Hemodynamic Changes with Propofol and Etomidate During Induction of Anaesthesia in Controlled Hypertensive Patients

Muhammad Wasib; Usman Khalid; Faisal Wahid; Attique ur rehman Orakzai; Rana Faizan Asghar; Najaf Imtiaz

doi:10.51253/pafmj.v76iSUPPL-8.10087

Authors

Muhammad Wasib Department of Anaesthesia, Combined Military Hospital, Malir/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Pakistan
Usman Khalid Department of Anaesthesia, Combined Military Hospital, Malir/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Pakistan
Faisal Wahid Department of Anaesthesia, Combined Military Hospital, Malir/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Pakistan
Attique ur rehman Orakzai Department of Anaesthesia, Combined Military Hospital, Malir/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Pakistan
Rana Faizan Asghar Department of Anaesthesia, Combined Military Hospital, Malir/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Pakistan
Najaf Imtiaz Department of Anaesthesia, Combined Military Hospital, Malir/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Pakistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51253/pafmj.v76iSUPPL-8.10087

Keywords:

Etomidate, Hemodynamic response, Hypertension, Propofol

Abstract

Objective: To determine the mean hemodynamic changes with etomidate and propofol during anaesthetic induction in controlled hypertensive patients.

Study Design: Quasi experimental study.

Place and Duration of Study: Anaesthesia Department, Combined Military Hospital Malir, Karachi, Pakistan from Mar 2019 to Mar 2020.

Methodology: After permission from the Institutional Ethical Review Committee, a sample size of 70 controlled hypertensive patient sundergoing surgery under general anaesthesia of ages between 30-60 years of either gender were included in the study and placed in two groups. Group-A included those who were given injection propofol and Group-B consisted of those who received injection etomidate. Determination of mean hemodynamic changes with propofol in comparison with etomidate during induction of anaesthesia was the primary outcome. Results recorded and analyzed thereafter for conclusion.

Results: The mean variation of heart rate (HR) in Group-A and Group-B was 76.80±7.74 bpm and 79.49±9.33 bpm respectively. Mean variation in systolic blood pressure (SBP) was 130.14±13.30 mm of Hg and 137.09±13.66 mm of Hg. Mean diastolic blood pressure (DBP) between propofol and etomidate was 76.80±7.74 mm of Hg and 79.49±9.33 mm of Hg. The analysis between two groups was made keeping in mind the variables of HR, SBP and DBP. It showed etomidate was a better choice for induction.

Conclusion: We concluded that hemodynamic control is better with etomidate than propofol during induction of anaesthesia in controlled hypertensive patients.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Shah SB, Chowdhury I, Bhargava AK, Sabbharwal B. Comparison of hemodynamic effects of intravenous etomidate versus propofol during induction and intubation using entropy guided hypnosis levels. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 2015; 31(2): 180.

https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-9185.155145

2. Das M, Pradhan BK, Samantray R. Comparative study on haemodynamic responses during intubation using etomidate, propofol and thiopentone in laparoscopic cholecystectomy surgeries. Innov J Med Health Sci 2015; 5(4): 150–158.

https://doi.org/10.15520/ijmhs.2015.vol5.iss4.80.150-158

3. Velásquez JA, Rodríguez J, Higuita-Gutiérrez L, Vergara MM. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the hemodynamic effects of etomidate versus other sedatives in patients undergoing rapid sequence intubation. Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim Engl Ed 2022; 69(10): 663-673.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.redare.2021.05.020

4. Shah J, Patel I, Guha A. Comparative study of propofol vs etomidate as an induction agent to evaluate hemodynamic changes during induction of anesthesia in controlled hypertensive patients. Anaesth Pain Intensive Care 2019; 361–367.

5. Biswal P, Singh S, Taank P. Application of ‘Priming Principle’on the induction dose requirements of propofol-A Randomized Clinical Trial. Int J Biomed Res 2018; 9(09): 320–324.

https://doi.org/10.7439/ijbr

6. Aggarwal S, Goyal VK, Chaturvedi SK, Mathur V, Baj B, Kumar A. A comparative study between propofol and etomidate in patients under general anesthesia. Rev Bras Anestesiol 2016; 66(3): 237–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjane.2014.10.005

7. Nazeer T, Tahir A, Khan M, Din ST, Shoaib M, Asif M. Comparison of propofol and etomidate in haemodynamic changes at the time of induction of general anaesthesia. Pak J Med Health Sci Apr 2021;15(4): 685–687.

