A before-and-after comparison found shorter scanning and fewer complications with dexmedetomidine–ketamine. The protocol change extended beyond replacing midazolam.
Seventy-two patients were studied in equal groups around a new protocol. Scan completion did not differ significantly, while scan time and recorded complications favored the later combination approach.
Midazolam had been given at clinician discretion; the newer regimen followed predefined indications. The authors identified that difference as a possible explanation of the outcome.
Drug choice, timing, patient selection, and preemptive preparation changed together. Subgroup analyses can explore but cannot fully remove confounding in a small retrospective comparison.
A nonsignificant completion comparison also is not formal proof of equivalence. In a case review, examine whether sedation was planned before imaging, why it was selected, and the nature of each complication. The study supports evaluating workflow alongside medication, but cannot attribute all improvement solely to eliminating midazolam or predict the result of one different dose.
Original analysis of the supplied journal article, identified as PMC6492498.