Dataset Information

Haemodynamic Responses to Tracheal Intubation Using Propofol, Etomidate and Etomidate-Propofol Combination in Anaesthesia Induction.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:The aim of this study was to measure the haemodynamic responses to a etomidate-propofol combination used for anaesthesia induction and to compare the haemodynamic responses with the separate use of each drug. METHODS:The patients were randomly divided into three groups as group P (n = 30, propofol 2.5 mg kg(-1)), group E (n = 30, etomidate 0.3 mg kg(-1)) and group PE (n = 30, propofol 1.25 mg kg(-1) + etomidate 0.15 mg kg(-1)). For each patient, the times of measurement of the heart rate (HR) and mean arterial pressure values were defined as baseline, after the induction, before the intubation, immediately after the intubation and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 10 minutes after the intubation. RESULTS:In all 3 groups, a significant decrease in MAP values were seen at T2 and T3 compared to the baseline values, and this decrease was greater in group P compared to that in group E and PE (P < 0.001, P < 0.01). A significant increase was seen in all 3 groups in the mean arterial pressure (MAP) value at T4 after the intubation. When the groups were compared with each other, this increase was greater in group E than in the other two groups (with group P, P < 0.001; with group PE, P < 0.01). CONCLUSION:Etomidate-propofol combination may be a valuable alternative when extremes of hypotensive and hypertensive responses due to propofol and etomidate are best to be avoided.

SUBMITTER: Yagan O

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4685278 | biostudies-literature | 2015

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Haemodynamic Responses to Tracheal Intubation Using Propofol, Etomidate and Etomidate-Propofol Combination in Anaesthesia Induction.

Yağan Özgür Ö Taş Nilay N Küçük Ahmet A Hancı Volkan V Yurtlu Bülent Serhan BS

Journal of cardiovascular and thoracic research 20151126 4

<h4>Introduction</h4>The aim of this study was to measure the haemodynamic responses to a etomidate-propofol combination used for anaesthesia induction and to compare the haemodynamic responses with the separate use of each drug.<h4>Methods</h4>The patients were randomly divided into three groups as group P (n = 30, propofol 2.5 mg kg(-1)), group E (n = 30, etomidate 0.3 mg kg(-1)) and group PE (n = 30, propofol 1.25 mg kg(-1) + etomidate 0.15 mg kg(-1)). For each patient, the times of measureme ...[more]

PMID: 26702341

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTracheal intubation is a high-risk intervention commonly performed in critically ill patients. Due to its favorable cardiovascular profile, ketamine is considered less likely to compromise clinical outcomes. This meta-analysis aimed to assess whether ketamine, compared with other agents, reduces mortality in critically ill patients undergoing intubation.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from inception until April 27, 2023, for randomized controlled trials and matched observational studies comparing ketamine with any control in critically ill patients as an induction agent. The primary outcome was mortality at the longest follow-up available, and the secondary outcomes included Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, ventilator-free days at day 28, vasopressor-free days at day 28, post-induction mean arterial pressure, and successful intubation on the first attempt. For the primary outcome, we used a Bayesian random-effects meta-analysis on the risk ratio (RR) scale with a weakly informative neutral prior corresponding to a mean estimate of no difference with 95% probability; the estimated effect size will fall between a relative risk of 0.25 and 4. The RR and 95% credible interval (CrI) were used to estimate the probability of mortality reduction (RR < 1). The secondary outcomes were assessed with a frequentist random-effects model. We registered this study in Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/2vf79/ ).ResultsWe included seven randomized trials and one propensity-matched study totaling 2978 patients. Etomidate was the comparator in all the identified studies. The probability that ketamine reduced mortality was 83.2% (376/1475 [25%] vs. 411/1503 [27%]; RR, 0.93; 95% CrI, 0.79-1.08), which was confirmed by a subgroup analysis excluding studies with a high risk of bias. No significant difference was observed in any secondary outcomes.ConclusionsAll of the included studies evaluated ketamine versus etomidate among critically ill adults requiring tracheal intubation. This meta-analysis showed a moderate probability that induction with ketamine is associated with a reduced risk of mortality.

Project description:Propofol, ketamine, and etomidate are common anesthetic agents for induction of anesthesia in the ICU. The choice between these agents is complex and may not depend solely upon severity of illness.ObjectivesTo evaluate the association between the administration of propofol, ketamine, and etomidate and ICU, hospital mortality, and length of stay.Design setting and participantsRetrospective single-center cohort study. ICUs in a tertiary medical center, between January 01, 2012, and December 31, 2017. Critically ill adult patients given a single IV anesthetic for intubation.Main outcome and measuresPrimary outcomes were ICU and hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were ICU- and hospital-free days through 28 days. An inverse probability of treatment weighed approach was used. The propensity score was estimated using a generalized logit model as a function of patient characteristics, admission source, ICU type, readmission status, length of ICU stays prior to intubation, and acute physiology score. Mortality outcomes were assessed with weighted logistic regression and -free days assessed by weighted linear regression with Bonferroni correction for pairwise comparisons.ResultsOf 2,673 patients, 36% received propofol, 30% ketamine and 34% etomidate. Overall ICU and hospital mortality were 19% and 29%, respectively. Patients given ketamine had higher odds of ICU mortality (1.45; [95% CI, 1.07-1.94]; p = 0.015) and patients given etomidate had higher odds of ICU mortality (1.87; 1.40-2.49; p < 0.001), hospital mortality (1.43; 1.09-1.86; p = 0.009), and less ICU-free days (-2.10; -3.21 to -1.00; p < 0.001) than those given propofol. Patients given ketamine and etomidate had similar odds of hospital mortality (1.06; 0.80-1.42; p = 0.761) and similar hospital-free days (0.30; -0.81 to 1.40; p = 0.600).Conclusions and relevanceCompared with ketamine and etomidate, propofol was associated with better outcome in critically ill patients undergoing anesthesia for intubation. Even after adjusting for severity of illness prior to intubation, residual confounders cannot be excluded.

Dataset Information

Haemodynamic Responses to Tracheal Intubation Using Propofol, Etomidate and Etomidate-Propofol Combination in Anaesthesia Induction.

Publications

Haemodynamic Responses to Tracheal Intubation Using Propofol, Etomidate and Etomidate-Propofol Combination in Anaesthesia Induction.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets