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.