Impact of Continuous Infusion Ketamine Compared to Continuous Infusion Benzodiazepines on Delirium in the Intensive Care Unit.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Journal of Intensive Care Medicine Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-22 DOI:10.1177/08850666241253541
Nicholas J Vollmer, Erin D Wieruszewski, Andrea M Nei, Kristin C Mara, Alejandro A Rabinstein, Caitlin S Brown
{"title":"Impact of Continuous Infusion Ketamine Compared to Continuous Infusion Benzodiazepines on Delirium in the Intensive Care Unit.","authors":"Nicholas J Vollmer, Erin D Wieruszewski, Andrea M Nei, Kristin C Mara, Alejandro A Rabinstein, Caitlin S Brown","doi":"10.1177/08850666241253541","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Purpose:</b> The purpose of this study was to evaluate rates of delirium or coma-free days between continuous infusion sedative-dose ketamine and continuous infusion benzodiazepines in critically ill patients. <b>Materials and Methods</b>: In this single-center, retrospective cohort adult patients were screened for inclusion if they received continuous infusions of either sedative-dose ketamine or benzodiazepines (lorazepam or midazolam) for at least 24 h, were mechanically ventilated for at least 48 h and admitted to the intensive care unit of a large quaternary academic center between 5/5/2018 and 12/1/2021. <b>Results:</b> A total of 165 patients were included with 64 patients in the ketamine group and 101 patients in the benzodiazepine group (lorazepam n = 35, midazolam n = 78). The primary outcome of median (IQR) delirium or coma-free days within the first 28 days of hospitalization was 1.2 (0.0, 3.7) for ketamine and 1.8 (0.7, 4.6) for benzodiazepines (p = 0.13). Patients in the ketamine arm spent a significantly lower proportion of time with RASS -3 to +4, received significantly higher doses and longer durations of propofol and fentanyl infusions, and had a significantly longer intensive care unit length of stay. <b>Conclusions:</b> The use of sedative-dose ketamine had no difference in delirium or coma-free days compared to benzodiazepines.</p>","PeriodicalId":16307,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intensive Care Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1204-1211"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Intensive Care Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08850666241253541","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate rates of delirium or coma-free days between continuous infusion sedative-dose ketamine and continuous infusion benzodiazepines in critically ill patients. Materials and Methods: In this single-center, retrospective cohort adult patients were screened for inclusion if they received continuous infusions of either sedative-dose ketamine or benzodiazepines (lorazepam or midazolam) for at least 24 h, were mechanically ventilated for at least 48 h and admitted to the intensive care unit of a large quaternary academic center between 5/5/2018 and 12/1/2021. Results: A total of 165 patients were included with 64 patients in the ketamine group and 101 patients in the benzodiazepine group (lorazepam n = 35, midazolam n = 78). The primary outcome of median (IQR) delirium or coma-free days within the first 28 days of hospitalization was 1.2 (0.0, 3.7) for ketamine and 1.8 (0.7, 4.6) for benzodiazepines (p = 0.13). Patients in the ketamine arm spent a significantly lower proportion of time with RASS -3 to +4, received significantly higher doses and longer durations of propofol and fentanyl infusions, and had a significantly longer intensive care unit length of stay. Conclusions: The use of sedative-dose ketamine had no difference in delirium or coma-free days compared to benzodiazepines.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
持续输注氯胺酮与持续输注苯二氮卓类药物对重症监护病房谵妄的影响。
目的:本研究旨在评估连续输注镇静剂量氯胺酮和连续输注苯二氮卓类药物的重症患者中谵妄或无昏迷天数的比率。材料和方法:在这项单中心回顾性队列研究中,筛选出在2018年5月5日至2021年1月12日期间接受连续输注镇静剂量氯胺酮或苯二氮卓类药物(劳拉西泮或咪达唑仑)至少24小时、机械通气至少48小时并入住一家大型四级学术中心重症监护室的成年患者。研究结果共纳入165例患者,其中氯胺酮组64例,苯二氮卓类药物组101例(劳拉西泮35例,咪达唑仑78例)。主要结果是住院后头28天内无谵妄或昏迷天数的中位数(IQR),氯胺酮为1.2(0.0,3.7)天,苯二氮卓类药物为1.8(0.7,4.6)天(p = 0.13)。氯胺酮治疗组患者的 RASS -3 至 +4 时间比例明显较低,接受异丙酚和芬太尼输注的剂量明显较高,持续时间明显较长,重症监护室的住院时间明显较长。结论与苯二氮卓类药物相比,使用镇静剂量的氯胺酮在谵妄或无昏迷天数方面没有差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Intensive Care Medicine
Journal of Intensive Care Medicine CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE-
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
3.20%
发文量
107
期刊介绍: Journal of Intensive Care Medicine (JIC) is a peer-reviewed bi-monthly journal offering medical and surgical clinicians in adult and pediatric intensive care state-of-the-art, broad-based analytic reviews and updates, original articles, reports of large clinical series, techniques and procedures, topic-specific electronic resources, book reviews, and editorials on all aspects of intensive/critical/coronary care.
期刊最新文献
A Practical Guide to Biostatistics Used in the Journal of Intensive Care Medicine. Impact of Sepsis Onset Timing on All-Cause Mortality in Acute Pancreatitis: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study. Serial Lactate in Clinical Medicine - A Narrative Review. A Combined Model of Vital Signs and Serum Biomarkers Outperforms Shock Index in the Prediction of Hemorrhage Control Interventions in Surgical Intensive Care Unit Patients. The Effects of Inspiratory Muscle Training in Critically ill Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1