Comparing the Effect of Induction with Propofol, Thiopental Sodium and Etomidate on Hemodynamic Changes and Surgeon Satisfaction during Suspension Laryngoscopy

Document Type : Original Article (s)

Authors

1 Assistant Professor, Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

2 Student of Medicine, School of Medicine AND Student Research Committee, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

3 Professor, Department of Otolaringology, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

Background: Induction with hypnotic drugs, as well as suspention laryngoscopy, can be coupled with vast changes in hemodynamic indices. This study aimed to analyze the effect of propofol, etomidate and thiopental sodium, as hypnotic drugs, in hemodynamic changes during suspension laryngoscopy.Methods: In this double-blinded study, 75 patients undergoing elective suspension laryngoscopy were divided into three groups of etomidate (0.3 mg/kg), propofol (2.2 mg/kg) and thiopental sodium (5.0 mg/kg). Hemodynamic parameters were measured at 1, 3, 5, 10, and 15 minutes after induction and 3, 5, 15, and 30 minutes after the recovery; surgeon's satisfaction of surgery and the duration of surgery and recovery time were recorded, too. SPSS software was used for data analysis.Findings: There was no statistical differences in term of demographic data, except height (P = 0.014), hempdynamic parameters after induction of anesthesia, the duration of recovery time, the duration of the surgery and the duration of hospitalization. Five patients (20%) had an episode of hypotension in etomidate group, one person (4%) in Propofol group and four patients (16%) in thiopental group; statistical analysis did not show differences between the groups (P = 0.270)Conclusion: Our study showed that there was no difference between administration of propofol, etomidate or thiopental sodium in terms of hemodynamic changes, surgeon's satisfaction of anesthesia and surgery duration. Further studies with greater population are required.

Keywords

References

  1. Killian G. Suspension laryngoscopy and its practical use. The Journal of Laryngology, Rhinology, and Otology 1914; 29(7): 337-60.
  2. Zeitels SM, Burns JA, Dailey SH. Suspension laryngoscopy revisited. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2004; 113(1): 16-22.
  3. Hendrix RA, Ferouz A, Bacon CK. Admission planning and complications of direct laryngoscopy. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1994; 110(6): 510-6.
  4. Robinson PM. Prospective study of the complications of endoscopic laryngeal surgery. J Laryngol Otol 1991; 105(5): 356-8.
  5. Hill RS, Koltai PJ, Parnes SM. Airway complications from laryngoscopy and panendoscopy. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1987; 96(6): 691-4.
  6. Atkins JP, Jr., Keane WM, Young KA, Rowe LD. Value of panendoscopy in determination of second primary cancer. A study of 451 cases of head and neck cancer. Arch Otolaryngol 1984; 110(8): 533-4.
  7. Wenig BL, Raphael N, Stern JR, Shikowitz MJ, Abramson AL. Cardiac complications of suspension laryngoscopy. Fact or fiction? Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1986; 112(8): 860-2.
  8. Khil JY, Choi YJ, Choi SU,.Shin HW, Lee HW, Lim HJ, et al. Comparison of propofol-remifentanil andsevoflurane-remifentanil anesthesia for suspension laryngoscopic surgery. Anesth Pain Med 2008; 3(1): 12-6.
  9. Miller RD. Miller's anesthesia. 6th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Churchill Livingstone: 2004. p.185.
  10. Altintas F, Bozkurt P, Kaya G, Akkan G. Lidocaine 10% in the endotracheal tube cuff: blood concentrations, haemodynamic and clinical effects. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2000; 17(7): 436-42.
  11. Agosti L. Anaesthetic technique for microsurgery of the larynx. Anaesthesia 1977; 32(4): 362-5.
  12. Cockshott ID. Propofol ('Diprivan') pharmacokinetics and metabolism--an overview. Postgrad Med J 1985; 61(Suppl 3): 45-50.
  13. Fragen RJ, Avram MJ, Henthorn TK, Caldwell NJ. A pharmacokinetically designed etomidate infusion regimen for hypnosis. Anesth Analg 1983; 62(7): 654-60.
  14. Bertrand D, Taron F, Manel J, Laxenaire MC. Propofol versus propanidid for the conduction of suspension laryngoscopy. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim 1987; 6(4): 289-92. [In French].
  15. Harris CE, Murray AM, Anderson JM, Grounds RM, Morgan M. Effects of thiopentone, etomidate and propofol on the haemodynamic response to tracheal intubation. Anaesthesia 1988; 43(Suppl): 32-6.
  16. Brussel T, Theissen JL, Vigfusson G, Lunkenheimer PP, van Aken H, Lawin P. Hemodynamic and cardiodynamic effects of propofol and etomidate: negative inotropic properties of propofol. Anesth Analg 1989; 69(1): 35-40.
  17. Coates DP, Monk CR, Prys-Roberts C, Turtle M. Hemodynamic effects of infusions of the emulsion formulation of propofol during nitrous oxide anesthesia in humans. Anesth Analg 1987; 66(1): 64-70.
  18. Lepage JY, Pinaud ML, Helias JH, Cozian AY, Le NY, Souron RJ. Left ventricular performance during propofol or methohexital anesthesia: isotopic and invasive cardiac monitoring. Anesth Analg 1991; 73(1): 3-9.
  19. Boey WK, Lai FO. Comparison of propofol and thiopentone as anaesthetic agents for electroconvulsive therapy. Anaesthesia 1990; 45(8): 623-8.
  20. Weiss-Bloom LJ, Reich DL. Haemodynamic responses to tracheal intubation following etomidate and fentanyl for anaesthetic induction. Can J Anaesth 1992; 39(8): 780-5.
  21. Habibi MR, Baradari AG, Soleimani A, Emami ZA, Nia HS, Habibi A, et al. Hemodynamic responses to etomidate versus ketamine-thiopental sodium combination for anesthetic induction in coronary artery bypass graft surgery patients with low ejection fraction: a double-blind, randomized, clinical trial. J Clin Diagn Res 2014; 8(10): GC01-GC05.
  22. Chraemmer-Jorgensen B, Hoilund-Carlsen PF, Marving J, Christensen V. Lack of effect of intravenous lidocaine on hemodynamic responses to rapid sequence induction of general anesthesia: a double-blind controlled clinical trial. Anesth Analg 1986; 65(10): 1037-41.
  23. de Grood PM, Mitsukuri S, van EJ, Rutten JM, Crul JF. Comparison of etomidate and propofol for anaesthesia in microlaryngeal surgery. Anaesthesia 1987; 42(4): 366-72.
  24. Lee DH, Park SJ. Effects of 10% lidocaine spray on arterial pressure increase due to suspension laryngoscopy and cough during extubation. Korean J Anesthesiol 2011; 60(6): 422-7.
  25. Bass SS, Erdemli MO. Effects of thiopental, propofol, etomidate, midazolam on hemodynamic state in anesthesia induction and intubation of hypertensive patients in the coronary artery bypass grafting surgery. GKDA Derg 2013; 19(4): 161-7.
  26. Boisson-Bertrand D, Taron F, Laxenaire MC. Etomidate vs. propofol to carry out suspension laryngoscopies. Eur J Anaesthesiol 1991; 8(2): 141-4.
Journal of Isfahan Medical School
Volume 33, Issue 340 - Serial Number 340
May and June 2015
Pages 999-1010

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 05 May 2015
  • Revise Date: 01 November 2024
  • Accept Date: 06 April 2022

Share

How to cite

Statistics