Sedoanalgesia Administration with Propofol and Ketamine for Minor Urologic Interventions

Aim: In this study we aimed to administer sedoanalgesia with propofol and ketamine combination in patients undergoing planned minor urologic interventions with limited anesthesia. By combining these two medications, lower doses may be used, and we aimed to provide sufficient sedation, analgesia and amnesia without disrupting hemodynamic and respiratory stability and to increase patient and surgeon satisfaction. Material-Method: The study included 53 patients with planned minor urologic interventions aged from 19 to 85 years and physical situation ASA I-III. After six hours starvation, patients were taken to the surgery. Patients were monitored for electrocardiography (ECG), oxygen saturation (SPO2 ) and non-invasive blood pressure. For use if necessary a nasal O2 cannula was inserted. A vein in the back of the left hand was opened and 5 ml/min isotonic sodium chloride infusion was begun. Patient heart rate (HR), systolic arterial pressure (SAP), diastolic arterial pressure (DAP), mean arterial pressure (MAP) and oxygen saturation (SpO2 ) values were measured and a 5 point sedation scale (Table 1) was used to measure sedation scores. Basal values were recorded (0 min). Later patients were randomly divided into two groups with Group I administered intraurethral lidocaine gel for local anesthesia by the surgeon, while Group II were administered intravenous 0.015 mg/kg midazolam, 0.5 mg/kg 1% ketamine and 0.5 mg/kg 1% propofol by the authors for sedoanalgesia. At five minute intervals the HR, SAP, DAP, MAP, SpO2 values and sedation scores were measured and recorded. Results: Statistical evaluation found a statistically significant increase in SAP, DAP and MAP values measured at the 5th minute in Group I patients compared to preoperative values. In Group I patients, when the heart rate measured in the 1st and 5th minutes are compared with preoperative values there was a statistically significant increase identified. In Group II patients, there was a statistically significant fall in SpO2 values in the 1st and 5th minutes compared with preoperative values. When patient and surgeon satisfaction are compared with Group I, Group II was found to be statistically significantly higher. Though the blood pressure and heart rate increases in Group I patients were statistically significant, they were not at levels that required clinical intervention and/or treatment. Similarly the SpO2 decrease observed in Group II patients did not fall below 90% in any patient in spite of being statistically significant and rose again without clinical intervention and/or treatment. Conclusion: In this study we showed that sedoanalgesia administration with propofol and ketamine may be an alternative method for patients undergoing minor urology interventions that does not disrupt hemodynamic and respiratory stability, does not delay patient discharge, has low side effect incidence and has high patient and surgeon satisfaction.