Scholarlink

Purpose <p>The optimal hypnotic agent for rapid sequence intubation (RSI) in critically ill patients remains uncertain. We evaluated whether Ketamine is a better alternative than propofol.</p> Methods <p>In this investigator-initiated, randomized, controlled, open-label trial conducted in two mixed ICU, adults (≥ 18&#xa0;years) requiring RSI were assigned 1:1 to Ketamine or propofol. The primary outcome was the lowest mean arterial pressure (MAP) within the first 10&#xa0;min after induction, analyzed with a linear regression model adjusted for age, baseline MAP, and total vasopressor dose within 10&#xa0;min.</p> Results <p>From October 2021 to October 2023, 207 patients were randomized and 175 were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. The lowest MAP within 10&#xa0;min was 66 (55–79) mmHg with Ketamine and 60 (48–72) mmHg with propofol (mean difference, 6.0 [95% CI − 0.0 to 11.9]; <i>p</i> = 0.050). The average MAP difference over the first hour was 1.67 (95% CI − 1.98 to 5.31). Cardiovascular collapse occurred in 20/91(22%) Ketamine-treated patients and 28/84 (33%) receiving propofol, mainly due to an increase in the vasopressor dose within 2&#xa0;min. Day-7 mortality was 33% with Ketamine and 23.8% with propofol (OR 1.38; 95% CI 0.86–2.24). Hospital mortality was 60.4% and 50.0%, respectively (OR 1.21; 95% CI 0.92–1.58).</p> Conclusions <p>Among critically ill patients undergoing RSI, Ketamine resulted in a less pronounced decrease in MAP in the first 10&#xa0;min compared with propofol, but the difference was not clinically meaningful or sustained. These findings challenge sedative selection based solely on perceived risk of hypotension and highlight the need for larger trials to determine the optimal induction agent.</p> Clinicaltrials.gov registry <p>NCT05092152—initial release 10.13.2021.</p> Visual abstract <p></p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Propofol versus ketamine in rapid sequence intubation in critically ill patients: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年3月23日

查看全文
  • Raysa Cristina Schmidt,
  • Fernando Godinho Zampieri,
  • Fernando Jose da Silva Ramos,
  • Felipe Santos Cavatoni Serra,
  • Bruno Adler Maccagnan Pinheiro Besen,
  • Nathaly Fonseca Nunes,
  • Daniela Boschetti,
  • Fernanda Chohfi Atallah,
  • Miriam Jackiu,
  • Livia Maria Garcia Melro,
  • Carla Daniele Nascimento Pontes,
  • Daniere Yurie Vieira Tomotani,
  • Lucas Petri Damiani,
  • Flávio Geraldo Rezende de Freitas,
  • Flávia Ribeiro Machado,
  • Juliana Oliveira Barros,
  • Jane Cristina Dias Alves,
  • Juliana Fernandes da Silva Kochleitner,
  • Fabrício Jocundo Calado Freires

摘要

Purpose

The optimal hypnotic agent for rapid sequence intubation (RSI) in critically ill patients remains uncertain. We evaluated whether Ketamine is a better alternative than propofol.

Methods

In this investigator-initiated, randomized, controlled, open-label trial conducted in two mixed ICU, adults (≥ 18 years) requiring RSI were assigned 1:1 to Ketamine or propofol. The primary outcome was the lowest mean arterial pressure (MAP) within the first 10 min after induction, analyzed with a linear regression model adjusted for age, baseline MAP, and total vasopressor dose within 10 min.

Results

From October 2021 to October 2023, 207 patients were randomized and 175 were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. The lowest MAP within 10 min was 66 (55–79) mmHg with Ketamine and 60 (48–72) mmHg with propofol (mean difference, 6.0 [95% CI − 0.0 to 11.9]; p = 0.050). The average MAP difference over the first hour was 1.67 (95% CI − 1.98 to 5.31). Cardiovascular collapse occurred in 20/91(22%) Ketamine-treated patients and 28/84 (33%) receiving propofol, mainly due to an increase in the vasopressor dose within 2 min. Day-7 mortality was 33% with Ketamine and 23.8% with propofol (OR 1.38; 95% CI 0.86–2.24). Hospital mortality was 60.4% and 50.0%, respectively (OR 1.21; 95% CI 0.92–1.58).

Conclusions

Among critically ill patients undergoing RSI, Ketamine resulted in a less pronounced decrease in MAP in the first 10 min compared with propofol, but the difference was not clinically meaningful or sustained. These findings challenge sedative selection based solely on perceived risk of hypotension and highlight the need for larger trials to determine the optimal induction agent.

Clinicaltrials.gov registry

NCT05092152—initial release 10.13.2021.

Visual abstract