Cargando…

Comparison of Bolus Dosing of Methohexital and Propofol in Elective Direct Current Cardioversion

BACKGROUND: Methohexital and propofol can both be used as sedation for direct current cardioversion (DCCV). However, there are limited data comparing these medications in this setting. We hypothesized that patients receiving methohexital for elective DCCV would be sedated more quickly, recover from...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Beaty, Elijah H., Fernando, Rohesh J., Jacobs, Marie L., Winter, Gillian G., Bulla, Catalina, Singleton, Matthew J., Patel, Neel J., Bradford, Natalie S., Bhave, Prashant D., Royster, Roger L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9673741/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36129031
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.122.026198
_version_ 1784833011387203584
author Beaty, Elijah H.
Fernando, Rohesh J.
Jacobs, Marie L.
Winter, Gillian G.
Bulla, Catalina
Singleton, Matthew J.
Patel, Neel J.
Bradford, Natalie S.
Bhave, Prashant D.
Royster, Roger L.
author_facet Beaty, Elijah H.
Fernando, Rohesh J.
Jacobs, Marie L.
Winter, Gillian G.
Bulla, Catalina
Singleton, Matthew J.
Patel, Neel J.
Bradford, Natalie S.
Bhave, Prashant D.
Royster, Roger L.
author_sort Beaty, Elijah H.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Methohexital and propofol can both be used as sedation for direct current cardioversion (DCCV). However, there are limited data comparing these medications in this setting. We hypothesized that patients receiving methohexital for elective DCCV would be sedated more quickly, recover from sedation faster, and experience less adverse effects. METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a prospective, blinded randomized controlled trial conducted at a single academic medical center. Eligible participants were randomly assigned to receive either methohexital (0.5 mg/kg) or propofol (0.8 mg/kg) as a bolus for elective DCCV. The times from bolus of the medication to achieving a Ramsay Sedation Scale score of 5 to 6, first shock, eyes opening on command, and when the patient could state their age and name were obtained. The need for additional medication dosing, airway intervention, vital signs, and medication side effects were also recorded. Seventy patients who were randomized to receive methohexital (n=37) or propofol (n=33) were included for analysis. The average doses of methohexital and propofol were 0.51 mg/kg and 0.84 mg/kg, respectively. There were no significant differences between methohexital and propofol in the time from end of injection to loss of conscious (1.4±1.8 versus 1.1±0.5 minutes; P=0.33) or the time to first shock (1.7±1.9 versus 1.4±0.5 minutes; P=0.31). Time intervals were significantly lower for methohexital compared with propofol in the time to eyes opening on command (5.1±2.5 versus 7.8±3.7 minutes; P=0.0005) as well as at the time to the ability to answer simple questions of age and name (6.0±2.6 versus 8.6±4.0 minutes; P=0.001). The methohexital group experienced less hypotension (8.1% versus 42.4%; P<0.001) and less hypoxemia (0.0% versus 15.2%; P=0.005), had lower need for jaw thrust/chin lift (16.2% versus 42.4%; P=0.015), and had less pain on injection compared with propofol using the visual analog scale (7.2±9.7 versus 22.4±28.1; P=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: In this model of fixed bolus dosing, methohexital was associated with faster recovery, more stable hemodynamics, and less hypoxemia after elective DCCV compared with propofol. It can be considered as a preferred agent for sedation for DCCV. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct; Unique identifier: NCT04187196.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9673741
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96737412022-11-21 Comparison of Bolus Dosing of Methohexital and Propofol in Elective Direct Current Cardioversion Beaty, Elijah H. Fernando, Rohesh J. Jacobs, Marie L. Winter, Gillian G. Bulla, Catalina Singleton, Matthew J. Patel, Neel J. Bradford, Natalie S. Bhave, Prashant D. Royster, Roger L. J Am Heart Assoc Original Research BACKGROUND: Methohexital and propofol can both be used as sedation for direct current cardioversion (DCCV). However, there are limited data comparing these medications in this setting. We hypothesized that patients receiving methohexital for elective DCCV would be sedated more quickly, recover from sedation faster, and