Efficacy and safety of etomidate-midazolam for screening colonoscopy in the elderly: A prospective double-blinded randomized controlled study

Effect of carotid corrected flow time combined with perioperative fluid therapy on preventing hypotension after general anesthesia induction in elderly patients: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Hypotension often occurs following the induction of general anesthesia in elderly patients undergoing surgery and can lead to severe complications. This study assessed the effect of carotid corrected flow time (FTc) combined with perioperative fluid therapy on preventing hypotension after general anesthesia induction in elderly patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The prospective cohort study was divided into two parts. The first part (Part I) consisted of 112 elderly patients. Carotid FTc was measured using Color Doppler Ultrasound 5 min before anesthesia induction. Hypotension was defined as a decrease of greater than 30% in systolic blood pressure (SBP) or a decrease of greater than 20% in mean arterial pressure (MAP) from baseline, or an absolute SBP below 90 mmHg and MAP below 60 mmHg within 3 min after induction of general anesthesia. The predictive value of carotid FTc was determined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. The second part (Part II) consisted of 65 elderly patients. Based on the results in Part I, elderly patients with carotid FTc below the optimal cut-off value received perioperative fluid therapy at a volume of 8 ml/kg of balanced crystalloids (lactated Ringer's solution) in 30 min before induction. The effect of carotid FTc combined with perioperative fluid therapy was assessed by comparing observed incidence of hypotension after induction.

RESULTS

The area under the ROC for carotid FTc to predict hypotension after induction was 0.876 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.800-0.952, P <0.001]. The optimal cut-off value was 334.95 ms (sensitivity of 87.20%; specificity of 82.20%). The logistic regression analysis revealed that carotid FTc is an independent predictor for post-induction hypotension in elderly patients. The incidence of post-induction hypotension was significantly lower ( P <0.001) in patients with carotid FTc less than 334.95 ms who received perioperative fluid therapy (35.71%) compared to those who did not (92.31%).

CONCLUSIONS

Carotid FTc combined with the perioperative fluid therapy could significantly reduce the incidence of hypotension after the induction of general anesthesia in elderly patients.

Etomidate versus propofol for sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes

BACKGROUND

Propofol is increasingly being used for sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy; however, owing to its side effects, an alternative drug is needed. We aimed to compare the safety, satisfaction, and efficacy outcomes of etomidate versus propofol in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy, including advanced endoscopic procedures.

METHODS

We systematically searched Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL (via EBSCO), China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Web of Science (1946-April 2020) databases for randomized controlled trials of gastrointestinal endoscopy (upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, colonoscopy, and advanced endoscopy) using etomidate or propofol as sedatives. We pooled odds ratios (ORs) for the safety profile and patient and anesthesiologist satisfaction using mixed-effects conditional logistic models and standardized mean differences for efficiency outcomes using random-effects models.

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies involving 3875 patients were included. Compared with propofol, etomidate resulted in significantly reduced apnea (OR: 0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.13-0.37; P < .001), hypoxemia (OR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.35-0.54; P < .001), hypotension (OR: 0.20; 95% CI: 0.11-0.36; P < .001), and bradycardia (OR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.30-0.91; P = .02) but led to increased myoclonus (OR: 8.54; 95% CI: 5.20-14.01; P < .001) and lowered anesthesiologist satisfaction (OR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.39-0.91; P = .02).

CONCLUSION

Etomidate may be a good alternative to propofol for gastrointestinal endoscopy, especially advanced endoscopy. Etomidate appears to be safe as an inducer for hemodynamically unstable patients or older adult patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Carotid artery corrected flow time and respiratory variations of peak blood flow velocity for prediction of hypotension after induction of general anesthesia in elderly patients

Background

Postinduction hypotension is closely related to postoperative complications. Elderly patients with compromised cardiovascular compensatory reserve are more susceptible to hypotension after induction of general anesthesia. This study investigated whether the carotid artery corrected flow time (FTc) and respiratory variation of peak blood flow velocity in the common carotid artery (ΔVpeak) could predict postinduction hypotension in elderly patients.

Methods

This prospective observational study included elderly patients aged 65 to 75 who were scheduled for elective surgery under general anesthesia with ASA physical status class of I-II, without cardiovascular disease, hypertension, diabetes, or obesity. Anesthesia was induced by midazolam, sufentanil, and etomidate and was maintained by sevoflurane. The carotid artery FTc and ΔVpeak were measured by ultrasound before induction of anesthesia. Hemodynamic data were recorded before induction and then during the first 10 min after induction.

