Comparative Study between Intravenous Ketamine- Propofol Versus Ketamine- Dexmedetomidine for Sedation of Adult patients during Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | ||||
| Al-Azhar International Medical Journal | ||||
| Volume 2025, Issue 3, March 2025, Page 46-51 PDF (468.72 K) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/aimj.2025.446460 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
| Abdullah Mohammed Ahmed Al-Sheikh; Ali Abdullah Abdullah Al-Kumity; Ibrahim Soliman Mohammed Saad* | ||||
| Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Management, Faculty of Medicine for Boys, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Background: It is common practice to combine intravenous ketamine with dexmedetomidine, a selective alpha-2 adrenergic receptor agonist, for sedative, analgesic, and anxiolytic effects; this combination has several benefits, including hemodynamic stability, postoperative pain relief, and the lack of respiratory depression. Several studies have examined this combination in pediatric patients. Aim and objectives: In order to evaluate the safety profile, hemodynamics, and sedation quality of ketamine-propofol (KP) vs. ketamine dexmedetomidine (KD) for procedural sedation in adult patients having upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Patients and methods: This is a randomized clinical trial blinded study that was performed at Al-Azhar University Hospitals over 60 adult patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy divided into two groups: Group(KP): 30 patients were sedated by KP and Group(KD): 30 patients were sedated by kD. Results: Regarding heart rate after loading dose, endoscope insertion, and 20 minutes, there was a statistically significant difference among the cases analyzed. When looking at the cases that were studied, there was no discernible difference in terms of recovery time. In terms of endoscopist satisfaction, there was no statistically significant distinction among the cases that were studied. When comparing the cases, we found that oxygen saturation levels varied significantly after the loading dosage, after the endoscope was inserted, and even after 5 minutes. In terms of Ramsay sedation scores, there was no discernible variation among the cases that were examined. When comparing the instances, there was a statistically significant difference in the amount of time it took for the first rescue bolus to be administered. Conclusion: We found no significant differences in recovery time, mean arterial pressures (MAP), respiration rate, pain score, or Ramsay sedation levels between the KP and KD groups. In contrast to Group (KD), Group (KP) had a shorter time to first rescue bolus. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Gastrointestinal endoscopy; Sedation; Intravenous; Ketamine-dexmedetomidine | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 19 PDF Download: 20 |
||||