experience less adverse effects. METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a prospective, blinded randomized controlled trial conducted at a single academic medical center. Eligible participants were randomly assigned to receive either methohexital (0.5 mg/kg) or propofol (0.8 mg/kg) as a bolus for elective DCCV. The times from bolus of the medication to achieving a Ramsay Sedation Scale score of 5 to 6, first shock, eyes opening on command, and when the patient could state their age and name were obtained. The need for additional medication dosing, airway intervention, vital signs, and medication side effects were also recorded. Seventy patients who were randomized to receive methohexital (n=37) or propofol (n=33) were included for analysis. The average doses of methohexital and propofol were 0.51 mg/kg and 0.84 mg/kg, respectively. There were no significant differences between methohexital and propofol in the time from end of injection to loss of conscious (1.4±1.8 versus 1.1±0.5 minutes; P=0.33) or the time to first shock (1.7±1.9 versus 1.4±0.5 minutes; P=0.31). Time intervals were significantly lower for methohexital compared with propofol in the time to eyes opening on command (5.1±2.5 versus 7.8±3.7 minutes; P=0.0005) as well as at the time to the ability to answer simple questions of age and name (6.0±2.6 versus 8.6±4.0 minutes; P=0.001). The methohexital group experienced less hypotension (8.1% versus 42.4%; P<0.001) and less hypoxemia (0.0% versus 15.2%; P=0.005), had lower need for jaw thrust/chin lift (16.2% versus 42.4%; P=0.015), and had less pain on injection compared with propofol using the visual analog scale (7.2±9.7 versus 22.4±28.1; P=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: In this model of fixed bolus dosing, methohexital was associated with faster recovery, more stable hemodynamics, and less hypoxemia after elective DCCV compared with propofol. It can be considered as a preferred agent for sedation for DCCV. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct; Unique identifier: NCT04187196. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-09-21 /pmc/articles/PMC9673741/ /pubmed/36129031 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.122.026198 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Original Research
Beaty, Elijah H.
Fernando, Rohesh J.
Jacobs, Marie L.
Winter, Gillian G.
Bulla, Catalina
Singleton, Matthew J.
Patel, Neel J.
Bradford, Natalie S.
Bhave, Prashant D.
Royster, Roger L.
Comparison of Bolus Dosing of Methohexital and Propofol in Elective Direct Current Cardioversion
title Comparison of Bolus Dosing of Methohexital and Propofol in Elective Direct Current Cardioversion
title_full Comparison of Bolus Dosing of Methohexital and Propofol in Elective Direct Current Cardioversion
title_fullStr Comparison of Bolus Dosing of Methohexital and Propofol in Elective Direct Current Cardioversion
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Bolus Dosing of Methohexital and Propofol in Elective Direct Current Cardioversion
title_short Comparison of Bolus Dosing of Methohexital and Propofol in Elective Direct Current Cardioversion
title_sort comparison of bolus dosing of methohexital and propofol in elective direct current cardioversion
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9673741/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36129031
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.122.026198
work_keys_str_mv AT beatyelijahh comparisonofbolusdosingofmethohexitalandpropofolinelectivedirectcurrentcardioversion
AT fernandoroheshj comparisonofbolusdosingofmethohexitalandpropofolinelectivedirectcurrentcardioversion
AT jacobsmariel comparisonofbolusdosingofmethohexitalandpropofolinelectivedirectcurrentcardioversion
AT wintergilliang comparisonofbolusdosingofmethohexitalandpropofolinelectivedirectcurrentcardioversion
AT bullacatalina comparisonofbolusdosingofmethohexitalandpropofolinelectivedirectcurrentcardioversion
AT singletonmatthewj comparisonofbolusdosingofmethohexitalandpropofolinelectivedirectcurrentcardioversion
AT patelneelj comparisonofbolusdosingofmethohexitalandpropofolinelectivedirectcurrentcardioversion
AT bradfordnatalies comparisonofbolusdosingofmethohexitalandpropofolinelectivedirectcurrentcardioversion
AT bhaveprashantd comparisonofbolusdosingofmethohexitalandpropofolinelectivedirectcurrentcardioversion
AT roysterrogerl comparisonofbolusdosingofmethohexitalandpropofolinelectivedirectcurrentcardioversion