Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

Induction Agents for Tracheal Intubation of Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Created on 19 Aug 2026

Authors

Garrett McDougall, Ben Forestell, Behnam Sadeghirad, Akira Kuriyama, Priatharsini Sivananathajothy, Holden Flindall, James Choi, John Centofanti, Sheila Nainan Myatra, Jay Prakash, Jonathan D Casey, Matthew W Semler, Michael Sklar, Ambika Tejpal, Sameer Sharif, Bram Rochwerg

Published in

Chest. Aug 18, 2026. Epub Aug 18, 2026.

Abstract

Tracheal intubation is a common yet high risk procedure in the critically ill with as many as half experiencing peri-intubation adverse outcomes.
We aimed to evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of various sedative agents used for endotracheal intubation of the critically ill patient in the emergency department, intensive care unit, operating room, and pre-hospital setting.
We conducted a network meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane, and trial registries from inception to December 10, 2025 for Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing two or more sedative agents in critically ill adults or children undergoing endotracheal intubation. Outcomes of interest were hemodynamic instability during intubation, hypoxemia, cardiac arrest, mortality, intensive care unit and hospital length of stay, vasopressor use, adrenal insufficiency, and first-pass success. Reviewers screened, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool independently and in duplicate. We performed frequentist random-effects model network meta-analysis and used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to rate certainty in estimates.
We included 21 RCTs enrolling 6,031 patients across Intensive Care Unit, Emergency Department, Operating Room, and pre-hospital settings. Compared with etomidate, there is probably more hemodynamic instability during intubation with ketamine (RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.15-1.48; moderate certainty). Ketamine-propofol may decrease hemodynamic instability during intubation compared with etomidate (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.27-0.72; low certainty) and ketamine (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.21-0.56; low certainty). Compared with etomidate, ketamine may decrease the need for the initiation of post-intubation continuous infusion vasopressors (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.50-1.28; low certainty). Etomidate caused increased adrenal suppression compared with other agents.
When considering sedation agents for endotracheal intubation of the critically ill, etomidate probably causes less hemodynamic instability during intubation when compared with ketamine. However, etomidate may increase the need for the initiation of post-intubation continuous infusion vasopressors when compared with ketamine and increases adrenal suppression. The clinical importance of these competing effects remains uncertain. Ketamine-propofol may decrease hemodynamic instability during intubation when compared with etomidate and ketamine though the available evidence is too limited and uncertain to support firm conclusions and further randomized trials are needed.

PMID:
42612901
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 19 Aug 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Reviewers' rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 12
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement