DOI 10.1007/s12098-025-05887-y
Ketamine-Fentanyl Versus Ketamine-Midazolam for Sedation in Children Undergoing Flexible Fiber-optic Bronchoscopy - An Open-label Randomized Controlled Trial.
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES
To compare the number of severe cough episodes during flexible fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB) in children receiving intravenous (IV) ketamine and fentanyl (KF) to those receiving IV ketamine and midazolam (KM).
METHODS
A parallel-group, open-label, randomized controlled trial was conducted at a tertiary care center. Children aged 6 mo to 15 y undergoing FOB were enrolled, excluding those with anticipated difficult airway, significant respiratory compromise, hemodynamic instability, and those undergoing interventional procedures. Video recordings of the entire procedure were reviewed by a blinded observer to assess the primary outcome.
RESULTS
Seventy-five participants were enrolled; 38 in the KM group and 37 in the KF group. The KF group had a lower median number of severe cough episodes [1 (0-4) vs. 3 (1-6), P = 0.054], though not statistically significant. No significant differences were found in time to reach Ramsay Sedation Scale (RSS) 4, bronchoscopy scores, need for additional sedation, or adverse events. No participants developed bradycardia, hypotension, apnea, laryngospasm, or deep desaturation. Post-hoc analysis showed a lower frequency of severe cough episodes (per minute procedure time) in the KF group [0.1 (0-0.4) vs. 0.35 (0.1-0.6), P = 0.008].
CONCLUSIONS
This RCT did not demonstrate a significant difference in severe cough episodes with the ketamine-fentanyl combination compared to ketamine-midazolam in children undergoing FOB. However, the post-hoc analysis does indicate some benefit with the use of ketamine-fentanyl. There was no increase in adverse events with the combination.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.