Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42100028›Full record

ArticleBJA open2026

Tolerability and efficacy profile of S-ketamine compared with racemic ketamine in surgical patients, a prospective observational before-and-after study in the perioperative setting.

Daniel El Khoury, Amélie Cambriel, Emmanuel Pardo, Aurélie Campeanu, Axel Hirwe, Adrien Bouglé, Dimitri Margetis, Souad Fellous, Thomas Botrel, Alice Jacquens and 5 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BJA open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

15 authors.

Daniel El KhouryDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Public Hospitals of Paris (AP-HP), DMU DREAM, GRC 29, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
Amélie CambrielDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Public Hospitals of Paris (AP-HP), DMU DREAM, GRC 29, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
Emmanuel PardoDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Public Hospitals of Paris (AP-HP), DMU DREAM, GRC 29, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
Aurélie CampeanuDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Public Hospitals of Paris (AP-HP), DMU DREAM, GRC 29, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
Axel HirweDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Public Hospitals of Paris (AP-HP), DMU DREAM, GRC 29, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
Adrien BougléDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Public Hospitals of Paris (AP-HP), DMU DREAM, GRC 29, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
Dimitri MargetisDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Public Hospitals of Paris (AP-HP), DMU DREAM, GRC 29, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
Souad FellousDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Public Hospitals of Paris (AP-HP), DMU DREAM, GRC 29, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
Thomas BotrelDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Public Hospitals of Paris (AP-HP), DMU DREAM, GRC 29, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
Alice JacquensDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Public Hospitals of Paris (AP-HP), DMU DREAM, GRC 29, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
Vincent DegosDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Public Hospitals of Paris (AP-HP), DMU DREAM, GRC 29, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
Jean-Michel ConstantinDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Public Hospitals of Paris (AP-HP), DMU DREAM, GRC 29, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
Arthur JamesDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Public Hospitals of Paris (AP-HP), DMU DREAM, GRC 29, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
Franck VerdonkDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Public Hospitals of Paris (AP-HP), DMU DREAM, GRC 29, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
GRC-29 Consortium

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: While the S-enantiomer of Ketamine (S-Ketamine) is described to be more potent than the racemic form (Ra-Ketamine), with a shorter half-life and almost no side effects, both forms have never been compared in real life. This before-after observational study leverages an institutional switch across multiple hospitals from Ra- to S-Ketamine to compare their efficacy and tolerance profile. The primary aim was to assess the occurrence of hallucination in patients receiving racemic Ketamine compared with S-Ketamine, as a proxy for ketamine's tolerance, as it is the most specific adverse effect. Methods: This is a prospective, observational, before-aafter, multicentre study conducted in the four centres of the APHP Sorbonne Universite hospitals consortium (GHU Sorbonne Universite), Paris, from 19 February to 22 March 2024. All patients requiring anaesthesia for any type of surgery and receiving Ketamine during the study period were included. Exclusion criteria included persistent sedation after surgery. Hallucinations, PACU length of stay, analgesic strategies, and postoperative adverse events were prospectively recorded. Results: Among 5578 surgical patients, 1426 (25%) received Ketamine and 783 (55%) were included in the study (447 Ra-Ketamine, 339 S-Ketamine). Infusion strategy was similar in both groups. Patients in the Ra-Ketamine group had more hallucinations (1.4% Conclusions: S-Ketamine demonstrated a safer profile compared with Ra-Ketamine, including fewer psychodysleptic side effects and possible superior analgesic efficacy, supporting its potential to enhance the quality of perioperative care. Clinical trial registration: researchregistry11703.

Indexed as

hallucinationketamineperioperative adverse eventspostoperative acute painS-ketaminetolerance

Identifiers

PMID42100028
PMCPMC13147423

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.