Skip to content

Comparison of Recovery Profile and Patient Hemodynamics after sedation with ketamine with either Dexmedetomidine or Propofol in patients undergoing Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangio Pancreatography

Comparison of Recovery Profile and Patient Hemodynamics following sedation with ketamine in combination with either Dexmedetomidine or Propofol in patients undergoing Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangio Pancreatography

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
CTRI
Registry ID
CTRI/2022/01/039451
Enrollment
90
Registered
2022-01-14
Start date
Unknown
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2024-09-16

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Health Condition 1: - Health Condition 2: K839- Disease of biliary tract, unspecified

Interventions

Intervention1: Sedation with Ketamine and Dexmedetomidine: Sedation with Inj. Ketamine 0.5mg/kg IV as bolus as per requirement of patient’s body weight over 2-5minutes, clinical response will be asses

Sponsors

Dr Aruna Bharti
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 18 to 65 year old ASA I and II patients who have consented to participate in the study

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Nonconsenting patients. Patients allergic to egg, allergy to study drugs assessed by prior history Baseline SpO2 BMI >35kg/m2 due to altered drug metabolism and clearance Pregnant and lactating patients. Psychiatric disorders (schizophrenia) as Ketamine is contraindicated in such patients Heart blocks, arrhythmias, Patient with pacemakers Patients with increased intracranial pressure, eg-patients with space occupying lesion in brain, h/o Cerebrovascular Accident in the previous one year Severe liver dysfunction (Child Pugh class C). ASA III and IV are not considered as they have liver dysfunction causing significant side effects of dexmedetomidine due to reduced clearance that requires dose adjustments and increases recovery time.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
comparing the recovery profile between the groups after the procedureTimepoint: awake and recovery time are assessed at the end of the procedure

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
To examine the hemodynamic stability between the groups. Rescue medication requirement during the procedure. Endoscopist’s satisfaction score assessed at the end of the procedure (using 5-point numerical rating scale where 1-excellent, 2-good, 3-satisfied, 4-poor and 5-very poor). Patient satisfaction score assessed 30mins after the end of procedure when MAS of 9 is achieved (using 5 point numerical rating scale where 1-excellent, 2-good, 3-satisfied, 4-poor and 5-very poor is done). Pain assessed with Numerical rating scale (0-10) recorded at 30mins and 6hr post procedure. Adverse events seen during procedure and during recovery. Timepoint: Hemodynamic stability and Rescue medication requirement are recorded during the procedure. Endoscopist’s satisfaction score assessed at the end of the procedure Patient satisfaction score assessed 30mins after the end of procedure when MAS of 9 is achieved Pain assessed with Numerical rating scale (0-10) recorded at 30mins and 6hr post procedure. Adverse events seen during procedure and during recovery.

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactDr Divya M

Sanjay Gandhi Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences

cardarone@gmail.com8004904626

Outcome results

None listed

Source: CTRI (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026