Etomidate Anesthesia during ERCP Caused More Stable Haemodynamic Responses Compared with Propofol: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Remimazolam vs Etomidate: Haemodynamic Effects in Hypertensive Elderly Patients Undergoing Non-Cardiac Surgery

Background

Remimazolam tosilate (RT) is a novel ultrashort-acting γ-aminobutyric acid subtype A (GABAA) agonist, with several advantages including rapid induction and recovery, stable haemodynamics, and mild respiratory inhibition. However, studies have not been conducted to explore the haemodynamic effects of RT in elderly hypertensive subjects undergoing non-cardiac surgery. Therefore, we sought to compare the effects of anaesthesia induction using different doses of RT and etomidate on the haemodynamics of this group of patients.

Methods

Patients were recruited into this single-center, prospective, randomized, double-blind trial from October 2022 to June 2023. A total of 150 hypertensive elderly undergoing non-cardiac surgery were randomly assigned into 0.2 mg/kg RT group (Group RL), 0.3 mg/kg RT group (Group RH) and 0.3 mg/kg etomidate group (Group E). The primary outcome of the study was haemodynamic changes (mean arterial pressure fluctuation value -∆MAP and heart rate fluctuation value -∆HR) observed during anaesthesia induction. Secondary outcomes included incidence of adverse cardiovascular events and adverse drug reactions (injection pain and myoclonus), cumulative doses of vasoactive drugs and vital signs at different time points.

Results

Patients in Group E and Group RL had significantly lower haemodynamic fluctuations (∆MAP), lower incidence of hypotension and cumulative dose of ephedrine than subjects in Group RH. Patients in groups RL and RH had significantly lower incidence of injection pain and myoclonus compared with patients in group E. The results showed no statistically significant differences in ∆HR, hypertension, bradycardia, tachycardia, and time to loss of eye-opening reflex and start of intubation, and vital signs at different time points among the three groups.

Conclusion

Use of low-dose RT (0.2 mg/kg) for induction of non-cardiac surgical anaesthesia in elderly hypertensive patients is more effective in maintaining haemodynamic stability and has fewer adverse effects compared with etomidate.

Etomidate Versus Propofol for Monitored Anesthesia Care During Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Background and objectives Propofol-based sedation is one of the most commonly used methods for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The commonest complications during ERCP are in the form of adverse cardiopulmonary events as a result of sedation. Etomidate has a more stable cardiovascular and respiratory profile than propofol and has been used for sedation in simple gastrointestinal endoscopy but has not been studied for procedural sedation in ERCP. The objective of the present study was to compare the safety and feasibility of etomidate and propofol for sedation during ERCP procedures. Methods This single-center, randomized trial included 100 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status class I to II patients who were scheduled for ERCP. All patients received midazolam 0.02 mg/kg, lignocaine (2%) 1 mg/kg, and fentanyl 1 µg/kg intravenously, followed by etomidate or propofol according to the group allocation. The primary outcome was to compare the mean arterial pressure (MAP) at various timepoints between the two groups and secondary outcomes were to compare oxygen saturation, induction and recovery times, and adverse events. Transient hypotension was defined as any decrease in MAP below 60 mmHg or 20% below the baseline. Transient hypoxia was defined as desaturation (saturation of peripheral oxygen (SpO2) <92%) lasting for more than 10 seconds requiring airway intervention. Results Fifty patients were enrolled in each group (Group E: etomidate and Group P: propofol). Transient hypotension occurred in eight (16%) patients in Group P, and two (4%) patients in Group E (P= 0.045). Baseline MAP was comparable between the two groups but was significantly lower in Group P at three timepoints during the study. Nine (18 %) patients in Group P had a transient hypoxic episode, compared to none in Group E (p= 0.006). The induction and recovery times were similar in the two groups. Conclusions Etomidate offers better hemodynamic and respiratory stability than propofol and can be recommended for use during ERCP in ASA I/II 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.

Comparison of Remimazolam Tosilate and Etomidate on Hemodynamics in Cardiac Surgery: A Randomised Controlled Trial

Background

Remimazolam tosilate (RT) is a new ultrashort-acting γ-aminobutyric acid subtype A (GABA_A) agonist, with the characteristics of rapid onset and offset, minimal cardiorespiratory depression. Currently, few studies have compared the effect of RT and etomidate on hemodynamics during anesthesia induction. Here, we aimed to compare the hemodynamic effects of different doses of RT and etomidate for anesthesia induction in patients undergoing cardiac surgeries.

Methods

Patients were recruited from January to September 2022 in this single-center, prospective, randomized, double-blind trial. A total of 117 patients undergoing selective valve replacement surgery were randomly divided into low-dose RT (0.2 mg/kg) group (group LR), high-dose RT (0.3 mg/kg) group (group HR), or etomidate (1.5 mg/kg) group (group E), respectively. The primary outcome was hemodynamic fluctuations (mean arterial pressure fluctuation value [∆MAP]; heart rate fluctuation value [∆HR]) during anesthesia induction. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of adverse drug reactions (injection pain and myoclonus) and adverse cardiovascular events, vital signs at different time points and the cumulative doses of vasoactive drugs.

Results

The hemodynamic fluctuations (∆MAP) in group LR and group E were significantly lower than that in group HR. In addition, the incidence of hypotension and the cumulative norepinephrine doses in group E and group LR were also significantly lower than that in group HR. Furthermore, the incidence of injection pain and myoclonus in group LR and group HR were less frequently recorded compared with group E. There were no significant differences in terms of ∆HR, tachycardia, hypertension, severe bradycardia, vital signs at different time points, lactic acid and blood glucose between both groups.

Conclusion

Compared with etomidate, low-dose RT (0.2mg/kg) can not only provide stable hemodynamic parameters but also cause fewer adverse reactions when used for anesthesia induction in patients with cardiac disease.

BIS feedback closed-loop target-controlled infusion of propofol or etomidate in elderly patients with spinal surgery

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the safety of etomidate anesthesia induction combined with Bispectral index (BIS) feedback closed-loop target-controlled infusion of propofol for spinal surgery in elderly patients.

METHODS

Clinical data of 90 elderly patients who underwent elective spinal surgery were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were assigned to an etomidate group (n=48) and a propofol group (n=42) according to the different anesthesia methods. The etomidate group was anesthetized with etomidate combined with BIS feedback closed-loop target-controlled infusion, and the propofol group was anesthetized with closed-loop target-controlled infusion induced by propofol. The mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) of the two groups were statistically analyzed 5 min after admission to the operating room (T0), the moment of the intubation (T1), 3 min after intubation (T2), 1 min before prone position (T3), 3 min after prone position (T4), the end of suture skin (T5) and 3 min after supine position (T6). In addition, the vasoactive drug application, awakening time, tracheal tube extraction time and incidence of postoperative complications were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

There were significant changes in MAP and HR from T0 to T1 in both groups (MAP: etomidate group t=5.677, P<0.001, propofol group t=8.093, P<0.001; HR: etomidate group t=2.731, P=0.008, propofol group t=3.967, P<0.001). MAP changes in etomidate group from T0 to T1 were less (MAP: t=4.236, P<0.001; t=2.082, P=0.040), and there was no significant difference in HR between the two groups (P>0.05). There were fewer patients receiving vasoactive drugs in the etomidate group (χ²=5.070, P=0.024), but no significant difference was found in the incidence of complications between the two groups, χ²=3.670, P=0.055.

CONCLUSION

Compared to propofol, the application of etomidate combined with BIS feedback closed-loop target-controlled infusion in spinal surgery anesthesia for elderly patients can keep hemodynamics in a stable state, without affecting postoperative resuscitation, showing high safety, so it is worthy of clinical application.

Effect of different doses of dexmedetomidine on the median effective concentration of propofol during gastrointestinal endoscopy: a randomized controlled trial

AIMS

Dexmedetomidine could be an ideal adjuvant to propofol during gastrointestinal endoscopy because it provides both analgesia and sedation without respiratory depression. This study investigates the effect of different doses of dexmedetomidine on the median effective concentration of propofol during gastrointestinal endoscopy.

METHODS

Ninety adult patients were randomly assigned to Group Control, Group DEX0.5 (0.5 μg/kg dexmedetomidine) or Group DEX1.0 (1.0 μg/kg dexmedetomidine). Anaesthesia during endoscopy was implemented by plasma target-controlled infusion (TCI) of propofol with different doses of dexmedetomidine. TCI concentration of the first patient for each group was 2.5 μg/mL and the consecutive adjacent concentration gradient was 0.5 μg/mL. Median effective concentration (EC₅₀ ) of propofol by TCI for gastrointestinal endoscopy was determined by using the modified Dixon's up-and-down method. Cardiovascular variables were also measured.

RESULTS

EC₅₀ of propofol by TCI and 95% confidence interval (CI) for gastrointestinal endoscopy were 3.77 (3.48-4.09), 2.51 (2.27-2.78) and 2.10 (1.90-2.33) μg/mL in Group Control, Group DEX0.5 and Group DEX1.0, respectively. The average percent change from heart rate (HR) baseline was 2.8 (8.9), -7.4 (7.7) and -10.5 (8.8) (P < .001), and the average percent change from mean arterial pressure (MAP) baseline was -10.6 [-24.7; 3.5], -9.5 [-29.2; 11.4] and -4.0 [-27.3; 15.5] (P = .034) in Group Control, Group DEX0.5 and Group DEX1.0, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Dexmedetomidine reduced the EC₅₀ of propofol by TCI. A 0.5-1 μg/kg dose of dexmedetomidine caused a decrease in HR without bradycardia. The decrease in dosage of propofol with increasing doses of dexmedetomidine caused more stable MAP. Dexmedetomidine is an ideal adjuvant drug to propofol during gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Effect of remimazolam tosilate versus etomidate on hemodynamics in patients undergoing valve replacement surgery: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with a history of cardiac disease are prone to develop cardiovascular adverse events such as hypotension, hypertension, and tachycardia during anesthesia induction. Therefore, hemodynamic stability is one of the most important concerns for induction of anesthesia in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Remimazolam tosilate is a new, ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine agent, with the advantages of rapid onset, rapid offset, and minimal cardiorespiratory depression. We aim to compare the effect of remimazolam tosilate and etomidate on hemodynamics during anesthesia induction in patients undergoing valve replacement surgery.

METHODS/DESIGN

The trial is a prospective, randomized, double-blinded, controlled, single-center trial to compare the effect of remimazolam tosilate and etomidate on hemodynamics in patients undergoing valve replacement surgery. One hundred seventeen patients undergoing selective valve replacement surgery between January 1, 2022, and December 31, 2023, will be enrolled and randomly allocated into one of three groups: low-dose remimazolam group (Group LR), high-dose remimazolam group (Group HR), or etomidate group (Group E). The primary outcome is hemodynamic fluctuations during anesthesia induction (the difference between mean arterial pressure [MAP] to baseline, ▴MAP; and the difference between maximum or minimum heart rate [HR] and baseline, ▴HR). Secondary outcomes include the incidence of adverse cardiovascular events (hypotension, severe bradycardia, hypertension, tachycardia, and arrhythmia), the cumulative doses of vasoactive drugs used per patient, incidence and degree of injection pain and myoclonus, blood glucose values, and vital signs at different time points.

DISCUSSION

This research will determine the effectiveness and safety of remimazolam tosilate induction on hemodynamics in patients undergoing valve replacement surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

www.chictr.org .cn identifier ChiCTR2100052535 . Registered on 17th Dec 2021, http://www.chictr.org.cn/ ).

Comparison of propofol-nalbuphine and propofol-fentanyl sedation for patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a double-blind, randomized controlled trial

Background

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) has been increasingly used to treat patients with biliary/pancreatic duct obstruction or stricture outside the operating room. Effective and safe sedation techniques are needed because of painful stimuli and the long duration of the ERCP procedure.Nalbuphine has been shown to cause less respiratory depression during sedation than similar cases without nalbuphine. This study compared the effects of propofol-nalbuphine (PN) and propofol-fentanyl (PF) sedation in patients undergoing ERCP.

Methods

Four hundred patients scheduled for ERCP procedures were divided into two groups: the PF group (receiving PF sedation,n = 199) and the PN group (receiving PN sedation,n = 201). Vital signs, adverse events during surgery, patient movement scores, pain scores, and adverse events one day post-ERCP were recorded.

Results

Stable haemodynamics were observed in both groups.Compared to the PF group, the PN group showed significantly decreased respiratory depression (P < 0.0001) and surgical interruptions (P = 0.048).Nalbuphine decreased patient movement by reducing pain from ERCP.

Conclusion

Nalbuphine, instead of fentanyl, precipitated less respiratory depression while permitting adequate/equivalent sedation for ERCP and therefore provides more efficient and safer sedation.

Trial registration

ChiCTR, ChiCTR1800016018, Registered 7 May 2018, http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=27085

The median effective concentration of propofol with different doses of esketamine during gastrointestinal endoscopy in elderly patients: A randomized controlled trial

AIMS

Propofol may result in hypotension, bradycardia and loss of protective reflexes, especially in elderly patients, while esketamine, a N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist, has analgesic, anaesthetic and sympathomimetic properties and is known to cause less cardiorespiratory depression. We hypothesized that esketamine may reduce the median effective concentration (EC₅₀ ) of propofol and coadministration is less likely to produce hypotension during gastrointestinal endoscopy in elderly patients.

METHODS

Ninety elderly patients, aged 65-89 years, undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy were randomly assigned into 3 groups: SK0 (control) group (0 mg/kg esketamine); SK0.25 group (0.25 mg/kg esketamine); and SK0.5 group (0.5 mg/kg esketamine). Anaesthesia was achieved by plasma target-controlled infusion of propofol with different bolus doses of esketamine. The EC₅₀ of propofol for gastrointestinal endoscopy was determined by using the up-and-down method of Dixon. The initial plasma target concentration is 2.5 μg/mL and the adjacent concentration gradient is 0.5 μg/mL. Cardiovascular variables were also measured.

RESULTS

Propofol EC₅₀ s and its 95% confidence interval for gastrointestinal endoscopy in elderly patients were 3.69 (2.59-4.78), 2.45 (1.85-3.05) and 1.71 (1.15-2.27) μg/mL in the SK0, SK0.25 and SK0.5 groups, respectively (P < .05). The average percent change from baseline mean arterial pressure was -19.7 (7.55), -15.2 (7.14) and -10.1 (6.73), in the SK0, SK0.25 and SK0.5 groups, respectively (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Combination medication of propofol with esketamine reduced the propofol EC₅₀ during gastrointestinal endoscopy in elderly patients compared with administration of propofol without esketamine. Increasing doses of SK with propofol are less likely to produce hypotension with shorter recovery time.

Comparison of etomidate and propofol-mediated anesthesia induction followed by intubation and sevoflurane maintenance during ERCP in obese patients

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we focused on obese patients (Body Mass Index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m²) and compared the efficacy and safety of etomidate or propofol-mediated anesthesia induction followed by intubation and sevoflurane maintenance during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP).

METHODS

A total of 180 patients were computer-randomized into a propofol group or an etomidate group, with 90 cases in each group. Patients received anesthesia induction by etomidate or propofol followed by intubation and sevoflurane maintenance during ERCP. Baseline characteristics, information about procedure-related time and satisfaction, and adverse events were collected and compared between the etomidate group and propofol group.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics of both groups were similar. The propofol group had a longer time of intraoperative SpO₂ <95% (etomidate group vs propofol group, 0.07±0.47 min vs 0.24±0.87 min, P-value = 0.019), higher frequency of SpO₂ <95% for any period of time (etomidate group vs propofol group, 2.22% vs 11.11%, P-value = 0.032), and higher frequency of transient hypotension (etomidate group vs propofol group, 1.11% vs 8.89%, P-value = 0.034). The etomidate group had longer induction time and recovery time than the propofol group with P-values of 0.019 and 0.004, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In obese patients who underwent ERCP and needed intubation, etomidate appears better than propofol for anesthesia induction followed by anesthesia maintenance of sevoflurane.

Obstructive Jaundice doesn't Change the Population Pharmacokinetics of Etomidate in Patients who Underwent Bile Duct Surgery

BACKGROUND

Etomidate is commonly used in the induction of anesthesia. We have previously confirmed that etomidate requirements are significantly reduced in patients with obstructive jaundice and that etomidate anesthesia during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) results in more stable hemodynamics when compared with propofol. The aim of the present study is to investigate whether obstructive jaundice affects the pharmacokinetics of etomidate in patients who underwent bile duct surgery.

METHODS

18 patients with obstructive jaundice and 12 non-jaundiced patients scheduled for bile duct surgery were enrolled in the study. Etomidate 0.333 mg/kg was administered by IV bolus for anesthetic induction. Arterial blood samples were drawn before, during, and up to 300 minutes after the bolus. Plasma etomidate concentrations were determined using a validated high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry assay. A population nonlinear mixed-effects modeling approach was used to characterize etomidate pharmacokinetics. The covariates of age, gender, height, weight, body surface area (BSA), body mass index (BMI), lean body mass (LBM), total bilirubin (TBL), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), total bile acid (TBA), creatinine (CR), blood urea nitrogen (BUN) were tested for significant effects on parameters using a multiple forward selection approach. Covariate effects were judged based on changes in the objective function value (OFV).

RESULTS

A three-compartment disposition model adequately described the pharmacokinetics of etomidate. The model was further improved when height was a covariate of total clearance [Cl1=1.30+0.0232(HT-162), ΔOFV=-7.33; P<0.01)]. The introduction of any other covariates, including bilirubin and total bile acids, did not improve the model significantly (P>0.01). For the height of 162cm, the final pharmacokinetic parameter values were as follows: V1=1.42 (95% CI, 1.01-1.83, L), V2=5.52 (95% CI, 4.07-6.97, L), V3=63.9 (95% CI, 41.95-85.85, L), Cl1= 1.30 (95% CI, 1.19-1.41, L/min), Cl2= 1.21 (95%CI, 0.95-1.47, L/min), and Cl3=0.584 (95%CI, 0.95-1.21, L/min), respectively.

CONCLUSION

A 3-compartment open model might best describe the concentration profile of etomidate after bolus infusion for anesthesia induction. The pharmacokinetics of etomidate were not changed by the presence of obstructive jaundice.

Neurologic Safety of Etomidate-Based Sedation during Upper Endoscopy in Patients with Liver Cirrhosis Compared with Propofol: A Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial

(1) Background: Although etomidate-based sedation is an effective and safe protocol in endoscopic procedures, there is a lack of evidence regarding the safety of etomidate in patients with liver cirrhosis (LC). This study aimed to compare the neurologic safety and efficacy of etomidate and propofol for endoscopic sedation in patients with LC. (2) Methods: From December 2017 to December 2019, consecutive cirrhotic patients who underwent sedative endoscopy using either etomidate or propofol were randomly recruited. The primary endpoint was the number connection test (NCT), and the secondary endpoints included factors for the safety of sedatives during endoscopy. (3) Results: 63 patients were enrolled in each of the etomidate and propofol groups. The NCT times were significantly lower in the etomidate group than in the propofol group. Furthermore, severe or very severe degree of encephalopathy was higher in the propofol group but was not significantly different. Pharmacological properties and the overall incidence of respiratory and cardiovascular events did not differ significantly between the groups. (4) Conclusion: Etomidate-based sedation exacerbates neither subclinical nor overt hepatic encephalopathy. It guarantees efficacies similar to those of propofol regarding rapid sedation, fast recovery, and early discharge, with no increased risk of adverse respiratory or cardiovascular events in patients with LC.

Difficult Intubation due to Penetrating Trauma from a Crossbow Bolt

We present the case of a patient with penetrating neck and craniofacial trauma from a self-inflicted crossbow bolt injury. This case highlights the challenges involved in prehospital airway management related to an in situ foreign object penetrating the oral cavity. We review the complications associated with such injuries and considerations for effective prehospital airway management.

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.

Comparison of Nitroglycerin versus Lignocaine Spray to Attenuate Haemodynamic Changes in Elective Surgical Patients Undergoing Direct Laryngoscopy and Endotracheal Intubation: A prospective randomised study

Objectives

This study aimed to compare the effects of nitroglycerin (NTG) versus lignocaine spray in blunting the pressor response during direct laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation.

Methods

This study was conducted between January and June 2018 in the Department of Anesthesiology, Teerthankar Mahaveer Medical College, Moradabad, India. A total of 90 elective surgical patients of American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status grades I or II were divided into three groups, comprising two treatment groups and one control group. Patients in the treatment groups received either one puff (1.5 mg/kg) of lignocaine 10% spray or one puff (400 μg) of NTG spray in the oropharynx one minute prior to the induction of anaesthesia. Haemodynamic variables and mean rate pressure product at baseline and one, two, three, four and five minutes post-induction were compared.

Results

There was a significant reduction in mean heart rate at 3–5 minutes in both treatment groups compared to the control group (P <0.050), as well as lower increases in mean arterial pressure at 1–3 minutes (P <0.050). However, at 2–4 minutes, there was a significantly greater decrease in mean systolic blood pressure in the NTG group compared to both the lignocaine and control groups (P <0.050). Moreover, a greater decrease in mean rate pressure product response at 1–5 minutes was observed in the NTG group compared to the lignocaine and control groups (P = 0.001).

Conclusion

The NTG spray was more effective than lignocaine in attenuating blood pressure increases and rate pressure product during elective laryngoscopy and intubation.

Effect of dexmedetomidine on etomidate-induced myoclonus: a randomized, double-blind controlled trial

Background: Etomidate used for the induction of general anesthesia can result in myoclonus. We tested the hypothesis that pretreatment with dexmedetomidine (Dex) reduces the incidence of etomidate-induced myoclonus during the induction of general anesthesia.

Materials and methods: One hundred patients who were scheduled for selective operations under general anesthesia were included in this randomized, double-blind controlled trial. Patients were randomized to receive either Dex 0.5 µg/kg in 20 mL of normal saline or the same volume of normal saline as pretreatment agents 15 mins before the injection of etomidate 0.3 mg/kg. The primary endpoint was the incidence of etomidate-induced myoclonus. Secondary endpoints were the severity of etomidate-induced myoclonus and the incidence of adverse effects from the onset of action of Dex or normal saline to the injection of etomidate, such as dizziness, respiratory depression, bradycardia, hypotension and nausea/vomiting.

Results: All of the 100 patients completed the trial. Dex resulted in a significant 38% reduction in the number of patients who experienced etomidate-induced myoclonus: 13 (26%) vs 32 (64%) (P=0.0001). Additionally, the severity of myoclonus was also reduced in the Dex group than that in the placebo group (P=0.02). Incidence of dizziness, respiratory depression, bradycardia, hypotension and nausea/vomiting was similar in both groups.

Conclusions: Pretreatment with Dex 0.5 µg/kg 15 mins before the induction of general anesthesia not only resulted in a 38% reduction in the incidence of etomidate-induced myoclonus, but also reduced the severity of myoclonus, without inducing any adverse effects.

