Skip to content

Etomidate versus ketamine for in-hospital rapid sequence intubation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Mohamed Aziz Daghmouri, Mohamed Ali Chaouch, Mohamed Noomen, Wael Chaabene, Benjamin Deniau, Ellington Barnes, Georges Mion, Cherifa Cheurfa, Besma Gafsi, Matthieu Camby

European journal of emergency medicine : official journal of the European Society for Emergency Medicine June 1, 2025 DOI: 10.1097/MEJ.0000000000001237 via PubMed

Summary

AI-generated from the abstract

Among critically ill patients undergoing rapid sequence intubation (RSI) in hospitals, ketamine and etomidate show no significant difference in 30-day survival. The meta-analysis of 14 studies with 23,926 patients found that etomidate use was linked to a higher rate of adrenal insufficiency, while ketamine required more post-intubation vasopressor support. Intubation difficulty, cardiovascular collapse, and systemic steroid use did not differ between the two agents. The findings suggest both drugs are comparable for short-term survival, but each carries distinct side-effect profiles that may guide clinical choice.

Study at a glance

Characteristics Systematic review and meta-analysis Randomized Peer reviewed
Sample size 23,926
Population Critically ill patients undergoing in-hospital rapid sequence intubation
Interventions Etomidate Ketamine
Topics Ketamine
Keywords Critically ill patients Etomidate Intrahospital Rapid sequence intubation
Citations 8
Key finding No significant difference in 30-day survival was found between etomidate and ketamine for RSI, though etomidate was associated with higher adrenal insufficiency and ketamine with more post-intubation vasopressor support.

Abstract

Rapid sequence intubation (RSI) is a critical procedure in emergency and intensive care settings. Etomidate has been favored for its hemodynamic stability; however, concerns about adrenal insufficiency have prompted interest in ketamine as an alternative induction agent. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the effects of etomidate vs ketamine on 30-day survival and other clinical outcomes in critically ill patients undergoing in-hospital RSI. A comprehensive literature search was conducted until 1 November 2024, across PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane databases, and clinical trial registries. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) assessing etomidate vs ketamine for RSI. The primary outcome was 30-day survival. Secondary outcomes encompassed intubation difficulty, post-intubation vasopressor use, cardiovascular collapse, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, systemic steroid use, organ support-free days, and adrenal insufficiency. Fourteen studies comprising 23 926 patients (19 288 receiving etomidate; 4638 receiving ketamine) met the inclusion criteria. Pooled analyses of RCTs and CCTs revealed no significant difference in 30-day survival between the two agents [RCTs: odds ratio (OR) = 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.68-1.24, P = 0.58; CCTs: OR = 1.16, 95% CI: 0.92-1.45, P = 0.58]. Ketamine was associated with a higher requirement for post-intubation vasopressor support (OR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.53-0.96, P = 0.03) and an increase in ICU-free days. Etomidate use correlated with a significantly higher incidence of adrenal insufficiency (OR = 2.43, 95% CI: 1.67-3.53, P < 0.001). No significant differences were observed in intubation difficulty, cardiovascular collapse, or systemic steroid use between the groups. Ketamine and etomidate showed no significant difference in 30-day survival among critically ill patients undergoing RSI. However, etomidate was associated with a higher incidence of adrenal insufficiency, while ketamine required more post-intubation vasopressor support. Provenance and peer review: Not commissioned, externally peer-reviewed.

Explore topics

Comments

No comments yet.

Log in to comment