Evaluation of intubating conditions with rocuronium and either propofol or etomidate for rapid sequence induction

We have assessed the effect of two induction agents on tracheal intubating conditions after rocuronium 0.6 mgkg⁻¹ in unpremedicated patients undergoing simulated rapid sequence induction. Following pre-oxygenation, anaesthesia was induced with propofol up to 2.5 mgkg⁻¹ ( n  = 35) or etomidate 0.3 mgkg⁻¹ ( n  = 36), and further increments as required. After loss of verbal contact, cricoid pressure was applied and rocuronium was injected. Laryngoscopy was performed at 45 s and intubation attempted at 60 s after rocuronium had been given. Ninety-four per cent of patients in the propofol group had clinically acceptable (good or excellent) intubating conditions compared to only 75% in the etomidate group (p = 0.025). Owing to coughing, one patient in the etomidate group could not be intubated on the first attempt. A greater pressor response also followed intubation after induction with etomidate. We conclude that etomidate and rocuronium alone cannot be recommended for intubation at 60 s under rapid sequence induction conditions.     

Echocardiographic assessment of the haemodynamic effects of propofol: a comparison with etomidate and thiopentone

The haemodynamic effects of propofol (2 mg/kg), etomidate (0.2 mg/kg) and thiopentone (4 mg/kg) were studied in 30 ASA 1 and 2 patients in whom anaesthesia had been induced with midazolam 0.1 mg/kg, fentanyl 5 micrograms/kg, vecuronium 0.1 mg/kg and atropine 10 micrograms/kg, and maintained with nitrous oxide in oxygen. Arterial pressure was measured directly and left ventricular diameters were determined by transoesophageal echocardiography. Systolic blood pressure after propofol and thiopentone and the end-systolic quotient (systolic pressure/end-systolic diameter), a measure of inotropy, decreased. Fractional shortening (end-diastolic-end-systolic diameter/end-diastolic diameter) decreased only in the thiopentone group. Diastolic blood pressure and end-diastolic diameter (a measure of preload) did not change in any of the groups, and the etomidate group showed no changes in the haemodynamic variables measured. Propofol shows simultaneous negative inotropy and afterload reduction, while thiopentone is exclusively negatively inotropic.     

Comparison of etomidate and propofol for anaesthesia in microlaryngeal surgery

Propofol and etomidate were compared as hypnotics in total intravenous anaesthesia for microlaryngeal surgery combined with jet ventilation. Two groups of 15 patients were studied. In group 1, propofol 2.0 mg/kg was used for induction. For maintenance a continuous infusion of 12 mg/kg/hour was used for the first 10 minutes, followed by 9 mg/kg/hour for the next 10 minutes and 6 mg/kg/hour thereafter. In group 2, the induction dose of etomidate was 0.3 mg/kg followed by continuous infusion of 1.8 mg/kg/hour for 10 minutes, 1.5 mg/kg/hour for the next 10 minutes and 1.0 mg/kg/hour thereafter. Alfentanil was given for analgesia and suxamethonium for muscle relaxation. The propofol group showed better surgical conditions, more stable anaesthesia and better recovery according to the Steward score. Recovery times to opening eyes on command were comparable for both groups.     

Pain on injection of propofol. A comparison of cold propofol with propofol premixed with lignocaine

Propofol is frequently associated with pain on injection. Previous studies have suggested that chilling of the propofol decreases pain significantly. This prospective, randomised, double-blind trial was designed to assess the effectiveness of cold propofol compared with propofol premixed with lignocaine in minimising pain on injection. Patients were allocated to one of four groups: propofol + lignocaine 0.1 mg.kg⁻¹, propofol + lignocaine 0.2 mg.kg⁻¹, cold propofol and a control group consisting of propofol premixed with normal saline and maintained at room temperature. The results of this study show that cold propofol is associated with a very high incidence of injection pain while lignocaine 0.1 mg.kg⁻¹ premixed with propofol significantly decreases the incidence of pain (p < 0.001). Increasing the dosage of lignocaine above 0.1 mg.kg⁻¹, however, does not significantly decrease the incidence of pain further. The addition of lignocaine also significantly decreases the incidence of excitatory side-effects.     

A comparison of midazolam co-induction with propofol predosing for induction of anaesthesia

In a double-blind, placebo-controlled study of 90 ASA 1 and 2 patients scheduled for elective surgery we compared the effect of pre-administering midazolam 2 mg or propofol 30 mg on the dose of propofol subsequently required to induce anaesthesia. Using loss of response to verbal command and tolerance to placement of a facemask as end-points, the dose of propofol required to induce anaesthesia was significantly smaller in the patients given propofol (1.87 mg.kg-1) or midazolam (1.71 mg.kg-1) when compared to the control group (2.38 mg.kg-1). Although the decrease in blood pressure following induction was no difference between the two study groups and the decrease was felt not to be of clinical significance in this group of patients. As propofol is presented ' ... for use in a single patient only' and the technique of predosing with propofol allowed induction of all patients with less than 200 mg (a single ampoule), we question on a cost basis whether midazolam co-induction is necessary to reduce propofol induction doses.     

