Repeated oral ketamine for out-patient treatment of resistant depression: randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, proof-of-concept study.

BACKGROUND: Ketamine has been demonstrated to improve depressive symptoms.AimsEvaluation of efficacy, safety and feasibility of repeated oral ketamine for out-patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD). METHOD: In a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, proof-of-concept trial, 41 participants received either 1 mg/kg oral ketamine or placebo thrice weekly for 21 days (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02037503). Evaluation was performed at baseline, 40 and 240 min post administration and on days 3, 7, 14 and 21. The main outcome measure was change in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). RESULTS: Twenty-two participants were randomised to the ketamine group, and 19 to the control, with 82.5% (n = 33) completing the study. In the ketamine group, a decrease in depressive symptoms was evident at all time points, whereas in the control group a decrease was evident only 40 min post administration. The reduction in MADRS score on day 21 was 12.75 in the ketamine group versus 2.49 points with placebo (P < 0.001). Six participants in the ketamine group (27.3%) achieved remission compared with none of the controls (P < 0.05). The number needed to treat for remission was 3.7. Side-effects were mild and transient. CONCLUSIONS: Repeated oral ketamine produced rapid and persistent amelioration of depressive symptoms in out-patients with TRD, and was well tolerated. These results suggest that add-on oral ketamine may hold significant promise in the care of patients suffering from TRD in the community.Declaration of interestNone.

Interaction of propofol and sevoflurane on loss of consciousness and movement to skin incision during general anesthesia.

BACKGROUND: Loss of consciousness (LOC) and immobility to surgical incision seem to be mediated at different levels of the central nervous system. Pharmacologic studies of hypnotic agents have previously focused on combinations of either volatile or intravenous anesthetics. This study examined the combination of inhaled sevoflurane and intravenous propofol at these two clinically relevant anesthetic end points. METHODS: Thirty-six elective surgical patients were initially enrolled. Conditions approximating steady state were obtained for sevoflurane and target-controlled propofol infusions. Patients were sequentially evaluated for LOC (loud voice plus mild prodding) and immobility to surgical incision. The study was designed using the Dixon up-down method. RESULTS: The observed propofol effect target with 50% response plus sevoflurane (0.46% end-tidal concentration) was 1.2 microg/ml (95% confidence interval, 1.1-1.3 microg/ml). It was not significantly different from that predicted (1.5 microg/ml; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-1.7 microg/ml) by simple additivity. The effective plasma concentration of propofol that suppressed movement to skin incision in 50% of patients was 5.4 microg/ml (95% confidence interval, 4.8-6.0 microg/ml) plus sevoflurane (0.86%) and was not significantly different from that predicted by additivity (5.4 microg/ml; 95% confidence interval, 4.8-5.9 microg/ml). Both analyses had adequate power (90%) to detect a significant change (+/-19 to 25%) from predicted value. Repeated-measures analysis of variance identified a Bispectral Index value of 70 as the break point between those who responded at LOC or did not. CONCLUSIONS: Propofol and sevoflurane interact in a simple additive manner to produce LOC and immobility to surgical incision, suggesting a common mechanism or a single site of action. These clinical observations are consistent with a single site of interaction at the gamma-aminobutyric acid type A receptor.