ICU sedation, delirium & recovery
Fospropofol disodium versus propofol for long-term sedation during invasive mechanical ventilation: A pilot randomized clinical trial
Authors' conclusion
Fospropofol disodium appears to be a feasible, effective and safe sedative for patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation with long-term sedation.
Study context
- Population
- Adults expected to need mechanical ventilation >24 h, general ICU of a university-affiliated teaching hospital
- Participants
- 60 adults
- Comparison
- Fospropofol disodium vs propofol continuous infusion for sedation
- Primary endpoint
- Percentage of time in target sedation range without rescue sedation
Methodological detailssingle-centre, prospective, unblinded, parallel-group
- Single-centre
- Prospective
- Unblinded
- Parallel-group
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
P = 0.887
Further findings
Dose
Safety
At least one adverse event
Hypertriglyceridemia
P = 0.104
- Hypertriglyceridemia: Fospropofol: all mild; Propofol: mild in 8, moderate in 1
At least one adverse event
- Most common AEs: tachycardia and hypotension
Paresthesia, catheter-related bloodstream infection, propofol infusion syndrome
- None reported in either group
- 0
Plasma formate concentration
- Very low; no significant difference at any time point between groups
Original publication
Fospropofol disodium versus propofol for long-term sedation during invasive mechanical ventilation: A pilot randomized clinical trial. J Clin Anesth. Published 16 March 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →