TY  - JOUR
AU  - Scherer, Clemens
AU  - Kleeberger, Jan
AU  - Kellnar, Antonia
AU  - Binzenhöfer, Leonhard
AU  - Lüsebrink, Enzo
AU  - Stocker, Thomas J
AU  - Berghoff, Stefan A
AU  - Keutner, Alix
AU  - Thienel, Manuela
AU  - Deseive, Simon
AU  - Stark, Konstantin
AU  - Braun, Daniel
AU  - Orban, Mathias
AU  - Petzold, Tobias
AU  - Brunner, Stefan
AU  - Hagl, Christian
AU  - Hausleiter, Jörg
AU  - Massberg, Steffen
AU  - Orban, Martin
TI  - Propofol versus midazolam sedation in patients with cardiogenic shock - an observational propensity-matched study.
JO  - Journal of critical care
VL  - 71
SN  - 0883-9441
CY  - Philadelphia, Pa.
PB  - Saunders
M1  - DZNE-2022-00704
SP  - 154051
PY  - 2022
AB  - Benzodiazepines are recommended as first line sedative agent in ventilated cardiogenic shock patients, although data regarding the optimal sedation strategy are sparse. The aim of this study was to investigate the hemodynamic effects of propofol versus midazolam sedation in our cardiogenic shock registry.Mechanically ventilated patients suffering from cardiogenic shock were retrospectively enrolled from the cardiogenic shock registry of the university hospital of Munich. 174 patients treated predominantly with propofol were matched by propensity-score to 174 patients treated predominantly with midazolam.Catecholamine doses were similar on admission but significantly lower in the propofol group on days 1-4 of ICU stay. Mortality rate was 38
KW  - Conscious Sedation
KW  - Humans
KW  - Hypnotics and Sedatives: therapeutic use
KW  - Midazolam: therapeutic use
KW  - Propofol: adverse effects
KW  - Respiration, Artificial
KW  - Retrospective Studies
KW  - Shock, Cardiogenic: drug therapy
KW  - Anesthetics (Other)
KW  - Cardiogenic shock (Other)
KW  - Midazolam (Other)
KW  - Propofol (Other)
KW  - Sedation (Other)
KW  - VA-ECMO (Other)
LB  - PUB:(DE-HGF)16
C6  - pmid:35526506
DO  - DOI:10.1016/j.jcrc.2022.154051
UR  - https://pub.dzne.de/record/164041
ER  -