Haemodynamic profiles of etomidate vs propofol for induction of anaesthesia: a randomised controlled trial in patients undergoing cardiac surgery |
| |
| Authors: | JA Hannam SJ Mitchell D Cumin C Frampton AF Merry MR Moore CJ Kruger |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Department of Pharmacology and Clinical Pharmacology, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand;2. Department of Anaesthesiology, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand;3. Department of Anaesthesia, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand;4. Department of Medicine, Christchurch School of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand;5. Department of Cardiothoracic and ORL Anaesthesia, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand |
| |
| Abstract: | BackgroundEtomidate is frequently selected over propofol for induction of anaesthesia because of a putatively favourable haemodynamic profile, but data confirming this perception are limited.MethodsPatients undergoing cardiac surgery were randomised to induction of anaesthesia with propofol or etomidate. Phase I (n=75) was conducted as open-label, whereas Phase II (n=75) was double blind. Mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) and boluses of vasopressor administered after induction were recorded. The primary endpoint was the area under the curve below baseline MAP (MAP-time integral) during the 10 min after induction. Secondary endpoints were the use of vasopressors over the same period, and the effect of blinding on the aforementioned endpoints. Groups were compared using regression models with phase and anaesthetist as factors.ResultsThe mean difference between etomidate and propofol in the MAP-time integral below baseline was 2244 mm Hg s (95% confidence interval, 581–3906; P=0.009), representing a 34% greater reduction with propofol. Overall, vasopressors were used in 10/75 patients in the etomidate group vs 21/75 in the propofol group (P=0.38), and in 20/74 patients during the blinded phase vs 11/76 during the open-label phase (P=0.31). The interaction between randomisation and phase (open-labelled or blinded) was not significant for either primary (P=0.73) or secondary endpoints (P=0.90).ConclusionsPropofol caused a 34% greater reduction in MAP-time integral from baseline after induction of anaesthesia than etomidate, despite more frequent use of vasopressors with propofol, confirming the superior haemodynamic profile of etomidate in this context. The proportion of patients receiving vasopressors increased slightly, albeit not significantly, in both groups in the blinded phase.Clinical trial registrationAustralian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12614000717651. |
| |
| Keywords: | coronary artery bypass haemodynamics blood pressure vasopressor |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