The effect of etomidate or propofol on brainstem function during anesthesia induction: a bispectral index-guided study

Purpose

To compare the effect of etomidate versus propofol infusion on hemodynamic profiles, spontaneous breathing, and corneal reflex during the induction of anesthesia.

Methods

Adult patients (n=80) were randomized to receive etomidate (Group E, n=40) or propofol (Group P, n=40) infusion during anesthesia induction. Throughout induction, mean blood pressure and heart rate were monitored. Time to loss of consciousness (LOC), bispectral index (BIS), existence of spontaneous breathing, and corneal reflex at LOC were recorded.

Results

Fewer changes in hemodynamic profile occurred in Group E compared with Group P during induction of anesthesia. The mean time to LOC was shorter with etomidate than propofol (129.5 s vs 189.5 s, P<0.0001). BIS was lower in Group E compared with Group P at LOC (46.3 vs 52.9, P=0.0141). More patients exhibited spontaneous breathing in Group E compared with Group P at LOC (80% vs 17.5%, P<0.0001). Similarly, more patients maintained corneal reflex in Group E compared with Group P (34 patients vs 4 patients, P<0.0001). The incidence of etomidate-induced myoclonus was 17.5%.

Conclusion

Compared with propofol infusion, etomidate infusion during anesthesia induction had fewer effects on the hemodynamic profile of patients. Among patients who received etomidate, the BIS value was lower at LOC, and more patients displayed spontaneous breathing and corneal reflex.

Trial Registry Number

China Clinical Research Information Service, ChiCTR-IOR-17011050

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

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Recent studies have shown that etomidate is associated with fewer serious adverse events than propofol and has a noninferior sedative effect. We investigated whether etomidate-midazolam is associated with fewer cardiopulmonary adverse events and has noninferior efficacy compared to propofol-midazolam for screening colonoscopy in the elderly.

METHODS

A prospective, single-center, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial was performed. Patients aged over 65 years who were scheduled to undergo screening colonoscopy were randomized to receive either etomidate or propofol based on midazolam. The primary outcome was all cardiopulmonary adverse events. The secondary outcomes were vital sign fluctuation (VSF), adverse events disturbing the procedure, and sedation-related outcomes.

RESULTS

The incidence of cardiopulmonary adverse events was higher in the propofol group (72.6%) than in the etomidate group (54.8%) (P = .040). VSF was detected in 17 (27.4%) and 31 (50.0%) patients in the etomidate and propofol groups, respectively (P = .010). The incidence rate of adverse events disturbing the procedure was significantly higher in the etomidate group (25.8%) than in the propofol group (8.1%) (P = .008). Moreover, the incidence rate of myoclonus was significantly higher in the etomidate group (16.1%) than in the propofol group (1.6%) (P = .004). There was no statistical significance between the 2 groups with respect to sedation times and sedation-related outcomes including patients' and endoscopist's satisfaction. In the multivariate analysis, the etomidate group had significantly low odds ratio (OR) associated with VSF (OR: 0.407, confidence interval: 0.179-0.926, P = .032).

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend using etomidate-midazolam in patients with high ASA score or vulnerable to risk factors; propofol-midazolam may be used as a guideline in patients with low ASA score.

Systematic review of anaesthetic medication for ERCP based on a network meta-analysis

AIMS

We performed a systematic review of various anaesthetic medications for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and aimed to make a comprehensive comparison based on a network meta-analysis.

METHODS

We searched globally recognized electronic databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Central and EMBASE, to retrieve relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of anaesthetic medications for ERCP. Network meta-analysis was conducted by evaluating the procedure time, adverse effects and drug requirements. The cumulative probability P value was utilized to rank the medications under examination.

