Cargando…

Ketamine versus propofol for rapid sequence induction in trauma patients: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND: Rapid Sequence Induction (RSI) is used for emergency tracheal intubation to minimise the risk of pulmonary aspiration of stomach contents. Ketamine and propofol are two commonly used induction agents for RSI in trauma patients. Yet, no consensus exists on the optimal induction agent for...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Breindahl, Niklas, Baekgaard, Josefine, Christensen, Rasmus Ejlersgaard, Jensen, Alice Herrlin, Creutzburg, Andreas, Steinmetz, Jacob, Rasmussen, Lars S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8442378/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34526085
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-021-00948-5
_version_ 1783752996698456064
author Breindahl, Niklas
Baekgaard, Josefine
Christensen, Rasmus Ejlersgaard
Jensen, Alice Herrlin
Creutzburg, Andreas
Steinmetz, Jacob
Rasmussen, Lars S.
author_facet Breindahl, Niklas
Baekgaard, Josefine
Christensen, Rasmus Ejlersgaard
Jensen, Alice Herrlin
Creutzburg, Andreas
Steinmetz, Jacob
Rasmussen, Lars S.
author_sort Breindahl, Niklas
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Rapid Sequence Induction (RSI) is used for emergency tracheal intubation to minimise the risk of pulmonary aspiration of stomach contents. Ketamine and propofol are two commonly used induction agents for RSI in trauma patients. Yet, no consensus exists on the optimal induction agent for RSI in the trauma population. The aim of this study was to compare 30-day mortality in trauma patients after emergency intubation prehospitally or within 30 min after arrival in the trauma centre using either ketamine or propofol for RSI. METHODS: In this investigator-initiated, retrospective study we included adult trauma patients emergently intubated with ketamine or propofol registered in the local trauma registry at Rigshospitalet, a tertiary university hospital that hosts a level-1 trauma centre. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included hospital and Intensive Care Unit length of stay as well as duration of mechanical ventilation. We analysed outcomes using multivariable logistic regression models adjusting for age, sex, injury severity score, shock (systolic blood pressure < 90 mmHg) and Glasgow Coma Scale score before intubation and present results as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: From January 1st, 2015 through December 31st, 2019 we identified a total of 548 eligible patients. A total of 228 and 320 patients received ketamine and propofol, respectively. The 30-day mortality for patients receiving ketamine and propofol was 20.2% and 22.8% (P = 0.46), respectively. Adjusted OR for 30-day mortality was 0.98 [0.58–1.66], P = 0.93. We found no significant association between type of induction agent and hospital length of stay, Intensive Care Unit length of stay or duration of mechanical ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, trauma patients intubated with ketamine did not have a lower 30-day mortality as compared with propofol.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8442378
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84423782021-09-15 Ketamine versus propofol for rapid sequence induction in trauma patients: a retrospective study Breindahl, Niklas Baekgaard, Josefine Christensen, Rasmus Ejlersgaard Jensen, Alice Herrlin Creutzburg, Andreas Steinmetz, Jacob Rasmussen, Lars S. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med Original Research BACKGROUND: Rapid Sequence Induction (RSI) is used for emergency tracheal intubation to minimise the risk of pulmonary aspiration of stomach contents. Ketamine and propofol are two commonly used induction agents for RSI in trauma patients. Yet, no consensus exists on the optimal induction agent for RSI in the trauma population. The aim of this study was to compare 30-day mortality in trauma patients after emergency intubation prehospitally or within 30 min after arrival in the trauma centre using either ketamine or propofol for RSI. METHODS: In this investigator-initiated, retrospective study we included adult trauma patients emergently intubated with ketamine or propofol registered in the local trauma registry at Rigshospitalet, a tertiary university hospital that hosts a level-1 trauma centre. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included hospital and Intensive Care Unit length of stay as well as duration of mechanical ventilation. We analysed outcomes using multivariable logistic regression models adjusting for age, sex, injury severity score, shock (systolic blood pressure < 90 mmHg) and Glasgow Coma Scale score before intubation and present results as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: From January 1st, 2015 through December 31st, 2019 we identified a total of 548 eligible patients. A total of 228 and 320 patients received ketamine and propofol, respectively. The 30-day mortality for patients receiving ketamine and propofol was 20.2% and 22.8% (P = 0.46), respectively. Adjusted OR for 30-day mortality was 0.98 [0.58–1.66], P = 0.93. We found no significant association between type of induction agent and hospital length of stay, Intensive Care Unit length of stay or duration of mechanical ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, trauma patients intubated with ketamine did not have a lower 30-day mortality as compared with propofol. BioMed Central 2021-09-15 /pmc/articles/PMC8442378/ /pubmed/34526085 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-021-00948-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Original Research
Breindahl, Niklas
Baekgaard, Josefine
Christensen, Rasmus Ejlersgaard
Jensen, Alice Herrlin
Creutzburg, Andreas
Steinmetz, Jacob
Rasmussen, Lars S.
Ketamine versus propofol for rapid sequence induction in trauma patients: a retrospective study
title Ketamine versus propofol for rapid sequence induction in trauma patients: a retrospective study
title_full Ketamine versus propofol for rapid sequence induction in trauma patients: a retrospective study
title_fullStr Ketamine versus propofol for rapid sequence induction in trauma patients: a retrospective study
title_full_unstemmed Ketamine versus propofol for rapid sequence induction in trauma patients: a retrospective study
title_short Ketamine versus propofol for rapid sequence induction in trauma patients: a retrospective study
title_sort ketamine versus propofol for rapid sequence induction in trauma patients: a retrospective study
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8442378/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34526085
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-021-00948-5
work_keys_str_mv AT breindahlniklas ketamineversuspropofolforrapidsequenceinductionintraumapatientsaretrospectivestudy
AT baekgaardjosefine ketamineversuspropofolforrapidsequenceinductionintraumapatientsaretrospectivestudy
AT christensenrasmusejlersgaard ketamineversuspropofolforrapidsequenceinductionintraumapatientsaretrospectivestudy
AT jensenaliceherrlin ketamineversuspropofolforrapidsequenceinductionintraumapatientsaretrospectivestudy
AT creutzburgandreas ketamineversuspropofolforrapidsequenceinductionintraumapatientsaretrospectivestudy
AT steinmetzjacob ketamineversuspropofolforrapidsequenceinductionintraumapatientsaretrospectivestudy
AT rasmussenlarss ketamineversuspropofolforrapidsequenceinductionintraumapatientsaretrospectivestudy