Results

Ninety-nine patients were included in the final analysis, of whom 63 developed postinduction hypotension. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves was 0.87 (0.78 to 0.93) for carotid artery FTc and 0.67 (0.56 to 0.76) for ΔVpeak, respectively. The optimal cutoff value for predicting postinduction hypotension was 379.1 ms for carotid artery FTc, with sensitivity and specificity of 72.2 and 93.7%, respectively. The best cutoff value was 7.5% for ΔVpeak, with sensitivity and specificity of 55.6 and 75.0%, respectively.

Conclusions

The carotid artery FTc is a reliable predictor of postinduction hypotension in elderly patients with ASA status of I or II, without cardiovascular disease, hypertension, diabetes, or obesity. Elderly patients with a carotid artery FTc less than 379.1 ms before anesthesia have a higher risk of postinduction hypotension.

Trial registration

Clinical Trial Registry on August 2nd, 2020 (www.chictr.org.cn; ChiCTR2000035190).

New sedatives and analgesic drugs for gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures

Procedural sedation has become increasingly common in endoscopy. Sedatives and analgesics induce anxiolysis and amnesia. In addition, an appropriate level of sedation is necessary for safe procedures including therapeutic endoscopy. Midazolam and propofol are the most commonly used drugs in sedative endoscopy. In recent years, the need to ascertain the safety and effectiveness of sedation has increased in practice. Therefore, new sedatives and analgesic drugs for optimal sedative endoscopy, have recently emerged. This article reviews the characteristics of sedatives and analgesics, and describes their clinical use in gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Pre-procedural Preparation and Sedation for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy in Patients with Advanced Liver Disease

Gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients with advanced liver disease poses various challenges, a major one being procedural sedation and its associated considerations. While sedation during endoscopy can improve patient comfort, decrease anxiety, and facilitate procedural completion, in patients with advanced liver disease, it is also associated with substantial and unique risks due to alterations in drug metabolism and other factors. As such, the choice of sedative agent(s) and related logistics may require careful inter-disciplinary planning and individualized considerations. Furthermore, a large proportion of agents require dose reductions and particular monitoring of the vital signs, level of consciousness, and other indices. In the present review, we provide a contemporary overview of procedural sedation considerations, commonly used intravenous sedatives, and second-line as well as novel sedatives for gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients with advanced liver disease.

The Efficacy and Safety of Remimazolam Tosilate versus Etomidate-Propofol in Elderly Outpatients Undergoing Colonoscopy: A Prospective, Randomized, Single-Blind, Non-Inferiority Trial

Objective

The optimal sedation regime during endoscopy remains controversial, especially for elderly outpatients. In this study, we compared the efficacy and safety between remimazolam tosilate (RT) and etomidate-propofol (EP) in elderly outpatients undergoing colonoscopy.

Methods

A total of 260 elderly outpatients undergoing sedative colonoscopy were randomized into two groups. Patients in the RT group received a 0.075-mg/kg maintenance dose of remimazolam following an initial dose of 0.15 mg/kg, whereas patients in the EP group (10 mL:20 mg etomidate plus 10 mL:100 mg propofol) received a 0.05-mL/kg maintenance dose following an initial dose of 0.1 mL/kg to maintain a Modified Observer’s Assessment of Alertness/Sedation score of ≤3 during the procedure. The primary endpoint was the success of the procedure. Secondary endpoints included time metrics, hemodynamics, consumption of fentanyl, etomidate, propofol, and remimazolam, intraoperative body movement, patient and endoscopist satisfaction scores, supplemental dose of sedative and fentanyl, and incidence and severity of adverse events.

Results

The procedure success rate was 96.52% in the RT group and 100% in the EP group. The difference in procedure success rate between the RT and EP groups was −3.48% (95% confidence interval: −6.81%, −0.15%). Four patients in the RT group required rescue midazolam. Compared with patients in the RT group, the onset time of the EP group was significantly lower (p < 0.05), whereas time to fully alert (p = 0.001), ready for discharge (p = 0.001), and hospital discharge (p = 0.002) were all significantly higher in the EP group. However, there were no significant differences in procedure time (p = 0.846) or cecal intubation time (p = 0.320) between the two groups. Although the frequency of intraoperative body movement was higher in the RT group, the difference was not significant (p = 0.508). There were no significant differences in patients’ demographic and baseline characteristics, supplemental doses of sedative and fentanyl, or patient and endoscopist satisfaction scores (p > 0.05). Muscular tremor and pain on injection were recorded more frequently in the EP group (p < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences in hypoxia, respiratory depression, or incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. The severity of adverse events was all mild (grade 1) across both groups.

Conclusion

RT may have non-inferior efficacy and a higher safety profile than EP in elderly outpatients undergoing colonoscopy, which suggests that RT may be more suitable for elderly outpatients undergoing colonoscopy.

