Key result
Etomidate provided significantly better hemodynamic stability than propofol, demonstrating only a 0.77% fall in mean arterial pressure at 1 minute post-intubation compared to a 26.07% fall with propofol.
Why the study?
The study was conducted to compare hemodynamic parameters and adverse effects between etomidate and propofol following endotracheal intubation in hypertensive patients.
Does etomidate improve hemodynamic stability and alter serum cortisol levels compared to propofol during induction of anesthesia in hypertensive patients?
RCT (n=60)
Double-blind
Randomized fashion
No
Does etomidate improve hemodynamic stability and alter serum cortisol levels compared to propofol during induction of anesthesia in hypertensive patients?
Absolute Event Rate: 0.77% vs 26.07%
p-value: p=<0.001
Etomidate provides superior hemodynamic stability compared to propofol during induction of anesthesia in hypertensive patients, despite causing transient cortisol suppression and a higher incidence of myoclonus.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Etomidate may preserve hemodynamics better than propofol during induction; leaves open cortisol suppression effects on outcomes in larger trials.
Solanki et al. (2023) conducted an RCT in Controlled hypertension in patients requiring general anesthesia and endotracheal intubation (n=60). Etomidate vs. Propofol 2 mg/kg IV was evaluated on Fall in mean arterial pressure (MAP) at 1 minute after intubation (p=<0.001). Etomidate provided significantly better hemodynamic stability than propofol, demonstrating only a 0.77% fall in mean arterial pressure at 1 minute post-intubation compared to a 26.07% fall with propofol.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: