Skip to content

Procedural propofol sedation with ketamine versus alfentanil and remifentanil in patients for cardiac ablation.

Procedural propofol sedation with ketamine versus alfentanil and remifentanil in patients for cardiac ablation.

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
NL-OMON
Registry ID
NL-OMON28894
Enrollment
120
Registered
2015-01-13
Start date
2015-06-01
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2024-02-28

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

Conditions

We designed this study to compare the effects of propofol-ketamine versus propofol-alfentanil and propofol-remifentanil for achieving a more acceptable respiratory stability with a decrease in respiratory side effects during PSA for CA treatment.

Interventions

For sedation, a propofol perfusor will be started at 2 mg/kg/h, with an induction bolus of 0,5 mg/kg. Contemporaneously with propofol, ketamine will be administered via a perfusor at 0,3 mg/kg/h, with

Sponsors

Catharina Hospital Eindhoven Michelangelolaan 2 5623 EJ Eindhoven The Netherlands 040-2399111 www.cze.nl
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Patients were eligible if are: scheduled for treatment of atrial fibrillation with CA under PSA, aged 18 years or older, American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) class 1 to 3. Patients will be included in this study after given written informed consent before the treatment starts.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Patients will be excluded from the study if they: are unable to give informed consent, are pregnant, have a known allergy to either study medication, have a know contra-indication to administer either study medication, are scheduled for a repeated procedure, are receiving treatment for neuromuscular or psychiatric disease and have a physical or communicational disorder.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
The primary endpoint of this study is respiratory stability with the applied sedational technique. Differences in respiration rate, number of apneas and oxygen saturation with the applied inspiratory fraction of oxygen, combined with the administered doses of PSA medication, between the three study groups will be compared.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Secondary outcome measures include: Observer’s Assessment of Alertness/ Sedation score; OAA/S (0 = fully sedated, 5 = not sedated) Ramsay score; RS (1 = anxious or restless or both, 8 = no response, even to pain) Hemodynamic parameters (mean heart rate, mean systolic blood pressure and mean diastolic blood pressure)v Times (time required for the induction of PSA, time required for the procedure, total time PSA is administered and total recovery time) Total dosages of medication administered during the procedure Numeric Rating Scale; NRS (0 = no pain, 10 = worst imaginable pain) Aldrete score Patient’s satisfaction (Likert five-item scoring system, 1 = not at all satisfied, 5 = extremely satisfied) Physician’s satisfaction (Likert five-item scoring system, 1 = not at all satisfied, 5 = extremely satisfied) Side effects (nausea, vomiting) Demographic characteristics (sex, age, length, weight, BMI, ASA physical status) Medical history (cardiac status, pulmonary status, renal status, diabetes mellitus, other diseases) Physical history (smoking, alcohol abuses, drugs abuses, history of PONV)

Contacts

Public ContactLoes Braam

Nurse anesthetist (PSA-specialist) Catharina Hospital Eindhoven Michelangelolaan 2 5623 EJ

loes.braam@catharinaziekenhuis.nl040-2399111 (sein 114521)

Outcome results

None listed

Source: NL-OMON (via WHO ICTRP)