We have located links that may give you full text access.
CLINICAL TRIAL
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Propofol-ketamine versus propofol-fentanyl for outpatient laparoscopy: comparison of postoperative nausea, emesis, analgesia, and recovery.
Journal of Clinical Anesthesia 2002 September
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare postoperative nausea, emesis, analgesia, and recovery between propofol-ketamine and propofol-fentanyl in outpatient laparoscopic tubal ligations with general anesthesia.
STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, blinded study.
SETTING: Tertiary-care women's hospital.
PATIENTS: 120 ASA physical status I and II ambulatory patients scheduled for elective laparoscopic tubal ligation.
INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to two groups to receive either ketamine (1-1.5 mg/kg) or fentanyl (3-5 microg/kg).
MEASUREMENTS: Measured variables included total dose of ketamine, fentanyl, propofol, and operating time. Vital signs, pain visual analog scale scores (VAS), nausea VAS, presence of emesis, treatment for nausea and vomiting, pruritus, sedation, and presence of dreaming were recorded on postanesthesia care unit (PACU) admission, PACU discharge, stepdown unit admission, and hospital discharge. Results are expressed as means +/- SD or medians and analyzed using t-test, Chi-square, or Mann-Whitney (p < 0.05).
MAIN RESULTS: No differences were noted with respect to propofol dose, operating times, pain or nausea VAS scores, emesis, treatment for nausea and vomiting, pruritus, and sedation on PACU admission, PACU discharge, stepdown unit admission, and hospital discharge. The ketamine group had a higher heart rate, required more pain medication, and had a higher frequency of dreaming on PACU admission than the fentanyl group. These differences became insignificant on PACU discharge.
CONCLUSIONS: For outpatient laparoscopic tubal ligations with general anesthesia, propofol-ketamine does not improve postoperative nausea, emesis, analgesia or recovery compared with the propofol-fentanyl combination.
STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, blinded study.
SETTING: Tertiary-care women's hospital.
PATIENTS: 120 ASA physical status I and II ambulatory patients scheduled for elective laparoscopic tubal ligation.
INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to two groups to receive either ketamine (1-1.5 mg/kg) or fentanyl (3-5 microg/kg).
MEASUREMENTS: Measured variables included total dose of ketamine, fentanyl, propofol, and operating time. Vital signs, pain visual analog scale scores (VAS), nausea VAS, presence of emesis, treatment for nausea and vomiting, pruritus, sedation, and presence of dreaming were recorded on postanesthesia care unit (PACU) admission, PACU discharge, stepdown unit admission, and hospital discharge. Results are expressed as means +/- SD or medians and analyzed using t-test, Chi-square, or Mann-Whitney (p < 0.05).
MAIN RESULTS: No differences were noted with respect to propofol dose, operating times, pain or nausea VAS scores, emesis, treatment for nausea and vomiting, pruritus, and sedation on PACU admission, PACU discharge, stepdown unit admission, and hospital discharge. The ketamine group had a higher heart rate, required more pain medication, and had a higher frequency of dreaming on PACU admission than the fentanyl group. These differences became insignificant on PACU discharge.
CONCLUSIONS: For outpatient laparoscopic tubal ligations with general anesthesia, propofol-ketamine does not improve postoperative nausea, emesis, analgesia or recovery compared with the propofol-fentanyl combination.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app