8. Rathore VS, Singh S, Taank P, Khandelwal A, Kaushal A. Clinical analysis of propofol, etomidate and an admixture of etomidate and propofol for induction of general anaesthesia. Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim 2019; 47(5): 382.

https://doi.org/10.5152/TJAR.2019.53806

9. DiMaria S, Mangano N, Bruzzese A, Bartula B, Parikh S, Costa A. Genetic variation and sex-based differences: current considerations for anesthetic management. Curr Issues Mol Biol 2025; 47(3): 202. https://doi.org/10.3390/cimb47030202

10. Dietrich SK, Mixon MA, Rogoszewski RJ, Delgado SD, Knapp VE, Floren M. Hemodynamic effects of propofol for induction of rapid sequence intubation in traumatically injured patients. Am Surg 2018; 84(9): 1504-1508.

https://doi.org/10.1177/000313481808400959

11. Fawcett W. Suxamethonium or rocuronium for rapid sequence induction of anaesthesia? BJA Educ 2019; 19(12): 380.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjae.2019.09.001

12. Dai ZL, Cai XT, Gao WL, Lin M, Lin J, Jiang YX, et al. Etomidate vs propofol in coronary heart disease patients undergoing major noncardiac surgery: a randomized clinical trial. World J Clin Cases 2021; 9(6): 1293. https://doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v9.i6.1293

13. Tarwade P, Smischney NJ. Endotracheal intubation sedation in the intensive care unit. World J Crit Care Med 2022; 11(1): 33.

https://doi.org/10.5492/wjccm.v11.i1.33

14. Ding T, Hu YL. Comparison of etomidate and propofol-mediated anesthesia induction followed by intubation and sevoflurane maintenance during ERCP in obese patients. Am J Transl Res 2021; 13(8): 9853.

15. Möller PA, Kamenik M. Bispectral index-guided induction of general anaesthesia in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery using propofol or etomidate: a double-blind, randomized, clinical trial. Br J Anaesth 2013; 110(3): 388–396. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aes416

16. Kaushal RP, Vatal A, Pathak R. Effect of etomidate and propofol induction on hemodynamic and endocrine response in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting/mitral valve and aortic valve replacement surgery on cardiopulmonary bypass. Ann Card Anaesth 2015; 18(2): 172.

https://doi.org/10.4103/0971-9784.154470

17. Pandey AK, Makhija N, Chauhan S, Das S, Kiran U, Bisoi AK, et al. The effects of etomidate and propofol induction on hemodynamic and endocrine response in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery on cardiopulmonary bypass. World J Cardiovasc Surg 2012; 2(3): 48-53.

https://doi.org/10.4236/wjcs.2012.23011

18. Gropper MA, Miller RD, Eriksson LI, Fleisher LA, Wiener-Kronish JP, Cohen NH, et al. Miller’s anesthesia, 2-volume set E-book. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2019. Available from: https://books.google.com.pk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=AcsVEQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=+Gropper+MA,+Miller+RD,+Eriksson+LI,+Fleisher+LA,+Wiener-Kronish+JP,+Cohen+NH,+et+al.+Miller%E2%80%99s+anesthesia,+2-volume+set+E-book.+Elsevier+Health+Sciences%3B+2019.+&ots=S3TEUH3qYZ&sig=6rIw21kbSF_VIl13wXoBXPjRdlo&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

19. Saricaoglu F, Uzun S, Arun O, Arun F, Aypar U. A clinical comparison of etomidate-lipuro, propofol and admixture at induction. Saudi J Anaesth 2011; 5(1): 62.

https://doi.org/10.4103/1658-354X.76509

20. Larsen J, Torp P, Norrild K, Sloth E. Propofol reduces tissue-Doppler markers of left ventricle function: a transthoracic echocardiographic study. Br J Anaesth 2007; 98(2): 183–188.

https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/ael345