Ketamine/Midazolam Versus Etomidate/Fentanyl Procedural Sedation for Pediatric Orthopedic Reductions

被引:29
|
作者
Lee-Jayaram, Jannet J. [1 ]
Green, Adam [2 ]
Siembieda, Joshua [2 ]
Gracely, Edward J. [2 ]
Mull, Colette C. [3 ]
Quintana, Eileen [3 ]
Adirim, Terry [4 ]
机构
[1] Kapiolani Med Ctr Women & Children, Dept Pediat, Honolulu, HI 96826 USA
[2] Drexel Univ, Coll Med, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
[3] Rady Childrens Hosp San Diego, San Diego, CA USA
[4] Off Hlth Affairs, Dept Homeland Secur, Washington, DC USA
关键词
procedural sedation; etomidate; ketamine; RAPID-SEQUENCE INTUBATION; KETAMINE SEDATION; DOUBLE-BLIND; EMERGENCY; CHILDREN; MIDAZOLAM; INDUCTION;
D O I
10.1097/PEC.0b013e3181e057cd
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Background: Orthopedic reductions are commonly performed procedures requiring sedation in the pediatric emergency department (PED). Ketamine is a widely used agent for pediatric procedural sedation, but its use may present difficulties in select populations, such as those with psychiatric diagnoses. In such a case, alternative agents that are safe and effective are needed. Etomidate is a commonly used induction agent for rapid-sequence intubation in the PED. Several retrospective and few prospective studies support etomidate's safety and efficacy in pediatric procedural sedation. Objective: The objective was to compare etomidate/fentanyl (E/F) with ketamine/midazolam (K/M) for procedural sedation during orthopedic reductions in the PED. Methods: Prospective, partially blinded, randomized controlled study comparing intravenously administered K/M with intravenously administered E/F. A convenience sample of patients, aged 5 to 18 years, presenting to an urban PED with fracture requiring reduction was enrolled. Outcome measures included guardian and staff completion of visual analog scale and Likert scales for observed pain and satisfaction, blinded OSBD-r (Observational Scale of Behavioral Distress-Revised) scoring of digital recordings of reductions, and sedation and recovery times. Descriptive tracking of adverse effects, adverse events, and interventions were recorded at the sedation. Results: Twenty-three patients were enrolled, 11 in the K/M group and 12 in the E/F group. The K/M group had significantly lower mean OSBD-r scores compared with the E/F group (0.08 vs 0.89, P = 0.001). Parents rated lower visual analog scale scores with K/M than with E/F (13.7 vs 50.5, P = 0.003) and favored K/M on a 5-point satisfaction scale (P = 0.004). The E/F group had significantly shorter total sedation times (49.6 vs 77.6 minutes, P = 0.003) and recovery times (24.7 vs 61.4 minutes, P = 0.000). There were no significant differences with respect to procedural amnesia and orthopedic practitioner satisfaction. Adverse effects noted in the K/M group included dysphoric emergence reaction and vomiting. Vomiting, injection-site pain, myoclonus, airway readjustment, and supplemental oxygen use were observed in the E/F group. Conclusions: This is a small study that strongly suggests that, for pediatric orthopedic reductions, K/M is more effective at reducing observed distress than E/F, although both provide equal procedural amnesia. With its significantly shorter sedation and recovery times, E/F may be more applicable for procedural sedation for shorter, simpler procedures in the PED.
引用
收藏
页码:408 / 412
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparison of propofol/fentanyl versus ketamine/midazolam for brief orthopedic procedural sedation in a pediatric emergency department
    Godambe, SA
    Elliot, V
    Matheny, D
    Pershad, J
    [J]. PEDIATRICS, 2003, 112 (01) : 116 - 123
  • [2] Etomidate Versus Ketamine Effective Use in Emergency Procedural Sedation for Pediatric Orthopedic Injuries
    Disel, Nezihat Rana
    Yilmaz, Hayri Levent
    Sertdemir, Yasar
    Yesilagac, Hasan
    Avci, Akkan
    [J]. PEDIATRIC EMERGENCY CARE, 2016, 32 (12) : 830 - 834
  • [3] Triple Agent Sedation: Midazolam, Fentanyl, and Ketamine in Combination for Pediatric Interventional Procedural Sedation
    Temple, M.
    Murray, D.
    Kemp, S.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2007, 188 (05)
  • [4] Propofol versus midazolam/ketamine for procedural sedation in pediatric oncology
    Gottschling, S
    Meyer, S
    Krenn, T
    Reinhard, H
    Lothschuetz, D
    Nunold, H
    Graf, N
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC HEMATOLOGY ONCOLOGY, 2005, 27 (09) : 471 - 476
  • [5] Etomidate versus midazolam for procedural sedation in pediatric outpatients: A randomized controlled trial
    Di Liddo, Lydia
    D'Angelo, Antonio
    Nguyen, Bao
    Bailey, Benoit
    Amre, Devendra
    Stanciu, Constantin
    [J]. ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2006, 48 (04) : 433 - 440
  • [6] Comparison of fentanyl/midazolam with ketamine/midazolam for pediatric orthopedic emergencies
    Kennedy, RM
    Porter, FL
    Miller, JP
    Jaffe, DM
    [J]. PEDIATRICS, 1998, 102 (04) : 956 - 963
  • [7] Procedural sedation for insertion of central venous catheters in children: comparison of midazolam/fentanyl with midazolam/ketamine
    Lucas da Silva, Paulo Sergio
    Oliveira Iglesias, Simone Brasil
    Aguiar, Vania Euzebio
    de Carvalho, Werther Brunow
    [J]. PEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA, 2007, 17 (04) : 358 - 363
  • [8] Etomidate and midazolam for procedural sedation: Prospective trial
    Hunt, GS
    Spencer, MT
    [J]. ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2003, 42 (04) : S40 - S40
  • [9] The efficacy and safety of midazolam with fentanyl versus midazolam with ketamine for bedside invasive procedural sedation in pediatric oncology patients: A randomized, double-blinded, crossover trial
    Monsereenusorn, Chalinee
    Malaithong, Wanwipha
    Lertvivatpong, Nawachai
    Photia, Apichat
    Rujkijyanont, Piya
    Traivaree, Chanchai
    [J]. PEDIATRIC HEMATOLOGY AND ONCOLOGY, 2022, 39 (08) : 681 - 696
  • [10] Procedural Sedation and Analgesia Outcomes in Children After Discharge From the Emergency Department: Ketamine Versus Fentanyl/Midazolam
    McQueen, Alisa
    Wright, Robert O.
    Kido, Maya M.
    Kaye, Erica
    Krauss, Baruch
    [J]. ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2009, 54 (02) : 191 - 197