A comparison of the induction characteristics of thiopentone and propofol (2, 6-di-isopropyl phenol)

A study has been undertaken to compare the induction characteristics of the new intravenous anaesthetic agent 2,6 di-isopropyl phenol, newly prepared in a lipid emulsion (propofol) with those of thiopentone. Despite a significantly higher incidence of pain on injection and spontaneous movement, the new agent was felt to perform comparably to thiopentone as an induction agent. Unfortunately, propofol caused decreases in blood pressure which were significantly greater than those seen after thiopentone. This feature may prove to be a considerable hurdle to the general acceptance of propofol.     

Pain on injection of propofol

Pain on injection of propofol is a common problem, the cause of which remains unknown. The chemical properties and preparation of propofol, proposed mechanisms for the cause of the pain and clinical strategies to prevent pain on injection of propofol are reviewed in the hope of shedding some light on the subject.     

Ventilatory effects of propofol during induction of anaesthesia

The ventilatory effects of induction of anaesthesia with either propofol 2.5 mg/kg or thiopentone 4.0 mg/kg have been observed in patients premedicated with either atropine alone or papaveretum and hyoscine. Induction of anaesthesia with propofol was accompanied by a greater degree of ventilatory depression which was of longer duration than following thiopentone. The effect was accentuated by the opioid premedication.     

A comparison of propofol and methohexitone as induction agents for day case isoflurane anaesthesia

The induction and recovery characteristics of equivalent doses of propofol and methohexitone were compared in 50 patients undergoing day case isoflurane anaesthesia. Propofol induction was smoother but was associated with greater cardiorespiratory depression. Both the speed and quality of recovery were superior with propofol compared with methohexitone.     

Effect of prior administration of cold saline on pain during propofol injection

A single-blind, randomised, controlled study was undertaken to compare the efficacy of three methods of preventing pain during injection of propofol on induction of anaesthesia. Patients were allocated randomly to receive unmodified propofol, propofol with 0.05% lignocaine, propofol at 4 degrees C and unmodified propofol preceded by 10 ml of 0.9% saline at 4 degrees C. Prior injection of cold saline reduced the incidence of pain and discomfort significantly (22%) compared with unmodified propofol (75%; p less than 0.005) and was similar to that after cold propofol (33%) and propofol with lignocaine (44%). There was no significant difference between the treatment groups.     

The influence of esmolol on the dose of propofol required for induction of anaesthesia

Cardiac output may be an important determinant of the induction dose of intravenous anaesthetic. Esmolol is known to reduce cardiac output, and we examined its effect on the propofol dose required for induction of anaesthesia. The size of the effect seen with esmolol was compared with midazolam co-induction. Sixty patients were randomly allocated to placebo (saline), esmolol (1mg x kg(-1) bolus, followed by an infusion at 250 microg x kg(-1)min(-1)) or midazolam (0.04 mg x kg(-1)) groups. Induction of anaesthesia commenced 3 min following the administration of the study drug, using a Diprifusor set to achieve plasma propofol concentrations of 10 microg x ml(-1) at 5 min. The primary end point used was the propofol dose per kg at loss of response to command. The mean (SD) propofol dose for each group was 2.38 (0.48) mg x kg(-1) for placebo, 1.79 (0.36) mg x kg(-1) for esmolol and 1.34 (0.35) mg x kg(-1) for midazolam (all means significantly different; p < 0.0005). We found that predosing with esmolol reduces the propofol requirements for induction of anaesthesia by 25%.     

Comparison of propofol and thiopentone for induction of anaesthesia in premedicated patients

Thirty premedicated ASA I or II patients scheduled for minor gynaecological surgery, were randomly allocated to receive either 1.5 mg/kg or 2 mg/kg propofol of the new emulsion formulation, or 4 mg/kg thiopentone, given over 20 seconds. Anaesthesia was successfully induced in all 30 patients. The mean (SEM) induction times were for propofol 1.5 mg/kg 33.3(3.2) seconds, for 2 mg/kg 30.5(2.7) seconds and for thiopentone 34.6(2.7) seconds. The incidence of apnoea greater than 10 seconds, was respectively 60, 80 and 80%, and the mean duration of apnoea 30.8(5.3), 37.1(5.0) and 23.7(5.0) seconds. The mean systolic blood pressure decreased after propofol 1.5 mg/kg by 16.0 mmHg, after 2 mg/kg by 18.6 mmHg, and increased after thiopentone by 1 mmHg, 2 minutes after injection. Heart rate increased significantly 2 minutes after thiopentone by an average of 15.1 beats/minute, but not after propofol. Pain was not reported during or after the injection. No major adverse reactions occurred at induction or during maintenance of anaesthesia with an inhalation agent. One patient who received 2 mg/kg propofol and isoflurane vomited for 24 hours. The recovery of anaesthesia after propofol induction, was quicker than after thiopentone.