Key result
Etomidate provided better hemodynamic stability than propofol during elective cardioversion, with significantly higher systolic blood pressure at 2 minutes (106.13 vs 95.33 mmHg) and faster recovery times.
Why the study?
Does etomidate improve haemodynamic stability and recovery compared to propofol in patients undergoing elective cardioversion?
RCT (n=60)
Single-blind
Computer generated randomization table by sealed envelope technique
No
Does etomidate improve haemodynamic stability and recovery compared to propofol in patients undergoing elective cardioversion?
Absolute Event Rate: 106.13% vs 95.33%
p-value: p=0.004
Etomidate combined with fentanyl offers superior hemodynamic stability and faster recovery than propofol for elective cardioversion, though it is associated with a higher incidence of myoclonus.
Favors etomidate over propofol for elective cardioversion in at-risk patients; extends RCT evidence on induction agents to this procedure.
CONTEXT: Electrical cardioversion is a short painful procedure to regain normal sinus rhythm requiring anaesthesia for haemodynamic stability, sedation, analgesia and early recovery. AIMS: To compare propofol and etomidate as sedatives during cardioversion. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: Single centred, prospective and randomized single blind study comprising 60 patients. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Patients more than 18 years, American Society of Anesthesiologists I/II/III grades undergoing elective cardioversion, randomly divided to receive propofol 1 mg/kg intravenous (IV) bolus followed by 0.5 mg/kg (Group P, n = 30) or etomidate (Group E, n = 30) 0.1 mg/kg followed by 0.05 mg/kg. All patients received IV fentanyl (1 μg/kg) before procedure. Heart rate, blood pressure (BP) (systolic BP [SBP], diastolic BP [DBP], mean arterial pressure), respiratory rate, Aldrete recovery score (ARS) and Ramsay sedation score (RSS) were assessed at 1, 2, 5, 10, 15, 20 and 30 min post cardioversion. Incidence of hypotension, respiratory depression and side effects were compared. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Student's unpaired t-test, Chi-square test and Mann-Whitney test. P < 0.05 was taken as significant. RESULTS: Group P showed significant fall in SBP, DBP, and mean BP at 2 min after cardioversion. Hypotension (33.3% Group P vs. 16.65% Group E) occurred more with propofol (P < 0.05). Group E showed better ARS at 1, 2, 5, 10, 15 and 20 min. Time required to attain RSS = 2 (659.1 s Group P and 435.7 s Group E) indicated longer recovery with propofol. Left atrial size (35.5-42.5 mm) did not affect success rate of cardioversion (80% Group P vs. 83.3% Group E). Incidence of myoclonus (Group E 26.67% vs. Group P 0%) showed significant difference. CONCLUSIONS: Etomidate/fentanyl is superior over propofol/fentanyl during cardioversion for quick recovery and haemodynamic stability.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Desai et al. (2015) conducted an RCT in Elective cardioversion for supraventricular tachyarrhythmia (n=60). Etomidate vs. Propofol (1 mg/kg IV bolus followed by 0.5 mg/kg) was evaluated on Systolic blood pressure at 2 minutes post-cardioversion (p=0.004). Etomidate provided better hemodynamic stability than propofol during elective cardioversion, with significantly higher systolic blood pressure at 2 minutes (106.13 vs 95.33 mmHg) and faster recovery times.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: