Comparison of propofol-remifentanil and propofol-ketamine combination for dilatation and currettage: a randomized double blind prospective trial

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.authoridHORASANLI, EYUP/0000-0002-6077-8549
dc.authoridArikan, Muge/0000-0003-2931-1729
dc.authoridASLAN, Bilge/0000-0001-6366-7548
dc.contributor.authorArikan, M.
dc.contributor.authorAslan, B.
dc.contributor.authorArikan, O.
dc.contributor.authorBut, A.
dc.contributor.authorHorasanli, E.
dc.date.accessioned2024-09-29T16:11:27Z
dc.date.available2024-09-29T16:11:27Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.departmentKarabük Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the propofol-remifentanil combination and propofol-ketamine combination for Dilatation and Curettage (DC) procedure. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective, double blind, and randomized study comprised 81 female patients undergoing diagnostic DC. Patients were randomly allocated to one of two groups; propofol-remifentanil (Group PR, n=44) or propofol-ketamine (Group PK, n=37). The level of sedation was assessed with the Ramsay Sedation Score (RSS). The patients' RSS scores were maintained at 4-5 with an additional 0.5 mg/kg bolus dose of propofol. Heart rate (HR), mean blood pressure (MBP), peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO(2)), and RSS were recorded. The Modify Aldrete Score (MAS) was used for postoperative recovery evaluation, and the time to reach MAS score of 10 was recorded. Total dose of propofol, procedure time, side effects, and satisfaction scores of patient and surgeon were also recorded. RESULTS: The mean HR and MBP values of Group PR were lower than those of Group PK, at all recording times. Sedation levels were significantly higher in Group PK. The total dose of propofol consumed was significantly higher in Group PR. The recovery time of Group PK was significantly longer than that of Group PF (p< 0.05). Nausea-vomiting and bradycardia were more frequent in the Group PR. There was no difference in patient and surgeon satisfaction between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Ketamine-propofol combination provides better hemodynamic stability and better quality of sedation than propofol-remifentanil combination. Ketamine still seems as an advantageous and safe drug for such procedure.en_US
dc.identifier.endpage3527en_US
dc.identifier.issn1128-3602
dc.identifier.issue18en_US
dc.identifier.pmid26439052en_US
dc.identifier.startpage3522en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14619/8445
dc.identifier.volume19en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000362577000032en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ3en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMeden_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherVerduci Publisheren_US
dc.relation.ispartofEuropean Review For Medical and Pharmacological Sciencesen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectDilatation and curettageen_US
dc.subjectPropofolen_US
dc.subjectKetamineen_US
dc.subjectRemifentanilen_US
dc.titleComparison of propofol-remifentanil and propofol-ketamine combination for dilatation and currettage: a randomized double blind prospective trialen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu