SynthesisInternal and emergency medicine2019
A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials: combination of ketamine and propofol versus ketamine alone for procedural sedation and analgesia in children.
Synthesis in Internal and emergency medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Incidence of Adverse Effects of Propofol for Procedural Sedation/Anesthesia in the Pediatric Emergency Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Continuous infusion of lidocaine in pediatric colonoscopy: A randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study.Saudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology AssociationTrial
- Midazolam-Ketamine (MK) Versus Propofol-Ketamine (PK) for Pediatric Burn Patients Undergoing Dressing Changes: A Non-Randomized Cross-Over Clinical Trial.Annals of burns and fire disasters · 2025Article
- The impact of oral melatonin on pain and anxiety reduction during venipuncture in pediatric patients: a double-blind randomized clinical trial.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2024Article
- Evaluating the Quality of Systematic Reviews on Pediatric Sedation in Dentistry: An Umbrella Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Nanotherapeutics for Alleviating Anesthesia-Associated Complications.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024Review
- Article
- Efficacy and safety of the combination of propofol and S(+)-ketamine for procedural sedation in pediatric patients undergoing totally implantable venous access port implantation: A prospective randomized controlled study.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Article
- Refractory symptoms in paediatric palliative care: can ketamine help?Drugs in context · 2021Review
- Moderate and deep sedation for non-invasive paediatric procedures in tertiary maternity and children's hospitals in China: a questionnaire survey from China.BMC health services research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although ketamine has been used for procedural sedation and analgesia, some researchers have assessed ketamine-propofol as a better alternative because of its reduced adverse events. The goal of this review was to compare adverse events between ketamine-propofol and ketamine for procedural sedation and analgesia in children. We searched the literature from their inception to May 2018 without the restriction of language. We included all randomized controlled trials comparing ketamine-propofol with ketamine for procedural sedation and analgesia in children. The meta-analysis was conducted using the Stata software. A total of six studies involving 693 individuals were included. Pooling of data showed that subjects with ketamine-propofol had similar incidence of respiratory adverse events compared to those with ketamine (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.68-1.98). However, ketamine-propofol was effective in reducing cardiovascular adverse events compared to ketamine (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.04-0.31). Ketamine-propofol was also effective in reducing psychomimetic adverse events compared to ketamine (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.16-0.93). In regard to nausea and vomiting, ketamine-propofol was significantly effective (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.25-0.74). In addition, we could not demonstrate differences in efficacious sedation between ketamine-propofol and ketamine. Although our study was not able to demonstrate differences in efficacious sedation between ketamine-propofol and ketamine, we confirmed that ketamine-propofol sedation had a lower frequency of adverse events compared to ketamine sedation in children.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.