Etomidate and its Analogs: A Review of Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics

Etomidate is a hypnotic agent that is used for the induction of anesthesia. It produces its effect by acting as a positive allosteric modulator on the γ-aminobutyric acid type A receptor and thus enhancing the effect of the inhibitory neurotransmitter γ-aminobutyric acid. Etomidate stands out among other anesthetic agents by having a remarkably stable cardiorespiratory profile, producing no cardiovascular or respiratory depression. However, etomidate suppresses the adrenocortical axis by the inhibition of the enzyme 11β-hydroxylase. This makes the drug unsuitable for administration by a prolonged infusion. It also makes the drug unsuitable for administration to critically ill patients. Etomidate has relatively large volumes of distributions and is rapidly metabolized by hepatic esterases into an inactive carboxylic acid through hydrolyzation. Because of the decrease in popularity of etomidate, few modern extensive pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic studies exist. Over the last decade, several analogs of etomidate have been developed, with the aim of retaining its stable cardiorespiratory profile, whilst eliminating its suppressive effect on the adrenocortical axis. One of these molecules, ABP-700, was studied in extensive phase I clinical trials. These found that ABP-700 is characterized by small volumes of distribution and rapid clearance. ABP-700 is metabolized similarly to etomidate, by hydrolyzation into an inactive carboxylic acid. Furthermore, ABP-700 showed a rapid onset and offset of clinical effect. One side effect observed with both etomidate and ABP-700 is the occurrence of involuntary muscle movements. The origin of these movements is unclear and warrants further research.

Using Etomidate and Midazolam for Screening Colonoscopies Results in More Stable Hemodynamic Responses in Patients of All Ages

Background/Aims

Recent studies have demonstrated that etomidate is a safe sedative drug with noninferior sedative effects. In our recent study, we revealed that etomidate/midazolam was more hemodynamically stable than propofol/midazolam in elderly patients undergoing colonoscopies. We aimed to investigate whether compared with propofol/midazolam, etomidate/midazolam causes fewer cardiopulmonary adverse events with noninferior efficacy for screening colonoscopies in patients of all ages.

Methods

In this single-center, randomized, double-blind study, we prospectively enrolled 200 patients. The patients were divided into etomidate and propofol groups. The primary outcome was the occurrence of cardiopulmonary adverse events. The secondary outcomes were the proportion of patients with fluctuations in vital signs (oxygen desaturation and transient hypotension), adverse events interrupting the procedure, and sedation-related outcomes.

Results

Adverse cardiopulmonary events were more common in the propofol group than the etomidate group (65.0% vs 51.0%, respectively; p=0.045). Forty-six patients (46.0%) in the propofol group and 29 (29.0%) in the etomidate group experienced fluctuations in their vital signs (p=0.013). The proportions of patients experiencing adverse events that interrupted the procedure, including myoclonus, were not significantly different between the two groups (etomidate: 20.0% vs propofol: 11.0%; p=0.079). Both groups had similar sedation-related outcomes. Multivariate analysis revealed that compared with the propofol groups, the etomidate group had a significantly lower risk of fluctuations in vital signs (odds ratio, 0.427; 95% confidence interval, 0.230 to 0.792; p=0.007).

Conclusions

Compared with using propofol/midazolam, using etomidate/midazolam for screening colonoscopies results in more stable hemodynamic responses in patients of all ages; therefore, we recommend using etomidate/midazolam for colonoscopies in patients with cardiovascular risk factors.

Efficacy and Safety of Etomidate in Comparison with Propofol or Midazolam as Sedative for Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

BACKGROUND/AIMS

In this study, we compared the efficacy and safety of etomidate with those of propofol or midazolam for the maintenance of sedation during endoscopy.

METHODS

The study enrolled patients who underwent sedative endoscopy in our hospital and divided them into three groups. Patients in each group were administered midazolam as induction therapy and were subsequently administered either midazolam (M + M group), propofol (M + P group), or etomidate (M + E group) as maintenance medication. The primary outcome was overall cardiovascular and respiratory adverse events.

RESULTS

In total, 105 patients who underwent sedative endoscopic examination were enrolled. The outcomes related to the procedure and sedation were not significantly different among the groups. Overall cardiovascular and respiratory adverse events were observed in 9 patients (25.7%) in the M + M group, 8 patients (23.5%) in the M + P group, and 10 patients (27.8%) in the M + E group. The logistic regression analysis revealed that etomidate use was not an independent risk factor for overall cardiovascular and respiratory adverse events.

CONCLUSION

The outcomes following the use of etomidate for maintenance after induction with midazolam for sedation in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy were not inferior to those following midazolam or propofol use from the perspectives of safety and efficacy.