N Mittal1, A Goyal, K Gauba, A Kapur, K Jain. 1. Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, Santosh Dental College and Hospital, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, India. dr.neetipgi@gmail.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To find out the safe and efficient sedative agent for primary molar pulpectomy in uncooperative pediatric patients. STUDY DESIGN: This double blind randomized trial enrolled 40 anxious and healthy 2-6 year olds. All subjects received IV propofol (1-1.5 mg/kg) or ketofol (1-1.5 mg/kg propofol with 0.25 mg/kg ketamine) as per group assignment after oral midazolam premedication (0.5 mg/kg). Sedation maintenance was done with propofol infusion at 25-75 microg/kg/min titrated to a predefined Worse level as per Houpt's sedation rating scale. Additional bolus/es was/were administered in the dosage similar to induction dose in case of inadequate sedation. Primary outcomes were intraoperative and postoperative adverse events. Secondary outcomes were vital signs, success of procedure, operator satisfaction, sedation quality, treatment time, recovery time and total propofol dose. RESULTS: Significantly greater incidence of respiratory depression was reported for ketofol group (11/20; 55%) when compared to propofol group (3/20; 15%) (p = 0.008). Desaturation was the most common adverse respiratory event with significantly greater incidence in ketofol group (9/20; 45%) when compared to propofol only group (3/20; 15%) (p = 0.033). No significant differences regarding secondary outcomes were reported in two groups. CONCLUSION: Both the regimen exhibited similar sedation profile while propofol alone emerged as a safer option.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To find out the safe and efficient sedative agent for primary molar pulpectomy in uncooperative pediatric patients. STUDY DESIGN: This double blind randomized trial enrolled 40 anxious and healthy 2-6 year olds. All subjects received IV propofol (1-1.5 mg/kg) or ketofol (1-1.5 mg/kg propofol with 0.25 mg/kg ketamine) as per group assignment after oral midazolam premedication (0.5 mg/kg). Sedation maintenance was done with propofol infusion at 25-75 microg/kg/min titrated to a predefined Worse level as per Houpt's sedation rating scale. Additional bolus/es was/were administered in the dosage similar to induction dose in case of inadequate sedation. Primary outcomes were intraoperative and postoperative adverse events. Secondary outcomes were vital signs, success of procedure, operator satisfaction, sedation quality, treatment time, recovery time and total propofol dose. RESULTS: Significantly greater incidence of respiratory depression was reported for ketofol group (11/20; 55%) when compared to propofol group (3/20; 15%) (p = 0.008). Desaturation was the most common adverse respiratory event with significantly greater incidence in ketofol group (9/20; 45%) when compared to propofol only group (3/20; 15%) (p = 0.033). No significant differences regarding secondary outcomes were reported in two groups. CONCLUSION: Both the regimen exhibited similar sedation profile while propofol alone emerged as a safer option.
Authors: Marija Stevic; Nina Ristic; Ivana Budic; Nebojsa Ladjevic; Branislav Trifunovic; Ivan Rakic; Marko Majstorovic; Ivana Burazor; Dusica Simic Journal: Lasers Med Sci Date: 2017-07-12 Impact factor: 3.161
Authors: Abel Wakai; Carol Blackburn; Aileen McCabe; Emilia Reece; Ger O'Connor; John Glasheen; Paul Staunton; John Cronin; Christopher Sampson; Siobhan C McCoy; Ronan O'Sullivan; Fergal Cummins Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2015-07-29