ArticleEuropean archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience2025
Arketamine: a scoping review of its use in humans.
Article in European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pleiotropic modulation of the gut-brain-lung axis by ketamine and its enantiomers.Molecular psychiatry · 2026Review
- Dexmedetomidine-esketamine combination for anesthesia in a patient with severe Swyer-James-Macleod syndrome: a case report.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Article
- Ketamine dosing formula in treatment-resistant bipolar depression.Therapeutic advances in psychopharmacology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Arketamine (R-ketamine), an enantiomer of ketamine, has historically been less studied than esketamine (S-ketamine) and the racemic mixture. Recent preclinical studies suggest that arketamine may offer prolonged antidepressant effects and a superior safety profile. This scoping review aims to assess and synthesise existing literature on the clinical use of arketamine in humans. This review follows the PRISMA for Scoping Reviews guidelines, with a comprehensive search conducted in PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry. Eligible studies included those reporting the administration of arketamine to humans. Data were extracted and synthesised descriptively. A total of 20 studies involving 410 subjects were included. Arketamine was primarily investigated for pain management and depression. While early evidence suggests arketamine may be effective in reducing pain, most studies were small and conducted in non-clinical settings. In psychiatry, trials indicate potential antidepressant effects, but results are inconsistent, and some studies remain unpublished. A consistent observation across most studies is arketamine's favourable safety profile, showing lower incidences of dissociative and psychotomimetic effects compared to esketamine and racemic ketamine. Arketamine may have a role in pain management and psychiatry, with a favourable safety profile compared to other forms of ketamine. However, the small scale of many studies limits the generalizability of findings, and results in depression trials are mixed. Larger, well-designed studies, possibly with higher doses, are needed to determine its therapeutic potential and establish its place in clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39680139What 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.