25 and 4. The RR and 95% credible interval (CrI) were used to estimate the probability of mortality reduction (RR < 1). The secondary outcomes were assessed with a frequentist random-effects model. We registered this study in Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/2vf79/ ).ResultsWe included seven randomized trials and one propensity-matched study totaling 2978 patients. Etomidate was the comparator in all the identified studies. The probability that ketamine reduced mortality was 83.2% (376/1475 [25%] vs. 411/1503 [27%]; RR, 0.93; 95% CrI, 0.79-1.08), which was confirmed by a subgroup analysis excluding studies with a high risk of bias. No significant difference was observed in any secondary outcomes.ConclusionsAll of the included studies evaluated ketamine versus etomidate among critically ill adults requiring tracheal intubation. This meta-analysis showed a moderate probability that induction with ketamine is associated with a reduced risk of mortality.
Project description:Propofol, ketamine, and etomidate are common anesthetic agents for induction of anesthesia in the ICU. The choice between these agents is complex and may not depend solely upon severity of illness.ObjectivesTo evaluate the association between the administration of propofol, ketamine, and etomidate and ICU, hospital mortality, and length of stay.Design setting and participantsRetrospective single-center cohort study. ICUs in a tertiary medical center, between January 01, 2012, and December 31, 2017. Critically ill adult patients given a single IV anesthetic for intubation.Main outcome and measuresPrimary outcomes were ICU and hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were ICU- and hospital-free days through 28 days. An inverse probability of treatment weighed approach was used. The propensity score was estimated using a generalized logit model as a function of patient characteristics, admission source, ICU type, readmission status, length of ICU stays prior to intubation, and acute physiology score. Mortality outcomes were assessed with weighted logistic regression and -free days assessed by weighted linear regression with Bonferroni correction for pairwise comparisons.ResultsOf 2,673 patients, 36% received propofol, 30% ketamine and 34% etomidate. Overall ICU and hospital mortality were 19% and 29%, respectively. Patients given ketamine had higher odds of ICU mortality (1.45; [95% CI, 1.07-1.94]; p = 0.015) and patients given etomidate had higher odds of ICU mortality (1.87; 1.40-2.49; p < 0.001), hospital mortality (1.43; 1.09-1.86; p = 0.009), and less ICU-free days (-2.10; -3.21 to -1.00; p < 0.001) than those given propofol. Patients given ketamine and etomidate had similar odds of hospital mortality (1.06; 0.80-1.42; p = 0.761) and similar hospital-free days (0.30; -0.81 to 1.40; p = 0.600).Conclusions and relevanceCompared with ketamine and etomidate, propofol was associated with better outcome in critically ill patients undergoing anesthesia for intubation. Even after adjusting for severity of illness prior to intubation, residual confounders cannot be excluded.
Project description:Airway and breathing management play critical role in trauma resuscitation. Early identification of esophageal intubation and detection of fatal events is critical. Authors studied the utility of integration of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) during different phases of rapid sequence intubation (RSI) in trauma resuscitation.It was prospective, randomized single-centered study conducted at the Emergency Department of a level one trauma center. Patients were divided into ultrasonography (USG) and clinical examination (CE) arm. The objectives were to study the utility of POCUS in endotracheal tube placement and confirmations and identification of potentially fatal conditions as tracheal injury, midline vessels, paratracheal hematoma, vocal cord pathology, pneumothorax, and others during RSI. Patient >1 year of age were included. Time taken for procedure, number of incorrect intubations, and pathologies detected were noted. The data were collected in Microsoft Excel spread sheets and analyzed using Stata (version 11.2, Stata Corp, Texas, U. S. A) software.One hundred and six patients were recruited. The mean time for primary survey USG versus CE arm was (20 ± 10.01 vs. 18 ± 11.03) seconds. USG detected four pneumothorax, one tracheal injury, and one paratracheal hematoma. The mean procedure time USG versus CE arm was (37.3 ± 21.92 vs. 58 ± 32.04) seconds. Eight esophageal intubations were identified in USG arm by POCUS and two in CE arm by EtCO2 values.Integration of POCUS was useful in all three phases of RSI. It identified paratracheal hematoma, tracheal injury, and pneumothorax. It also identified esophageal intubation and confirmed main stem tracheal intubation in less time compared to five-point auscultation and capnography.
Project description:INTRODUCTION:The aim of this study was to measure the haemodynamic responses to a etomidate-propofol combination used for anaesthesia induction and to compare the haemodynamic responses with the separate use of each drug. METHODS:The patients were randomly divided into three groups as group P (n = 30, propofol 2.5 mg kg(-1)), group E (n = 30, etomidate 0.3 mg kg(-1)) and group PE (n = 30, propofol 1.25 mg kg(-1) + etomidate 0.15 mg kg(-1)). For each patient, the times of measurement of the heart rate (HR) and mean arterial pressure values were defined as baseline, after the induction, before the intubation, immediately after the intubation and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 10 minutes after the intubation. RESULTS:In all 3 groups, a significant decrease in MAP values were seen at T2 and T3 compared to the baseline values, and this decrease was greater in group P compared to that in group E and PE (P < 0.001, P < 0.01). A significant increase was seen in all 3 groups in the mean arterial pressure (MAP) value at T4 after the intubation. When the groups were compared with each other, this increase was greater in group E than in the other two groups (with group P, P < 0.001; with group PE, P < 0.01). CONCLUSION:Etomidate-propofol combination may be a valuable alternative when extremes of hypotensive and hypertensive responses due to propofol and etomidate are best to be avoided.
