Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41259542›Full record

ArticleCritical care science2025

Prospective, randomized, controlled trial comparing PROpofol versus KetaMINE in rapid sequence intubation in critically ill patients (PROMINE): protocol paper and statistical analysis plan.

Raysa Cristina Schmidt, Fernando Godinho Zampieri, Fernando Jose da Silva Ramos, Felipe Santos Cavatoni Serra, Lucas Petri Damiani, Flávio Geraldo Rezende de Freitas, Flávia Ribeiro Machado

Abstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Trial
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

7 authors.

Raysa Cristina SchmidtIntensive Care Department, Hospital São Paulo, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo - São Paulo (SP), Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9777-113X
Fernando Godinho ZampieriIntensive Care Department, Hospital São Paulo, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo - São Paulo (SP), Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9315-6386
Fernando Jose da Silva RamosIntensive Care Department, Hospital São Paulo, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo - São Paulo (SP), Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5277-4759
Felipe Santos Cavatoni SerraIntensive Care Department, Hospital São Paulo, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo - São Paulo (SP), Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0005-9452-5821
Lucas Petri DamianiIntensive Care Department, Hospital São Paulo, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo - São Paulo (SP), Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5836-3379
Flávio Geraldo Rezende de FreitasIntensive Care Department, Hospital São Paulo, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo - São Paulo (SP), Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7144-6494
Flávia Ribeiro MachadoIntensive Care Department, Hospital São Paulo, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo - São Paulo (SP), Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2356-4867

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe optimal and safest hypnotic agent for rapid sequence intubation in critically ill patients remains uncertain. Factors such as hypovolemia, vasoplegia, hypoxemia, and acidosis can influence the efficacy and safety of induction agents. Propofol is commonly used for this purpose; however, it is associated with the risk of exacerbating hypotension. Ketamine, which has a more favorable hemodynamic profile, may offer a safer alternative in these patients.

objectiveTo assess whether ketamine is a safer alternative to propofol for rapid sequence intubation by reducing the incidence of hypotension during induction in critically ill patients.

methodsThis will be a randomized, open-label, pragmatic, bicenter study. A total of 170 critically ill patients requiring endotracheal intubation in the intensive care unit will be randomly assigned to receive either ketamine or propofol as the hypnotic agent. Randomization will be conducted using RedCap with a 1:1 ratio and variable block sizes, stratified by study site and vasopressor use during intubation.

resultsThe primary outcome will be the occurrence of hypotension, defined as the lowest mean arterial pressure recorded within the first 10 minutes following induction. Secondary outcomes, assessed within 1-hour post-induction, include mortality, incidence of cardiopulmonary arrest, the occurrence of severe hypotension (systolic blood pressure < 80mmHg), the occurrence of severe hypoxemia (oxygen saturation < 85%), and the number of intubation attempts.

conclusionThe PROMINE study will provide valuable evidence to guide the selection of hypnotic agents for rapid sequence intubation in critically ill patients. It will contribute to a better understanding of the hemodynamic effects associated with propofol and ketamine in this context, potentially informing clinical practice.

Indexed as

Critical IllnessHypnotics and SedativesIntubation, IntratrachealKetaminePropofolRapid Sequence Induction and IntubationFemaleHumansHypotensionIntensive Care UnitsPragmatic Clinical Trials as TopicProspective StudiesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicHypnotics and SedativesKetaminePropofol

Identifiers

PMID41259542
PMCPMC12614951

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.