ISSN 1016-5169 | E-ISSN 1308-4488
pdf
Comparison of Propofol and Ketamine for Sedation in Patients Undergoing Radiofrequency Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation [Turk Kardiyol Dern Ars]
Turk Kardiyol Dern Ars. Ahead of Print: TKDA-16377 | DOI: 10.5543/tkda.2025.16377

Comparison of Propofol and Ketamine for Sedation in Patients Undergoing Radiofrequency Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation

Şahin Yılmaz1, Levent Pay2, Cahit Coşkun3, Koray Kalenderoğlu4, Tufan Çınar5, Mert İlker Hayıroğlu4
1Department of Anesthesiology, Dr Siyami Ersek Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery Training Hospital, İstanbul, Türkiye
2Department of Cardiology, Istanbul Haseki Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Türkiye
3Department of Cardiology, Demirci State Hospital, Manisa, Türkiye
4Department of Cardiology, Dr Siyami Ersek Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery Training Hospital, İstanbul, Türkiye
5Department of Medicine, University of Maryland Medical Center Midtown Campus, Maryland, USA


OBJECTIVE
Catheter-based ablation is now widely recognized as a beneficial therapeutic option for managing atrial fibrillation (AF). However, the extended duration and pain associated with the procedure may cause patient movements, potentially leading to disruptions in the electro-anatomical mapping systems. Sedative and analgesic agents are used to prevent body movements and manage pain. This study aimed to conduct a comparison between the safety and effects of ketamine and propofol for deep sedation on outcomes in AF patients undergoing radiofrequency ablation.

METHODS
This retrospective and single-center study included 108 patients who underwent radiofrequency AF ablation under deep sedation (without intubation) in our hospital. The patients were categorized into two groups based on the anesthetic agent administered for deep sedation: the propofol group and the ketamine group. Procedure duration, success rates, and recovery times were compared.

RESULTS
Of the 108 patients, 54 were in the propofol group and 54 were in the ketamine group. The procedure durations were similar in both groups (propofol group: 135 min (120 – 145) vs. ketamine group: 140 min (120 – 155), p=0.803). The eye-opening time after the procedure was 275 seconds in the propofol group and 266 seconds in the ketamine group (p=0.530). Additionally, no significant variation was detected in the initial measurements of systolic and diastolic blood pressure or heart rate.

CONCLUSION
In conclusion, there was no significant difference between the propofol group and the ketamine group in terms of outcomes. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to assess the efficacy of ketamine and propofol in the radiofrequency AF ablation patient group.

Keywords: Atrial fibrillation, ketamine, propofol, radiofrequency ablation

Corresponding Author: Levent Pay, Türkiye
Manuscript Language: English
×
APA
NLM
AMA
MLA
Chicago
Copied!
CITE


Journal Metrics

Journal Citation Indicator: 0.18
CiteScore: 1.1
Source Normalized Impact
per Paper:
0.22
SCImago Journal Rank: 0.348

Quick Search

Copyright © 2025 Archives of the Turkish Society of Cardiology



Kare Publishing is a subsidiary of Kare Media.