儿童磁共振成像中使用异丙酚与异丙酚-氯胺酮镇静后的肺部气胸:随机临床试验

IF 10.5 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL JAMA Network Open Pub Date : 2024-11-04 DOI:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.33029
Yu Jeong Bang, Jeayoun Kim, Nam-Su Gil, Woo Seog Sim, Hyun Joo Ahn, Mi Hye Park, Sangmin Maria Lee, Dong-Jae Kim, Ji Seon Jeong
{"title":"儿童磁共振成像中使用异丙酚与异丙酚-氯胺酮镇静后的肺部气胸:随机临床试验","authors":"Yu Jeong Bang, Jeayoun Kim, Nam-Su Gil, Woo Seog Sim, Hyun Joo Ahn, Mi Hye Park, Sangmin Maria Lee, Dong-Jae Kim, Ji Seon Jeong","doi":"10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.33029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Little is known about the impact of different anesthetic agents used for routine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sedation on pulmonary function in children.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the incidence of pulmonary atelectasis after MRI sedation with propofol vs propofol-ketamine.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>This double-masked randomized clinical trial screened 117 consecutive pediatric patients aged 3 to 12 years with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I to II undergoing elective MRI under deep sedation from November 2, 2022, to April 28, 2023, at a tertiary referral center. Four patients met the exclusion criteria, and 5 patients refused to participate. The participants and outcome assessors were masked to the group allocation.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>During the MRI, the propofol group received 0.2 mL/kg of 1% propofol and 2 mL of 0.9% saline followed by a continuous infusion of propofol (200 μg/kg/min) and 0.9% saline (0.04 mL/kg/min). The propofol-ketamine group received 0.2 mL/kg of 0.5% propofol and 1 mg/kg of ketamine followed by a continuous infusion of propofol (100 μg/kg/min) and ketamine (20 μg/kg/min).</p><p><strong>Main outcome and measure: </strong>The incidence of atelectasis assessed by lung ultrasonography examination.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 107 children (median [IQR] age, 5 [4-6] years; 62 male [57.9%]), with 54 in the propofol group and 53 in the propofol-ketamine group, were analyzed in this study. Notably, 48 (88.9%) and 31 (58.5%) patients had atelectasis in the propofol and propofol-ketamine groups, respectively (relative risk, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.5-0.8; P < .001). The incidence of desaturation and interruption of the MRI due to airway intervention or spontaneous movement did not significantly differ between the groups. The propofol-ketamine group showed a faster emergence time than the propofol group (15 [9-23] vs 25 [22-27] minutes in the propofol-ketamine vs propofol group; median difference in time, 9.0 minutes; 95% CI, 6.0-12.0 minutes; P < .001). No patient was withdrawn from the trial due to adverse effects.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>In this randomized clinical trial, the propofol-ketamine combination reduced sedation-induced atelectasis while allowing for faster emergence compared with propofol alone.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>cris.nih.go.kr Identifier: KCT0007699.</p>","PeriodicalId":14694,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Network Open","volume":"7 11","pages":"e2433029"},"PeriodicalIF":10.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11530935/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pulmonary Atelectasis After Sedation With Propofol vs Propofol-Ketamine for Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Children: A Randomized Clinical Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Yu Jeong Bang, Jeayoun Kim, Nam-Su Gil, Woo Seog Sim, Hyun Joo Ahn, Mi Hye Park, Sangmin Maria Lee, Dong-Jae Kim, Ji Seon Jeong\",\"doi\":\"10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.33029\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Little is known about the impact of different anesthetic agents used for routine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sedation on pulmonary function in children.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the incidence of pulmonary atelectasis after MRI sedation with propofol vs propofol-ketamine.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>This double-masked randomized clinical trial screened 117 consecutive pediatric patients aged 3 to 12 years with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I to II undergoing elective MRI under deep sedation from November 2, 2022, to April 28, 2023, at a tertiary referral center. Four patients met the exclusion criteria, and 5 patients refused to participate. The participants and outcome assessors were masked to the group allocation.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>During the MRI, the propofol group received 0.2 mL/kg of 1% propofol and 2 mL of 0.9% saline followed by a continuous infusion of propofol (200 μg/kg/min) and 0.9% saline (0.04 mL/kg/min). The propofol-ketamine group received 0.2 mL/kg of 0.5% propofol and 1 mg/kg of ketamine followed by a continuous infusion of propofol (100 μg/kg/min) and ketamine (20 μg/kg/min).</p><p><strong>Main outcome and measure: </strong>The incidence of atelectasis assessed by lung ultrasonography examination.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 107 children (median [IQR] age, 5 [4-6] years; 62 male [57.9%]), with 54 in the propofol group and 53 in the propofol-ketamine group, were analyzed in this study. Notably, 48 (88.9%) and 31 (58.5%) patients had atelectasis in the propofol and propofol-ketamine groups, respectively (relative risk, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.5-0.8; P < .001). The incidence of desaturation and interruption of the MRI due to airway intervention or spontaneous movement did not significantly differ between the groups. The propofol-ketamine group showed a faster emergence time than the propofol group (15 [9-23] vs 25 [22-27] minutes in the propofol-ketamine vs propofol group; median difference in time, 9.0 minutes; 95% CI, 6.0-12.0 minutes; P < .001). No patient was withdrawn from the trial due to adverse effects.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>In this randomized clinical trial, the propofol-ketamine combination reduced sedation-induced atelectasis while allowing for faster emergence compared with propofol alone.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>cris.nih.go.kr Identifier: KCT0007699.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14694,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JAMA Network Open\",\"volume\":\"7 11\",\"pages\":\"e2433029\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":10.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11530935/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JAMA Network Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.33029\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA Network Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.33029","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

重要性:人们对常规磁共振成像(MRI)镇静所用的不同麻醉剂对儿童肺功能的影响知之甚少:比较使用异丙酚与异丙酚-氯胺酮进行磁共振成像镇静后肺大回流的发生率:这项双盲随机临床试验筛选了 117 名年龄在 3 到 12 岁之间、美国麻醉医师协会体能状态 I 到 II 级的连续儿科患者,他们于 2022 年 11 月 2 日至 2023 年 4 月 28 日在一家三级转诊中心接受了选择性 MRI 深度镇静治疗。4名患者符合排除标准,5名患者拒绝参与。参与者和结果评估者对组别分配进行了蒙蔽:在磁共振成像期间,丙泊酚组接受0.2毫升/千克的1%丙泊酚和2毫升0.9%生理盐水,然后持续输注丙泊酚(200微克/千克/分钟)和0.9%生理盐水(0.04毫升/千克/分钟)。丙泊酚-氯胺酮组接受0.5%丙泊酚0.2 mL/kg和氯胺酮1 mg/kg,然后持续输注丙泊酚(100 μg/kg/min)和氯胺酮(20 μg/kg/min):本研究共分析了107名儿童(中位数[IQR]年龄,5[4-6]岁;62名男性[57.9%]),其中异丙酚组54名,异丙酚-氯胺酮组53名。值得注意的是,异丙酚组和异丙酚-氯胺酮组分别有 48 例(88.9%)和 31 例(58.5%)患者出现肺不张(相对风险,0.7;95% CI,0.5-0.8;P 结论和意义:在这项随机临床试验中,与单独使用异丙酚相比,异丙酚-氯胺酮联合用药可减少镇静引起的肺不张,同时使患者更快苏醒。试验注册:cris.nih.go.kr Identifier:KCT0007699.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Pulmonary Atelectasis After Sedation With Propofol vs Propofol-Ketamine for Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Children: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Little is known about the impact of different anesthetic agents used for routine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sedation on pulmonary function in children.

Objective: To compare the incidence of pulmonary atelectasis after MRI sedation with propofol vs propofol-ketamine.

Design, setting, and participants: This double-masked randomized clinical trial screened 117 consecutive pediatric patients aged 3 to 12 years with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I to II undergoing elective MRI under deep sedation from November 2, 2022, to April 28, 2023, at a tertiary referral center. Four patients met the exclusion criteria, and 5 patients refused to participate. The participants and outcome assessors were masked to the group allocation.

Interventions: During the MRI, the propofol group received 0.2 mL/kg of 1% propofol and 2 mL of 0.9% saline followed by a continuous infusion of propofol (200 μg/kg/min) and 0.9% saline (0.04 mL/kg/min). The propofol-ketamine group received 0.2 mL/kg of 0.5% propofol and 1 mg/kg of ketamine followed by a continuous infusion of propofol (100 μg/kg/min) and ketamine (20 μg/kg/min).

Main outcome and measure: The incidence of atelectasis assessed by lung ultrasonography examination.

Results: A total of 107 children (median [IQR] age, 5 [4-6] years; 62 male [57.9%]), with 54 in the propofol group and 53 in the propofol-ketamine group, were analyzed in this study. Notably, 48 (88.9%) and 31 (58.5%) patients had atelectasis in the propofol and propofol-ketamine groups, respectively (relative risk, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.5-0.8; P < .001). The incidence of desaturation and interruption of the MRI due to airway intervention or spontaneous movement did not significantly differ between the groups. The propofol-ketamine group showed a faster emergence time than the propofol group (15 [9-23] vs 25 [22-27] minutes in the propofol-ketamine vs propofol group; median difference in time, 9.0 minutes; 95% CI, 6.0-12.0 minutes; P < .001). No patient was withdrawn from the trial due to adverse effects.

Conclusions and relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, the propofol-ketamine combination reduced sedation-induced atelectasis while allowing for faster emergence compared with propofol alone.

Trial registration: cris.nih.go.kr Identifier: KCT0007699.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
JAMA Network Open
JAMA Network Open Medicine-General Medicine
CiteScore
16.00
自引率
2.90%
发文量
2126
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: JAMA Network Open, a member of the esteemed JAMA Network, stands as an international, peer-reviewed, open-access general medical journal.The publication is dedicated to disseminating research across various health disciplines and countries, encompassing clinical care, innovation in health care, health policy, and global health. JAMA Network Open caters to clinicians, investigators, and policymakers, providing a platform for valuable insights and advancements in the medical field. As part of the JAMA Network, a consortium of peer-reviewed general medical and specialty publications, JAMA Network Open contributes to the collective knowledge and understanding within the medical community.
期刊最新文献
JAMA Network Open. Meal Timing Interventions for Weight Loss and Metabolic Health-What Does the Evidence Tell Us So Far? Saving Children's Lives Through Universal Pediatric Readiness Is a Wise Investment. Anemia Acuity Effect on Transfusion Strategies in Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Secondary Analysis of the MINT Trial. Effectiveness of Virtual Yoga for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
×
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