Home Current Issue Previous Issues Published Ahead-of-Print Podcasts For Authors Journal Info
Skip Navigation LinksHome > May 2006 - Volume 34 - Issue 5 > A randomized trial of intermittent lorazepam versus propofol...
Critical Care Medicine:
doi: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000215513.63207.7F
Feature Articles

A randomized trial of intermittent lorazepam versus propofol with daily interruption in mechanically ventilated patients*

Carson, Shannon S. MD; Kress, John P. MD; Rodgers, Jo Ellen PharmD; Vinayak, Ajeet MD; Campbell-Bright, Stacy PharmD; Levitt, Joseph MD; Bourdet, Sharya PharmD; Ivanova, Anastasia PhD; Henderson, Ashley G. MD; Pohlman, Anne RN, MSN; Chang, Lydia MD; Rich, Preston B. MD; Hall, Jesse MD

Collapse Box

Abstract

Objective: To compare duration of mechanical ventilation for patients randomized to receive lorazepam by intermittent bolus administration vs. continuous infusions of propofol using protocols that include scheduled daily interruption of sedation.

Design: A randomized open-label trial enrolling patients from October 2001 to March 2004.

Setting: Medical intensive care units of two tertiary care medical centers.

Patients: Adult patients expected to require mechanical ventilation for >48 hrs and who required ≥10 mg of lorazepam or a continuous infusion of a sedative to achieve adequate sedation.

Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive lorazepam by intermittent bolus administration or propofol by continuous infusion to maintain a Ramsay score of 2–3. Sedation was interrupted on a daily basis for both groups.

Measurements and Main Results: The primary outcome was median ventilator days. Secondary outcomes included 28-day ventilator-free survival, intensive care unit and hospital length of stay, and hospital mortality. Median ventilator days were significantly lower in the daily interruption propofol group compared with the intermittent bolus lorazepam group (5.8 vs. 8.4, p = .04). The difference was largest for hospital survivors (4.4 vs. 9.0, p = .006). There was a trend toward greater ventilator-free survival for patients in the daily interruption propofol group (median 18.5 days for propofol vs. 10.2 for lorazepam, p = .06). Hospital mortality was not different.

Conclusions: For medical patients requiring >48 hrs of mechanical ventilation, sedation with propofol results in significantly fewer ventilator days compared with intermittent lorazepam when sedatives are interrupted daily.

© 2006 by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Article Tools

Share

Search for Similar Articles
You may search for similar articles that contain these same keywords or you may modify the keyword list to augment your search.