Effectiveness and safety of ketamine and etomidate for rapid sequential intubation: a Meta-analysis
-
摘要:目的
比较氯胺酮和依托咪酯在快速顺序插管(RSI)中的有效性和安全性。
方法通过计算机检索中国知网、万方数据、维普、PubMed、Embase、Cochrane图书馆、Clinicaltrials.gov建库至2023年5月1日发表的有关于氯胺酮和依托咪酯用于急危重症患者RSI的随机对照实验(RCT)和队列研究。根据纳入和排除标准对文献进行筛选, 并对文献进行数据提取和质量评估。采用RevMan 5.3软件进行Meta分析。
结果最终纳入15篇文献, 共计20 839例患者, 包括3项RCT和12项队列研究。Meta分析结果显示, 与依托咪酯组相比, 氯胺酮组的首次插管成功率(RR=0.99, 95 %CI: 0.98~1.00, P=0.10)、心脏骤停发生率(RR=1.00, 95 %CI: 0.62~1.62, P=0.99)、机械通气时间(MD=0.33, 95 %CI: -0.34~1.01, P=0.33)、病死率(RR=1.05, 95 %CI: 0.95~1.16, P=0.31)均无显著差异, 肾上腺皮质功能不全发生率显著降低(RR=0.54, 95 %CI: 0.41~0.70, P < 0.001), ICU住院时间显著缩短(MD=-0.44, 95 %CI: -0.70~-0.18, P=0.001), 但低氧血症发生率显著升高(RR=1.50, 95 %CI: 1.27~1.79, P < 0.001)。
结论在充分预给氧的RSI过程中, 氯胺酮是一种安全有效的替代药物, 相比于依托咪酯, 其肾上腺皮质功能不全的发生率更低, 可以缩短ICU住院时间。
Abstract:ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness and safety of ketamine and etomidate for rapid sequential intubation.
MethodsRandomized controlled trials and cohort studies with ketamine and etomidate for RSI in patients with acute and critical illnesses published by China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data, VIP Network, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Clinicaltrials.gov from the date of database creation to May 1, 2023 were searched by computer. The literatures were screened according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the data of literatures were also extracted for quality assessment. Meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 5.3 software.
ResultsA total of 15 literatures with 20 839 patients were included, including 3 RCT studies and 12 cohort studies. Meta-analysis showed that there were no significant differences in the success rate of primary intubation (RR=0.99, 95 %CI, 0.98 to 1.00, P=0.10), incidence of cardiac arrest (RR=1.00, 95 %CI, 0.62 to 1.62, P=0.99), time of mechanical ventilation (MD=0.33, 95 %CI, -0.34 to 1.01, P=0.33), and mortality rate (RR=1.05, 95 %CI, 0.95 to 1.16, P=0.31) between the ketamine group and the etomidate group, but the incidence of adrenal insufficiency (RR=0.54, 95 %CI, 0.41 to 0.70, P < 0.001) and ICU stay (MD=-0.44, 95 %CI, -0.70 to -0.18, P=0.001) in the etomidate group were significantly lower and shorter than those in the ketamine group, while the incidence of hypoxemia was significantly higher in the etomidate group (RR=1.50, 95 %CI, 1.27 to 1.79, P < 0.001).
ConclusionDuring the process of RSI with sufficient preoxygenation, ketamine is a safe and effective alternative drug, and compared with etomidate, it has a lower incidence of adrenal insufficiency and shorter ICU stay.
-
-
表 1 纳入文献基本信息
作者 发表时间 研究类型 例数/例 插管环境 干预措施 结局指标 T C T C PATANWALA A E等[6] 2014 队列研究 115 1 983 ED 未提及 未提及 ① PRICE B等[7] 2013 队列研究 50 50 院前 1.0~2.0 mg/kg 3.0 mg/kg ①③ UPCHURCH C P等[8] 2017 队列研究 442 526 ED 1.0~2.0 mg/kg 0.3 mg/kg ①②④ WAN C等[9] 2021 队列研究 792 919 ICU 未提及 未提及 ④⑥ MATCHETT G等[10] 2022 RCT 395 396 ICU 1.0~2.0 mg/kg 0.2~0.3 mg/kg ①②⑤⑥⑦ APRIL M D等[11] 2020 队列研究 738 6 068 ED 未提及 未提及 ①②③④ STANKE L等[12] 2021 队列研究 33 80 院前 1.5~2.0 mg/kg 0.3 mg/kg ① VAN BERKEL M A等[13] 2017 队列研究 184 200 ICU 1.0~2.0 mg/kg 0.2~0.6 mg/kg ④⑥ FARRELL N M等[14] 2020 队列研究 9 47 ED 未提及 未提及 ① MOHR N M等[15] 2020 队列研究 140 363 ED 未提及 未提及 ①③ DRIVER B ER[16] 2019 RCT 67 62 ICU 未提及 未提及 ① POLLACK M A等[17] 2020 队列研究 3 463 1 381 院前 2.0 mg/kg 0.3 mg/kg ①②③ JABRE P等[18] 2009 RCT 235 234 ICU 2.0 mg/kg 0.3 mg/kg ②⑤ SIVILOTTI M L等[19] 2003 队列研究 69 1 334 ED 未提及 未提及 ① 阚景祥等[20] 2018 队列研究 208 256 ICU 未提及 未提及 ④⑥ T: 氯胺酮组; C: 依托咪酯组; ED: 急诊科; ICU: 重症监护室; ①: 首次插管成功率; ②: 心脏骤停; ③: 低氧血症; ④: 病死率; ⑤: 肾上腺皮质功能不全; ⑥: ICU住院时间; ⑦: 机械通气时间。 
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 队列研究文献质量
分 纳入文献 队列的选择 可比性 结果 NOS评分 暴露组代表 非暴露组代表 暴露因素确定 确定结局指标 基于设计所得队列的可比性 评价是否充分 随访是否充分 随访的完整性 PATANWALA A E等[6] 1 1 1 1 2 1 0 0 7 PRICE B等[7] 1 1 0 1 2 1 1 1 8 UPCHURCH C P等[8] 1 1 0 1 2 1 1 1 8 WAN C等[9] 1 1 0 1 2 1 1 1 8 APRIL M D等[11] 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 9 STANKE L等[12] 1 1 0 1 2 1 1 0 7 VAN BERKEL M A等[13] 1 1 0 1 2 1 1 0 7 FARRELL N M等[14] 1 1 0 1 2 1 1 0 7 MOHR N M等[15] 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 0 8 POLLACK M A等[17] 1 1 0 1 2 1 1 0 7 SIVILOTTI M L等[19] 1 1 1 1 2 1 0 0 7 阚景祥等[20] 1 1 0 1 2 1 1 0 7
