Is propofol safe for procedural sedation in children? A prospective evaluation of propofol versus ketamine in pediatric critical care

被引:92
作者
Vardi, A [1 ]
Salem, Y [1 ]
Padeh, S [1 ]
Paret, G [1 ]
Barzilay, Z [1 ]
机构
[1] Chaim Sheba Med Ctr, Dept Pediat Intens Care, IL-52621 Tel Hashomer, Israel
关键词
propofol; ketamine; anesthesia; sedation; procedures; pediatric critical care;
D O I
10.1097/00003246-200206000-00010
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Objectives. To compare propofol with ketamine sedation delivered by pediatric intensivists during painful procedures in the pediatric critical care department (PCCD). Design: Prospective 15-month study. Setting: An 18-bed multidisciplinary, university-affiliated PCCD. Interventions. All children were randomized to the propofol or ketamine protocol according to prescheduled procedure dates. Propofol was delivered by continuous infusion after a loading bolus dose and a minidose of lidocaine (PL). Ketamine was given as a bolus injection together with midazolam and fentanyl (KMF). Repeated bolus doses of both drugs were given to achieve the desired level of anesthesia. The studied variables included procedures performed, anesthetic drug doses, procedure and recovery durations, and side effect occurrence. The patient's parents, PCCD nurse and resident physician, pediatric intensivist, and the physician performing the procedure graded the adequacy of anesthesia. Measurements and Main Results. Of the 105 procedures in 98 children, PL sedation was used in 58 procedures, and KMF was used in 47. Recovery time was 23 mins for PL and 50 mins for KMF, and total PCCD monitoring was 43 mins for PL and 70 mins for KMF. Five children (10.6%) in the KMF group and in none in the PL group experienced discomfort during emergence from sedation. Transient decreases in blood pressure, partial airway obstruction, and apnea were more frequent in the PL than in the KMF sedation. All procedures were successfully completed, and no child recalled undergoing the procedure. The overall sedation adequacy score was 97% for PL and 92% for KMF (p <.05). Conclusions: Both PL and KMF anesthesia are effective in optimizing comfort in children undergoing painful procedures. PL scored better by all evaluators, recovery from PL anesthesia after procedural sedation was more rapid, total PCCD stay was shorter with PL, and emergence from PL was smoother than with KMF. Because transient respiratory depression and hypotension are associated with PL, it is considered safe only in a monitored environment.
引用
收藏
页码:1231 / 1236
页数:6
相关论文
共 19 条
[1]   Comparative study of propofol versus midazolam in the sedation of critically ill patients: Results of a prospective, randomized, multicenter trial [J].
Chamorro, C ;
deLatorre, FJ ;
Montero, A ;
SanchezIzquierdo, JA ;
Jareno, A ;
Moreno, JA ;
Gonzalez, E ;
Barrios, M ;
Carpintero, JL ;
MartinSantos, F ;
Otero, B ;
Ginestal, R .
CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, 1996, 24 (06) :932-939
[2]   Lactic acidemia and bradyarrhythmia in a child sedated with propofol [J].
Cray, SH ;
Robinson, BH ;
Cox, PN .
CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, 1998, 26 (12) :2087-2092
[3]  
Gross JB, 1996, ANESTHESIOLOGY, V84, P459
[4]  
HANSENFLASCHEN J, 1994, CRIT CARE MED, V22, P732
[5]   Propofol anesthesia for invasive procedures in ambulatory and hospitalized children: Experience in the pediatric intensive care unit [J].
Hertzog, JH ;
Campbell, JK ;
Dalton, HJ ;
Hauser, GJ .
PEDIATRICS, 1999, 103 (03) :E30
[6]   Propofol anesthesia for elective cardioversion of pediatric intensive care unit patients with congenital heart disease [J].
Hertzog, JH ;
Campbell, JK ;
Dalton, HJ ;
Cockerham, JT ;
Hauser, GJ .
JOURNAL OF INTENSIVE CARE MEDICINE, 1997, 12 (05) :264-268
[7]  
KAUFFMAN RE, 1992, PEDIATRICS, V89, P1110
[8]   Primary care: Sedation and analgesia for procedures in children [J].
Krauss, B ;
Green, SM .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2000, 342 (13) :938-945
[9]  
LEBOVIC S, 1992, ANESTH ANALG, V74, P490
[10]   Short-term propofol infusions in children [J].
Mehta, N ;
DeMunter, C ;
Habibi, P ;
Nadel, S ;
Britto, J .
LANCET, 1999, 354 (9181) :866-867