Cargando…
Propofol versus Ketofol for Sedation of Pediatric Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Pulmonary Valve Implantation: A Double-blind Randomized Study
OBJECTIVE: The study was done to compare propofol and ketofol for sedation of pediatric patients scheduled for elective pulmonary valve implantation in a catheterization laboratory. DESIGN: This was a double-blind randomized study. SETTING: This study was conducted in Prince Sultan Cardiac Centre, S...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5535572/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28701596 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/aca.ACA_24_17 |
Sumario: | OBJECTIVE: The study was done to compare propofol and ketofol for sedation of pediatric patients scheduled for elective pulmonary valve implantation in a catheterization laboratory. DESIGN: This was a double-blind randomized study. SETTING: This study was conducted in Prince Sultan Cardiac Centre, Saudi Arabia. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study included 60 pediatric patients with pulmonary regurge undergoing pulmonary valve implantation. INTERVENTION: The study included sixty patients, classified into two groups (n = 30). Group A: Propofol was administered as a bolus dose (1–2 mg/kg) and then a continuous infusion of 50–100 μg/kg/min titrated as needed. Group B: Ketofol was administered 1–2 mg/kg and then infusion of 20–60 μg/kg/min. The medication was prepared by the nursing staff and given to anesthetist blindly. MEASUREMENTS: The monitors included heart rate, mean arterial blood pressure, respiratory rate, temperature, SPO(2) and PaCO(2), Michigan Sedation Score, fentanyl dose, antiemetic medications, and Aldrete score. MAIN RESULTS: The comparison of heart rate, mean arterial pressure, respiratory rate, temperature, SPO(2) and PaCO(2), Michigan Sedation Score, and Aldrete score were insignificant (P > 0.05). The total fentanyl increased in Group A more than Group B (P = 0.045). The required antiemetic drugs increased in Group A patients more than Group B (P = 0.020). The durations of full recovery and in the postanesthesia care unit were longer in Group A than Group B (P = 0.013, P < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: The use of propofol and ketofol is safe and effective for sedation of pediatric patients undergoing pulmonary valve implantation in a catheterization laboratory. However, ketofol has many advantages more than the propofol. Ketofol has a rapid onset of sedation, a rapid recovery time, decreased incidence of nausea and vomiting and leads to rapid discharge of patients from the postanesthesia care unit. |
---|