Comparison of cardiovascular responses measured with a Vigileo-FloTrac device after propofol or etomidate with remifentanil for the induction of general anesthesia in geriatric patients.
- Author:
Woo Suk CHUNG
1
;
Yo Han KIM
;
Jae Kook KIM
;
Bum June KIM
;
Jungun LEE
Author Information
1. Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Chungnam University Hospital, Daejeon, Korea. julee@cnu.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article ; Randomized Controlled Trial
- Keywords:
Cardiovascular response;
Etomidate;
Propofol;
Remifentanil;
Vigileo-FloTrac device
- MeSH:
Anesthesia;
Anesthesia, General*;
Arterial Pressure;
Blood Pressure;
Cardiac Output;
Etomidate*;
Heart Rate;
Hemodynamics;
Humans;
Hypotension;
Intubation;
Intubation, Intratracheal;
Lidocaine;
Propofol*;
Vital Signs
- From:Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
2014;9(3):179-184
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: Remifentanil efficiently blunts the stress response during endotracheal intubation, but also causes hypotension, especially in geriatric patients. Hence, this study was designed to compare the hemodynamic changes during the induction with propofol or etomidate in geriatric patients. METHODS: Sixty ASA physical status class I or II geriatric patients, who were scheduled for elective surgery, were randomly assigned to two groups (n = 30 each). Induction was performed with either propofol (2 mg/kg mixed with lidocaine 40 mg, Group P) or etomidate (0.2 mg/kg, Group E). Both groups received a bolus dose of remifentanil (1 microg/kg), followed with continuous administration (0.1 microg/kg/min). An additional bolus dose (50 microg) was repeated, if needed. The systolic, diastolic, mean arterial blood pressure, heart rates and cardiac index were measured before induction (baseline vital signs), after propofol or etomidate administration, before intubation, immediately after intubation and at 1, 3, 5 and 10 minutes after intubation. RESULTS: Patient characteristics and baseline vital signs were similar in both groups. Systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, mean arterial blood pressure and cardiac output were significantly decreased in group P compared with those in group E (P < 0.05). Heart rates decreased after the injection of both propofol or etomidate, but were recovered after intubation. 5 patients in group P and 14 patients in group E needed an additional bolus dose of remifentanil (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Etomidate can be used safely with remifentanil for the stable induction of anesthesia in geriatric patients.
