ABSTRACT
Patients with sepsis often require emergency intubation. In emergency departments (EDs), rapid-sequence intubation with a single-dose induction agent is standard practice, but the best choice of induction agent in sepsis remains controversial. We conducted a randomized, controlled, single-blind trial in the ED. We included septic patients who were aged at least 18 years and required sedation for emergency intubation. Patients were randomly assigned by a blocked randomization to receive 0.2-0.3 mg/kg of etomidate or 1-2 mg/kg of ketamine for intubation. The objectives were to compare the survival outcomes and adverse events after intubation between etomidate and ketamine. Two hundred and sixty septic patients were enrolled; 130 patients/drug arm whose baseline characteristics were well balanced at baseline. In the etomidate group, 105 patients (80.8%) were alive at 28 days, compared with 95 patients (73.1%) in the ketamine group (risk difference [RD], 7.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI], - 2.5 to 17.9%; P = 0.092). There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients who survived at 24 h (91.5% vs. 96.2%; P = 0.097) and survived at 7 days (87.7% vs. 87.7%; P = 0.574). A significantly higher proportion of the etomidate group needed a vasopressor within 24 h after intubation: 43.9% vs. 17.7%, RD, 26.2% (95% CI, 15.4 to 36.9%; P < 0.001). In conclusion, there were no differences in early and late survival rates between etomidate and ketamine. However, etomidate was associated with higher risks of early vasopressor use after intubation. Trial registration: The trial protocol was registered in the Thai Clinical Trials Registry (identification number: TCTR20210213001). Registered 13 February 2021-Retrospectively registered, https://www.thaiclinicaltrials.org/export/pdf/TCTR20210213001 .