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] MOSIER J M, SAKLES J C, LAW J A, et al. Tracheal intubation in the critically ill. where we came from and where we should go[J]. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2020, 201(7): 775-788. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201908-1636CI
[2] APRIL M D, LONG B, BROWN C A 3rd. Etomidate should be the default agent for rapid sequence intubation in the emergency department[J]. Ann Emerg Med, 2021, 78(6): 720-721. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2021.05.018
[3] PEKSA G D, GOTTLIEB M. Ketamine should be the preferred agent for rapid sequence intubation[J]. Ann Emerg Med, 2021, 78(6): 722-723. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2021.07.118
[4] ALBERT S G, ARIYAN S, RATHER A. The effect of etomidate on adrenal function in critical illness: a systematic review[J]. Intensive Care Med, 2011, 37(6): 901-910. doi: 10.1007/s00134-011-2160-1
[5] MERELMAN A H, PERLMUTTER M C, STRAYER R J. Alternatives to rapid sequence intubation: contemporary airway management with ketamine[J]. West J Emerg Med, 2019, 20(3): 466-471. doi: 10.5811/westjem.2019.4.42753
[6] PATANWALA A E, MCKINNEY C B, ERSTAD B L, et al. Retrospective analysis of etomidate versus ketamine for first-pass intubation success in an academic emergency department[J]. Acad Emerg Med, 2014, 21(1): 87-91. doi: 10.1111/acem.12292
[7] PRICE B, ARTHUR A O, BRUNKO M, et al. Hemodynamic consequences of ketamine vs etomidate for endotracheal intubation in the air medical setting[J]. Am J Emerg Med, 2013, 31(7): 1124-1132. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2013.03.041
[8] UPCHURCH C P, GRIJALVA C G, RUSS S, et al. Comparison of etomidate and ketamine for induction during rapid sequence intubation ofAdult trauma patients[J]. Ann Emerg Med, 2017, 69(1): 24-33, e2. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2016.08.009
[9] WAN C, HANSON A C, SCHULTE P J, et al. Propofol, ketamine, and etomidate as induction agents for intubation and outcomes in critically ill patients: a retrospective cohort study[J]. Crit Care Explor, 2021, 3(5): e0435. doi: 10.1097/CCE.0000000000000435
[10] MATCHETT G, GASANOVA I, RICCIO C A, et al. Etomidate versus ketamine for emergency endotracheal intubation: a randomized clinical trial[J]. Intensive Care Med, 2022, 48(1): 78-91. doi: 10.1007/s00134-021-06577-x
[11] APRIL M D, ARANA A, SCHAUER S G, et al. Ketamine versus etomidate and peri-intubation hypotension: a national emergency airway registry study[J]. Acad Emerg Med, 2020, 27(11): 1106-1115. doi: 10.1111/acem.14063
[12] STANKE L, NAKAJIMA S, ZIMMERMAN L H, et al. Hemodynamic effects of ketamine versus etomidate for prehospital rapid sequence intubation[J]. Air Med J, 2021, 40(5): 312-316. doi: 10.1016/j.amj.2021.05.009
[13] VAN BERKEL M A, EXLINE M C, CAPE K M, et al. Increased incidence of clinical hypotension with etomidate compared to ketamine for intubation in septic patients: a propensity matched analysis[J]. J Crit Care, 2017, 38: 209-214. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2016.11.009
[14] FARRELL N M, KILLIUS K, KUE R, et al. A comparison of etomidate, ketamine, and methohexital in emergency department rapid sequence intubation[J]. J Emerg Med, 2020, 59(4): 508-514. doi: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2020.06.054
[15] MOHR N M, PAPE S G, DAN R D, et al. Etomidate use is associated with less hypotension than ketamine for emergency department sepsis intubations: a NEAR cohort study[J]. Acad Emerg Med, 2020, 27(11): 1140-1149. doi: 10.1111/acem.14070
[16] DRIVER B ER. Ketamine versus etomidate for rapid sequence intubation[EB/OL]. ClinicalTrials. gov. 2019. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT01823328.