Project description:Rapid sequence induction and intubation (RSII) is a technique commonly used to resist regurgitation of gastric contents and protect the airway. A modification of this technique is implemented in certain clinical circumstances. However, there is currently no standard definition for a modified RSII. Therefore, we surveyed clinicians at academic centers across the United States to establish a working definition of a modified RSII as well as the clinical scenarios in which it is being used.A survey was created that queried the use and definition of modified RSII, and validated with test respondents. We then mailed the survey to all 131 anesthesia residency training programs across the United States. Logistic regression models were created to estimate the percentage of affirmative responses among respondents that performed modified RSII procedures and answered survey items in a consistent manner. Similar quantities were calculated by physician status (resident and attending).Four hundred ninety surveys were received from 58 institutions (44% institution response rate); 93% of respondents reported using a modified RSII, and of those 85% consistently completed the survey instrument. A majority of respondents (71%, CI: 63%-77%) reported administering oxygen before anesthesia induction, applying cricoid pressure, and attempting to ventilate the lungs via a facemask before securing the airway. Respondents noted that they would use a modified RSII procedure if the patient were either moderately or morbidly obese (each ?59%, 53%-64%), had a history but no current symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (52%, 46%-57%), had a hiatal hernia (42%, 36%-48%) or were a trauma patient who had been NPO for at least 8 h (39%, 33%-45%). Similar RSII results were obtained when repeating the analysis on the subset that did not enforce the consistency requirements.Based on our survey we have established three defining features of a modified RSII: (1) oxygen administration before induction; (2) the use of cricoid pressure; and (3) an attempt to ventilate the patient's lungs before securing the airway. Although this definition seems intuitively obvious, no previous work has tested whether it is commonly accepted.
Project description:BackgroundWe aimed to compare the hemodynamic effect of two ratios of propofol and ketamine (ketofol), namely 1:1 and 1:3 ratios, in rapid-sequence induction of anesthesia for emergency laparotomy.MethodsThis randomized controlled study included adult patients undergoing emergency laparotomy under general anesthesia. The patients were randomized to receive either ketofol ratio of 1:1 (n = 37) or ketofol ratio of 1:3 (n = 37). Hypotension (mean arterial pressure < 70 mmHg) was managed by 5-mcg norepinephrine. The primary outcome was total norepinephrine requirements during the postinduction period. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of postinduction hypotension, and the intubation condition (excellent, good, or poor).ResultsThirty-seven patients in the ketofol-1:1 and 35 patients in the ketofol 1:3 group were analyzed. The total norepinephrine requirement was less in the ketofol-1:1 group than in the ketofol-1:3 group, P-values: 0.043. The incidence of postinduction hypotension was less in the ketofol-1:1 group (4 [12%]) than in ketofol-1:3 group (12 [35%]), P-value 0.022. All the included patients had excellent intubation condition.ConclusionIn patients undergoing emergency laparotomy, the use of ketofol in 1:1 ratio for rapid-sequence induction of anesthesia was associated with less incidence of postinduction hypotension and vasopressor consumption in comparison to the 1:3 ratio with comparable intubation conditions.Clinical trial registrationNCT05166330. URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05166330 .
Project description:Laryngoscopy and intubation frequently used for airway management during general anesthesia, is frequently associated with undesirable hemodynamic disturbances.The aim of this study was to compare the effects of etomidate, combination of propofol-ketamine and thiopental-ketamine as induction agents on hemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and intubation.In a double blind, randomized clinical trial a total of 120 adult patients of both sexes, aged 18 - 45 years, scheduled for elective surgery under general anesthesia were randomly assigned into three equally sized groups. Patients in group A received etomidate (0.3 mg/kg) plus normal saline as placebo. Patients in group B and C received propofol (1.5 mg/kg) plus ketamine (0.5 mg/kg) and thiopental sodium (3 mg/kg) plus ketamine (0.5 mg/kg), respectively for anesthesia induction. Before laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation, immediately after, and also one and three minutes after the procedures, hemodynamic values (SBP, DBP, MAP and HR) were measured.A repeated measurement ANOVA showed significant changes in mean SBP and DBP between the time points (P < 0.05). In addition, the main effect of MAP and HR were statistically significant during the course of study (P < 0.05). Furthermore, after induction of anesthesia, the three study groups had significantly different SBP, DBP and MAP changes overtime (P < 0.05). However, HR changes over time were not statistically significant (P > 0.05). Combination of propofol-ketamine had superior hemodynamic stability compared to other induction agents.Combination of propofol-ketamine may be recommended as an effective and safe induction agent for attenuating hemodynamic responses to laryngoscopy and intubation with better hemodynamic stability. Although, further well-designed randomized clinical trials to confirm the safety and efficacy of this combination, especially in critically ill patients or patients with cardiovascular disease, are warranted.
