van den Bosch Oscar F C, van Lennep Johan P A, Alvarez-Jimenez Ricardo, van Middendorp Henriët, Evers Andrea W M, Steegers Monique A H, Schober Patrick, Loer Stephan A
Department of Anesthesiology, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Institute of Psychology, Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands.
PLoS One. 2025 Sep 4;20(9):e0331358. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0331358. eCollection 2025.
S-ketamine and midazolam are frequently used to provide sedation while maintaining spontaneous respiration. However, the effects of these agents on respiratory variability, which reflects the adaptability of the respiratory system, have not been thoroughly explored. We evaluated these effects in a randomized controlled pilot trial. This study was conducted as part of a randomized controlled trial originally designed to assess the effects of s-ketamine conditioning on pain sensitivity in patients with fibromyalgia syndrome. Participants were randomly assigned to receive an infusion of either s-ketamine (0.3 mg kg-1 h-1), midazolam (0.05 mg kg-1 h-1), or saline in a blinded fashion. Mean respiratory rate, variability of respiratory rate (VRR), and variability of tidal volume (VTV) were measured continuously and non-invasively with a bio-impedance method. Changes during drug infusion were compared in a linear mixed model to assess the effects of s-ketamine and midazolam compared to saline. Data were analyzed for 57 experiments in 28 participants. Their median baseline variabilities of respiratory rate and tidal volume were 0.19 (IQR: 0.16-0.25) and 0.23 (0.19-0.34), respectively. While mean respiratory rate was not affected, midazolam resulted in a significant decrease in both VRR (ß = -0.071, 95% CI: -0.120 to -0.021) and VTV (ß = -0.117, 95% CI: -0.170 to -0.062). In contrast, s-ketamine appeared to produce a smaller decrease in VTV (ß = -0.062, 95% CI: -0.118 to -0.003) with VRR remaining unaffected (ß = -0.036, 95% CI: -0.092 to 0.019). In conclusion, our study demonstrates that midazolam reduces respiratory variability, potentially impairing the adaptability of the respiratory system. In contrast, s-ketamine largely preserved respiratory variability, suggesting it may be a safer alternative for sedation in patients with impaired spontaneous breathing. Further studies are needed to assess the clinical implications of these observations in patients undergoing sedation.
S-氯胺酮和咪达唑仑常用于在维持自主呼吸的同时提供镇静作用。然而,这些药物对反映呼吸系统适应性的呼吸变异性的影响尚未得到充分研究。我们在一项随机对照试验中评估了这些影响。本研究是一项随机对照试验的一部分,该试验最初旨在评估S-氯胺酮预处理对纤维肌痛综合征患者疼痛敏感性的影响。参与者被随机分配以盲法接受S-氯胺酮(0.3mg·kg-1·h-1)、咪达唑仑(0.05mg·kg-1·h-1)或生理盐水的输注。使用生物阻抗法连续无创测量平均呼吸频率、呼吸频率变异性(VRR)和潮气量变异性(VTV)。在一个线性混合模型中比较药物输注期间的变化,以评估S-氯胺酮和咪达唑仑相对于生理盐水的效果。对28名参与者的57次实验数据进行了分析。他们呼吸频率和潮气量的基线变异性中位数分别为0.19(四分位间距:0.16 - 0.25)和0.23(0.19 - 0.34)。虽然平均呼吸频率未受影响,但咪达唑仑导致VRR(β = -0.071,95%置信区间:-0.120至-0.021)和VTV(β = -0.117,95%置信区间:-0.170至-0.062)均显著降低。相比之下,S-氯胺酮似乎使VTV的降低幅度较小(β = -0.062,95%置信区间:-0.118至-0.003),而VRR未受影响(β = -0.036,95%置信区间:-0.092至0.019)。总之,我们的研究表明咪达唑仑会降低呼吸变异性,可能损害呼吸系统的适应性。相比之下,S-氯胺酮在很大程度上保留了呼吸变异性,这表明它可能是自主呼吸受损患者镇静的更安全选择。需要进一步研究来评估这些观察结果对接受镇静治疗患者的临床意义。