RESULTS

Seventeen RCTs that examined 1877 patients were included in this research. Under good convergence and efficiency, data analysis was performed using a consistency model. For the comparison of procedure times, we found that a combination of dexmedetomidine and ketamine (P = 0.19) or propofol plus pethidine (P = 0.18) seemed to be the two best medications for reducing procedure time. Additionally, midazolam combined with dexmedetomidine plus pethidine seemed to be the safest application for ERCP (P = 0.36). Propofol plus alfentanil also exhibited a good safety value (P = 0.28). For evaluation of drug requirements, the whole network connection could not be established; thus, comparisons in two subgroups were conducted. The results showed that midazolam combined with dexmedetomidine plus pethidine (P = 0.41) and propofol plus refentanil (P = 0.94) were superior to others in decreasing drug requirements.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the objective results and our conclusions, we deemed that a combination of midazolam and dexmedetomidine was recommended, and propofol plus opioids also revealed great clinical value. However, we are still expecting more clinical research in the future.

Efficacy and safety of etomidate-based sedation compared with propofol-based sedation during ERCP in low-risk patients: a double-blind, randomized, noninferiority trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Etomidate is a short-acting intravenous hypnotic with a safety profile that is superior to alternative drugs such as propofol. However, there is a lack of evidence on the safety of etomidate in ERCP. The objective of this study was to compare efficacy and safety profiles of etomidate and propofol for endoscopic sedation.

METHODS

This single-center, randomized, double-blind, noninferiority trial included patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I to II who had been scheduled for ERCP. All patients received .05 mg/kg midazolam intravenously as pretreatment before receiving etomidate or propofol. Either etomidate or propofol was then administered according to group allocation. The primary endpoint was an overall respiratory event. A noninferiority margin of 10% was assumed.

RESULTS

Sixty-three and 64 patients were enrolled in the etomidate and propofol groups, respectively. Respiratory events were identified in 10 patients (15.6%) in the etomidate group and 16 patients (25.4%) on the propofol group, with a rate difference of -9.8% (1-sided 97.5% confidence interval, -∞ to 4.2%). The overall incidence of cardiovascular events tended to be higher in the etomidate group (67.2% vs 50.8%, P = .060). In particular, tachycardia (heart rate > 100 beats/min) was more common in the etomidate group than in the propofol group (64.1% vs 34.9%, P = .001). Transient hypotension tended to be less common in the etomidate group (6.3 vs 15.9%, P = .084).

CONCLUSIONS

Etomidate-based sedation during ERCP was noninferior to propofol-based sedation in terms of the overall incidence of respiratory events in patients with ASA physical status I to II. (International Clinical Trials Registry Platform number: KCT0001926.).

Propofol decreases etomidate-related myoclonus in gastroscopy

OBJECTIVE

Myoclonus, a common complication during intravenous induction with etomidate, is bothersome to both anesthesiologists and patients. This study explored the preventive effect of pretreatment with propofol on etomidate-related myoclonus.

METHODS

This was a prospective, double-blind, clinical, randomized controlled study. Totally, 363 patients who were scheduled for a short-duration, painless gastrointestinal endoscopy were divided into 5 groups. Four groups received 0 mg/kg (E group), 0.25 mg/kg (LPE group), 0.50 mg/kg (MPE group), or 0.75 mg/kg (HPE group) propofol pretreatment before etomidate anesthesia. Another group only received 1 to 2 mg/kg of propofol (P group) as anesthesia. The incidence and severity of myoclonus, patient circulation and respiratory status, and intraoperative and postoperative complications were recorded.

RESULTS

The incidence of myoclonus in the LPE group (26.8%), MPE group (16.4%), HPE group (14.9%), and P group (0) was lower than the E group (48.6%, P < .05). The incidence of grade 1, 2, and 3 of myoclonus in the LPE group, MPE group, HPE group, and P group was significantly lower than the E group, and that in the P group was lower than the LPE group (P < .05). The incidence of hypoxemia in the P group was higher than the E group, and the incidence of adverse events in the HPE group and P group was lower than the E group (P < .05).

DISCUSSION

Pretreatment with propofol was feasible for preventing etomidate-related myoclonus. Furthermore, as propofol dosage increased, its effect on reducing the incidence and severity of myoclonic movements induced by etomidate increased.