Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28422805›Full record

Trial reportThe journal of ECT2017

A Randomized Pilot Study Comparing Ketamine and Methohexital Anesthesia for Electroconvulsive Therapy in Patients With Depression.

Shona L Ray-Griffith, Lou Ann Eads, Xiaotong Han, Kimberly Golden, Zachary N Stowe

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The journal of ECT, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Ketamine and depression: a narrative review.Drug design, development and therapy · 2019
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Shona L Ray-Griffith
Lou Ann Eads
Xiaotong Han
Kimberly Golden
Zachary N Stowe
Arkansas Children's Hospital · US

Funding

Arkansas Center for Clinical and Translational ResearchUL1TR000039 · NCATS · UNIV OF ARKANSAS FOR MED SCIS · PI BECK, CORNELIA MARIE, JAMES, LAURA P · 2012 to 2014
$10.0M
Arkansas Center for Clinical Translational ResearchKL2TR000063 · NCATS · UNIV OF ARKANSAS FOR MED SCIS · PI BECK, CORNELIA MARIE, JAMES, LAURA P · 2012 to 2014
$459k
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR000063NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000039
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis randomized controlled pilot study examines the differences in response to electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) as defined by an improvement of depressive symptoms between ketamine and methohexital as the primary anesthetic agent. Adverse effects and cognitive tolerability were also examined.

methodsSubjects undergoing ECT for unipolar or bipolar depression were randomized to receive ketamine or methohexital as the anesthetic agent. Primary outcome measure includes the Hamilton rating scale for depression (17-item). Secondary outcome measures included the mini-mental status examination and Beck depression inventory. All ratings were conducted masked to anesthetic agent. Because of multiple outcome measures obtained over time, mixed models were used to account for the correlations among the measurements within the subjects. Because outcomes were either normally distributed or approximately normally distributed, general linear mixed models were fit with a random intercept specified.

resultsA total of 21 subjects were enrolled, and 16 were randomized (methohexital, n = 8; ketamine, n = 8). The 2 treatment groups did not differ statistically in any demographic characteristic. No statistical difference was found between the ketamine and methohexital groups for an improvement in depressive symptoms (P = 0.6); however, subjects in both groups showed significant improvement in depression over time (ketamine, P < 0.0001; methohexital, P < 0.0001). Mini-mental status examination results did not differ between groups, and fatigue was reported more in subjects receiving ketamine (P = 0.03).

conclusionsThe results of this pilot study are inconclusive because they lack power to support an advantage of ketamine anesthesia compared with methohexital in ameliorating depressive symptoms for electroconvulsive therapy.

Indexed as

Anesthetics, DissociativeAnesthetics, IntravenousKetamineMethohexitalAdultAgedAnesthesiaAnesthesia, IntravenousBipolar DisorderDepressive DisorderElectroconvulsive TherapyFatigueFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedAnesthetics, DissociativeAnesthetics, IntravenousKetamineMethohexital

Identifiers

PMID28422805
PMCPMC5647204
OpenAlexW2605588856

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.