Posters
Presenting Author Academic/Professional Position
Resident
Academic Level (Author 1)
Resident
Discipline/Specialty (Author 1)
Internal Medicine
Academic Level (Author 2)
Resident
Discipline/Specialty (Author 2)
Internal Medicine
Academic Level (Author 3)
Resident
Discipline/Specialty (Author 3)
Internal Medicine
Discipline Track
Patient Care
Abstract Type
Research/Clinical
Abstract
Background: Rapid Sequence Intubation (RSI) is a critical procedure in emergency and critical care settings, and the choice of induction agent can significantly affect patient outcomes. Etomidate and Ketamine are two widely used agents with distinct pharmacologic profiles. Understanding their comparative efficacy and safety across clinical contexts is essential for optimizing care in high-acuity environments.
Objective: To compare Etomidate and Ketamine as induction agents for RSI, focusing on their mechanisms of action, hemodynamic effects, and clinical outcomes in various patient populations.
Methods: A literature-based review was conducted using key databases including PubMed, Cochrane, and clinical guidelines. Studies examining the use of Etomidate and Ketamine in RSI were selected for analysis, including randomized controlled trials, retrospective reviews, and expert consensus guidelines. Key variables examined included onset and duration of action, impact on blood pressure and intracranial pressure (ICP), side effect profiles, and context specific considerations such as sepsis, traumatic brain injury (TBI), and reactive airway disease.
Results: Etomidate offers rapid onset, cardiovascular stability, and decreased ICP, making it favorable in neurocritical care; however, it is associated with transient adrenal suppression, particularly concerning in septic patients. Ketamine provides both sedation and analgesia, supports blood pressure in most patients, and offers bronchodilatory effects, making it preferred in asthma, trauma, and septic shock. Recent studies, including the KETASED and Jaber trials, show no significant difference in mortality or intubation success between the two agents, reinforcing the importance of individualized patient selection.
Conclusion: Both Etomidate and Ketamine are effective for RSI, but clinical context should guide agent selection. Etomidate may be preferred in cases of increased ICP, while Ketamine is advantageous in patients with sepsis, asthma, or trauma. Greater awareness of these distinctions can enhance patient outcomes and support evidence-based intubation practices.
Presentation Type
Poster
Recommended Citation
Rodriguez, Abelardo; Ortega, Cesar; and Daza, Jessica, "Etomidate vs Ketamine in Rapid Sequence Intubation: A Comparative Review of Clinical Efficacy and Safety" (2025). Research Colloquium. 2.
https://scholarworks.utrgv.edu/colloquium/2025/posters/2
Included in
Etomidate vs Ketamine in Rapid Sequence Intubation: A Comparative Review of Clinical Efficacy and Safety
Background: Rapid Sequence Intubation (RSI) is a critical procedure in emergency and critical care settings, and the choice of induction agent can significantly affect patient outcomes. Etomidate and Ketamine are two widely used agents with distinct pharmacologic profiles. Understanding their comparative efficacy and safety across clinical contexts is essential for optimizing care in high-acuity environments.
Objective: To compare Etomidate and Ketamine as induction agents for RSI, focusing on their mechanisms of action, hemodynamic effects, and clinical outcomes in various patient populations.
Methods: A literature-based review was conducted using key databases including PubMed, Cochrane, and clinical guidelines. Studies examining the use of Etomidate and Ketamine in RSI were selected for analysis, including randomized controlled trials, retrospective reviews, and expert consensus guidelines. Key variables examined included onset and duration of action, impact on blood pressure and intracranial pressure (ICP), side effect profiles, and context specific considerations such as sepsis, traumatic brain injury (TBI), and reactive airway disease.
Results: Etomidate offers rapid onset, cardiovascular stability, and decreased ICP, making it favorable in neurocritical care; however, it is associated with transient adrenal suppression, particularly concerning in septic patients. Ketamine provides both sedation and analgesia, supports blood pressure in most patients, and offers bronchodilatory effects, making it preferred in asthma, trauma, and septic shock. Recent studies, including the KETASED and Jaber trials, show no significant difference in mortality or intubation success between the two agents, reinforcing the importance of individualized patient selection.
Conclusion: Both Etomidate and Ketamine are effective for RSI, but clinical context should guide agent selection. Etomidate may be preferred in cases of increased ICP, while Ketamine is advantageous in patients with sepsis, asthma, or trauma. Greater awareness of these distinctions can enhance patient outcomes and support evidence-based intubation practices.
