COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL

Etomidate versus ketamine for rapid sequence intubation in acutely ill patients: a multicentre randomised controlled trial

Patricia Jabre, Xavier Combes, Frederic Lapostolle, Mohamed Dhaouadi, Agnes Ricard-Hibon, Benoit Vivien, Lionel Bertrand, Alexandra Beltramini, Pascale Gamand, Stephane Albizzati, Deborah Perdrizet, Gaelle Lebail, Charlotte Chollet-Xemard, Virginie Maxime, Christian Brun-Buisson, Jean-Yves Lefrant, Pierre-Edouard Bollaert, Bruno Megarbane, Jean-Damien Ricard, Nadia Anguel, Eric Vicaut, Frederic Adnet
Lancet 2009 July 25, 374 (9686): 293-300
19573904

BACKGROUND: Critically ill patients often require emergency intubation. The use of etomidate as the sedative agent in this context has been challenged because it might cause a reversible adrenal insufficiency, potentially associated with increased in-hospital morbidity. We compared early and 28-day morbidity after a single dose of etomidate or ketamine used for emergency endotracheal intubation of critically ill patients.

METHODS: In this randomised, controlled, single-blind trial, 655 patients who needed sedation for emergency intubation were prospectively enrolled from 12 emergency medical services or emergency departments and 65 intensive care units in France. Patients were randomly assigned by a computerised random-number generator list to receive 0.3 mg/kg of etomidate (n=328) or 2 mg/kg of ketamine (n=327) for intubation. Only the emergency physician enrolling patients was aware of group assignment. The primary endpoint was the maximum score of the sequential organ failure assessment during the first 3 days in the intensive care unit. We excluded from the analysis patients who died before reaching the hospital or those discharged from the intensive care unit before 3 days (modified intention to treat). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00440102.

FINDINGS: 234 patients were analysed in the etomidate group and 235 in the ketamine group. The mean maximum SOFA score between the two groups did not differ significantly (10.3 [SD 3.7] for etomidate vs 9.6 [3.9] for ketamine; mean difference 0.7 [95% CI 0.0-1.4], p=0.056). Intubation conditions did not differ significantly between the two groups (median intubation difficulty score 1 [IQR 0-3] in both groups; p=0.70). The percentage of patients with adrenal insufficiency was significantly higher in the etomidate group than in the ketamine group (OR 6.7, 3.5-12.7). We recorded no serious adverse events with either study drug.

INTERPRETATION: Our results show that ketamine is a safe and valuable alternative to etomidate for endotracheal intubation in critically ill patients, and should be considered in those with sepsis.

FUNDING: French Ministry of Health.

Full Text Links

Find Full Text Links for this Article

Discussion

You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion.

Related Papers

Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read
19573904
×

Save your favorite articles in one place with a free QxMD account.

×

Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"