MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170591989 · doi:10.1592/phco.27.11.1588

Combination Ketamine and Propofol for Procedural Sedation and Analgesia

2007· review· en· W2170591989 on OpenAlexaff
Victoria C. Slavik

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmacotherapy The Journal of Human Pharmacology and Drug Therapy · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Sedative Agents
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentreInterior Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKetaminePropofolSedationMedicineAnesthesiaAdverse effectClinical trialPharmacologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The combination of ketamine and propofol for procedural sedation and analgesia theoretically may be beneficial, with the rationale being that using lower doses of each agent may result in a reduction of the undesirable adverse effects of both agents while maintaining optimal conditions for performing procedures. To examine the current evidence for the efficacy and safety of ketamine and propofol in combination for procedural sedation and analgesia, we searched the MEDLINE (1966-March 2007), EMBASE (1980-March 2007), and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (through the first quarter of 2007) databases for reports describing the use of ketamine and propofol in combination for procedural sedation and analgesia. Additional published reports were identified through a manual search of references from retrieved articles. Prospective, comparative, full-text reports of studies performed in humans that were published in English were reviewed for inclusion. Both authors independently evaluated all studies. Studies in adult and pediatric patients were included if they evaluated efficacy or safety end points. Eight clinical trials were included, seven of which compared a combination of propofol and ketamine with propofol monotherapy. In these trials, variable milligram:milligram ratios of propofol and ketamine were used, ranging from 10:1-2:1, and the optimum dose of these agents in combination is unclear. Combination propofol and ketamine has not demonstrated superior clinical efficacy compared with propofol alone for procedural sedation and analgesia. Conflicting data exist regarding reduced hemodynamic and respiratory complications in patients receiving the combination compared with propofol monotherapy. At higher doses, the addition of ketamine to propofol may incur more adverse effects. Compatibility data for the two agents combined in a syringe are limited. The available evidence does not support the use of a fixed-dose ketamine-propofol combination for procedural sedation and analgesia. Further research is needed to elucidate the role, if any, of this combination for procedural sedation and analgesia.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.083
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.354 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations57
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePharmacotherapy The Journal of Human Pharmacology and Drug TherapySame topicAnesthesia and Sedative AgentsFrench-language works237,207