Mohammad Jalili, Maryam Bahreini, Amin Doosti-Irani, Rasoul Masoomi, Mona Arbab, Hadi Mirfazaelian
Journal: The American journal of emergency medicine 2016;34(3):558-69
PMID: 26809929
OBJECTIVE
This meta-analysis of trials was conducted to evaluate the analgesic and side effects of ketamine-propofol combination (ketofol) in comparison to propofol in procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA).
METHODS
Medline, EMBASE, Scopus, CINHAL, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for clinical trial. The administration complications were the key outcomes of interest.
RESULT
Eighteen clinical trials that met our criteria were included in the analysis. Pooling of data showed that ketofol is significantly effective for reduction of respiratory complication and with relative risk (RR) of 0.31 in 14 trials (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.47-0.7; P = .001). Ketofol was also effective in reducing cardiovascular complications with hypotension RR of 0.11 in 9 trials (95% CI, 0.17-0.97; P = .04) and bradycardia RR of 0.47 in 8 trials (95% CI, 0.28-0.72; P = .008). The present study also showed that the summary of RR for psychomimetic complications was 1.95 in 13 trials were (95% CI, 0.79-4.81; P = .15) and for muscle rigidity was 0.52 for 2 trials (95% CI, 0.06-4.67; P = .56), and both were insignificant. In regard to nausea and vomiting, the RR was 1.23 in 12 trials (95% CI, 0.39-3.88; P = .72) and insignificant.
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis demonstrates good safety profile in cardiorespiratory problems and comparable rate of other complications with propofol in adult procedural sedation and analgesia.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Medical:
Other Literature Sources:
Miscellaneous:
Research Materials:
© Copyright 2026, Nutrition Evidence
We use cookies to improve your experience and analyze site traffic with Google Analytics. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more.