[17] POLLACK M A, FENATI G M, PENNINGTON T W, et al. The use of ketamine for air medical rapid sequence intubation was not associated with a decrease in hypotension or cardiopulmonary arrest[J]. Air Med J, 2020, 39(2): 111-115. doi: 10.1016/j.amj.2019.11.003
[18] JABRE P, COMBES X, LAPOSTOLLE F, et al. Etomidate versus ketamine for rapid sequence intubation in acutely ill patients: a multicentre randomised controlled trial[J]. Lancet, 2009, 374(9686): 293-300. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60949-1
[19] SIVILOTTI M L, FILBIN M R, MURRAY H E, et al. Does the sedative agent facilitate emergency rapid sequence intubation[J]. Acad Emerg Med, 2003, 10(6): 612-620. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2003.tb00044.x
[20] 阚景祥, 朱海颖, 赵国芹, 等. 依托咪酯与氯胺酮对ICU脓毒症患者插管后血压的影响[J]. 中国急救医学, 2018, 38(2): 184-188. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZJJY201802021.htm [21] ENGSTROM K, BROWN C S, MATTSON A E, et al. Pharmacotherapy optimization for rapid sequence intubation in the emergency department[J]. Am J Emerg Med, 2023, 70: 19-29. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2023.05.004
[22] SHARDA S C, BHATIA M S. Etomidate compared to ketamine for induction during rapid sequence intubation: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Indian J Crit Care Med, 2022, 26(1): 108-113. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10071-24086
[23] NATT B S, MALO J, HYPES C D, et al. Strategies to improve first attempt success at intubation in critically ill patients[J]. Br J Anaesth, 2016, 117(Suppl 1): i60-i68.
[24] GIL-JARDINÉ C, JABRE P, ADNET F, et al. Incidence and factors associated with out-of-hospital peri-intubation cardiac arrest: a secondary analysis of the CURASMUR trial[J]. Intern Emerg Med, 2022, 17(2): 611-617. doi: 10.1007/s11739-021-02903-9
[25] APRIL M D, ARANA A, REYNOLDS J C, et al. Peri-intubation cardiac arrest in the Emergency Department: a National Emergency Airway Registry (NEAR) study[J]. Resuscitation, 2021, 162: 403-411. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2021.02.039
[26] SMISCHNEY N J, KHANNA A K, BRAUER E, et al. Risk factors for and outcomes associated with peri-intubation hypoxemia: a multicenter prospective cohort study[J]. J Intensive Care Med, 2021, 36(12): 1466-1474. doi: 10.1177/0885066620962445
[27] RUSSOTTO V, MYATRA S N, LAFFEY J G, et al. Intubation practices and adverse peri-intubation events in critically ill patients from 29 countries[J]. JAMA, 2021, 325(12): 1164-1172. doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.1727
[28] VALK B I, STRUYS M M R F. Etomidate and its analogs: a review of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics[J]. Clin Pharmacokinet, 2021, 60(10): 1253-1269. doi: 10.1007/s40262-021-01038-6
[29] BRUDER E A, BALL I M, RIDI S, et al. Single induction dose of etomidate versus other induction agents for endotracheal intubation in critically ill patients[J]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2015, 1(1): CD010225.
[30] KUZA C M, TO J, CHANG A, et al. A retrospective data analysis on the induction medications used in trauma rapid sequence intubations and their effects on outcomes[J]. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg, 2022, 48(3): 2275-2286. doi: 10.1007/s00068-021-01759-0
-
期刊类型引用(2)
1. 何君梅，李思宇，唐志红. 创伤性颅脑损伤的临床治疗进展. 中国临床医生杂志. 2025(01): 19-23 . 
百度学术
2. 吴碧珠. 集束化护理干预对外伤性颅脑损伤患者负性情绪、生命质量及睡眠质量的影响. 世界睡眠医学杂志. 2023(08): 1896-1899 . 百度学术
其他类型引用(0)
计量
- 文章访问数: 125
- HTML全文浏览量: 36
- PDF下载量: 8
- 被引次数: 2
苏公网安备 32100302010246号
