Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (4)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = ketofol

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
15 pages, 2720 KB  
Article
Ketamine–Propofol Coadministration for Induction and Infusion Maintenance in Anesthetized Dogs: Effects on Electroencephalography and Antinociception
by Jeff C. Ko, Carla Murillo, Ann B. Weil, Matthias Kreuzer and George E. Moore
Animals 2023, 13(21), 3391; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13213391 - 1 Nov 2023
Cited by 6 | Viewed by 5289
Abstract
The effects of concurrent ketamine and propofol (ketofol) constant rate infusion (CRI) were examined in six dogs. The K:P ratio was 1:2, with an initial CRI of 0.25/0.5 mg/kg/min over ten minutes, followed by a 0.5 mg/kg ketamine bolus for induction. During induction, [...] Read more.
The effects of concurrent ketamine and propofol (ketofol) constant rate infusion (CRI) were examined in six dogs. The K:P ratio was 1:2, with an initial CRI of 0.25/0.5 mg/kg/min over ten minutes, followed by a 0.5 mg/kg ketamine bolus for induction. During induction, a comprehensive EEG frequency spectrum from delta to gamma was observed, accompanied by subanesthetic-dose ketofol-induced behavioral excitation, including nystagmus, tongue flicking, salivation and active muscle activity. The dogs were maintained on three 15 min decremental doses of ketofol CRI (0.8/1.6, 0.4/0.8 and 0.2/0.4 mg/kg/min). This phase featured a significant decrease in the Patient State Index, electromyographic activity and a shift to low beta waves (SEF95: 13–18 Hz). Additionally, profound antinociception to electric stimulation and a stable heart rate and blood pressure (MBP 81.5–110 mmHg) were observed, as well as a merging of ketamine and propofol EEG characteristics during maintenance. In the recovery phase, a return to beta and gamma EEG patterns and excitement behavior occurred, accompanied by a significant reduction in antinociception, highlighting features of low doses of ketofol. This study reveals biphasic EEG dynamic changes, associated behaviors and robust antinociception and cardiovascular function, suggesting the utility of ketofol as a total intravenous anesthetic combination in dogs. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Veterinary Clinical Studies)
Show Figures

Figure 1

9 pages, 879 KB  
Article
Total Intravenous Anesthesia with Ketofol versus Combination of Ketofol and Lidocaine for Short-Term Anesthesia in Pediatric Patients; Double Blind, Randomized Clinical Trial of Effects on Recovery
by Ana Nevešćanin Biliškov, Danijela Gulam, Marija Žaja and Zenon Pogorelić
Children 2022, 9(2), 282; https://doi.org/10.3390/children9020282 - 18 Feb 2022
Cited by 5 | Viewed by 4185
Abstract
Background: Ketofol admixture has been proposed to be useful for sedation and general anesthesia. The beneficial effect of the combination of ketofol with lidocaine may be a shortened time of anesthesia and recovery period. This study aimed to establish the effect of total [...] Read more.
Background: Ketofol admixture has been proposed to be useful for sedation and general anesthesia. The beneficial effect of the combination of ketofol with lidocaine may be a shortened time of anesthesia and recovery period. This study aimed to establish the effect of total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with ketofol and ketofol with lidocaine on recovery in children. Methods: Two hundred children from the ages of 1–12 years who underwent short surgical procedures were randomly allocated into two groups. Propofol mixtures (ketofol) were prepared for group l. A ratio of 1:4 of ketofol was used for induction and for the maintenance of anesthesia a ratio of was used 1:7. For the induction and maintenance of anesthesia ketofol with lidocaine (lidoketofol) was used in group II. The McFarlan infusion regimen was used with reduction. The extubating time, anesthesia duration and the length of stay in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) were recorded. Results: Extubation time showed to be considerably shorter in the lidoketofol group than in the ketofol group (120 s versus 240 s; p < 0.00001). The anesthesia duration was also significantly shorter in the lidoketofol group (35 min vs. 50 min; p < 0.00001). The lidoketofol group showed to have a lower length of stay in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) than the ketofol group (20 min vs. 35 min; p < 0.00001). The lidoketofol group showed lower fentanyl consumption per kg (2.1 µg per kg vs. 2.3 µg per kg; p < 0.056) and lower propofol consumption (6.6 mg per kg vs. 7.6 mg per kg; p < 0.032). Conclusion: The recovery in pediatric anesthesia can improve with usage of TIVA with ketofol plus lidocaine admixture with a reduced McFarlan dose regimen. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Pediatric Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine)
Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 1553 KB  
Article
Effects on Recovery of Pediatric Patients Undergoing Total Intravenous Anesthesia with Propofol versus Ketofol for Short—Lasting Laparoscopic Procedures
by Ana Nevešćanin Biliškov, Božena Ivančev and Zenon Pogorelić
Children 2021, 8(7), 610; https://doi.org/10.3390/children8070610 - 19 Jul 2021
Cited by 14 | Viewed by 5917
Abstract
Background: Combining ketamine and propofol (ketofol) was suggested as a new concept for sedation and general anesthesia in pediatric populations for various conditions. The aim of the present study was to determine the effect of total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with propofol and ketofol [...] Read more.
Background: Combining ketamine and propofol (ketofol) was suggested as a new concept for sedation and general anesthesia in pediatric populations for various conditions. The aim of the present study was to determine the effect of total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with propofol and ketofol on recovery after laparoscopic surgery in pediatric patients. Methods: Two hundred children with median age of 5 years who underwent laparoscopic surgery were randomized into two groups. Propofol 1% was used for induction and maintenance of anesthesia in group I, while ketamine-propofol combination (ketofol) was used in group II. Ketamine-propofol combination (ketofol) was prepared in the same applicator for group II. Ketofol ratios of 1:4 and 1:7 were used for induction and maintenance of anesthesia, respectively. A reduced McFarlan infusion dose was used in group I (1.2, 1.0, and 0.8 mL/kg/h for 15, 15, and 30 min, respectively), while a McFarlan infusion dose was used in group II (1.5, 1.3, and 1.1 mL/kg/h for 15, 15, and 30 min, respectively). Extubating time, duration of anesthesia, and length of stay in post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) were recorded. Results: Extubating time was significantly lower in the ketofol group than in the propofol group (240 s vs. 530 s; p < 0.00001). Significantly shorter duration of anesthesia (47 min vs. 60 min; p < 0.00001) as well as length of stay in the PACU (35 min vs. 100 min; p < 0.00001) were recorded in ketofol compared to the propofol group. Total fentanyl (100 µg (interquartile range, IQR 80, 125) vs. 50 µg (IQR 40, 60); p < 0.00001) and propofol (260 mg (IQR 200, 350) vs. 160 mg (IQR 120, 210); p < 0.00001) consumption per body weight were significantly lower in the ketofol group. Conclusions: TIVA with ketamine-propofol combination (ketofol) using a reduced McFarlan dose regimen shortened extubating time, duration of anesthesia, as well as length of stay in the PACU in pediatric anesthesia after laparoscopic surgery. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Pediatric Surgery)
Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 1101 KB  
Article
Procedural Sedation Using a Propofol–Ketamine Combination (Ketofol) vs. Propofol Alone in the Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure (LEEP): A Randomized Controlled Trial
by Chahyun Oh, Yeojung Kim, Hongsik Eom, Sookyoung Youn, Sangmin Lee, Young-Bok Ko, Heon Jong Yoo, Woosuk Chung, ChaeSeong Lim and Boohwi Hong
J. Clin. Med. 2019, 8(7), 943; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm8070943 - 28 Jun 2019
Cited by 11 | Viewed by 5238
Abstract
Background: Although the loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) is a brief procedure, it can cause severe pain and discomfort to patients in the absence of adequate sedation. An admixture of ketamine with propofol (ketofol), may reduce patient movement due to insufficient sedation while [...] Read more.
Background: Although the loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) is a brief procedure, it can cause severe pain and discomfort to patients in the absence of adequate sedation. An admixture of ketamine with propofol (ketofol), may reduce patient movement due to insufficient sedation while providing hemodynamic and respiratory stability. This study evaluated the ability of two ratios of a propofol–ketamine combination, compared with propofol alone, to reduce patient movement during procedural sedation for LEEPs. Methods: One hundred and twenty women scheduled for a LEEP were randomly assigned to three groups. Anesthesia was induced with 1 mg/kg propofol (group P), 1 mg/kg propofol and 0.33 mg/kg ketamine (group K1), or 1 mg/kg propofol and 0.66 mg/kg ketamine (group K2). The primary outcome was the incidence of adduction motion in the lower extremities during the procedure. The requirements for respiratory interventions, changes in vital signs, sedation score, additional anesthetic usage, and surgeon and patient satisfaction were also evaluated. Results: The incidence of adduction motion was significantly lower in groups K1 and K2 than in group P (overall p-value <0.001) but did not differ significantly in groups K1 and K2. Group K2 needed more jaw thrust maneuvers than group K1. Additional propofol usage was lower and surgeon satisfaction scores higher in groups K1 and K2 than in group P. Conclusion: A propofol–ketamine combination is more effective than propofol alone in reducing procedural interference during LEEPs. However, increasing the dose of ketamine showed no additional benefit. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Anesthesiology)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop