Impact of anesthetic induction with etomidate, thiopentone, and propofol on regional cerebral oxygenation: An observational study in patients with traumatic brain injury

Kunal K Sharma, Rohini M. Surve, K. M. Reddy, Rita Christopher, D. Chakrabarti, Sundaravadivel Pandarisamy, Shruti V. Palakuzhiyil, S. Kamath
{"title":"Impact of anesthetic induction with etomidate, thiopentone, and propofol on regional cerebral oxygenation: An observational study in patients with traumatic brain injury","authors":"Kunal K Sharma, Rohini M. Surve, K. M. Reddy, Rita Christopher, D. Chakrabarti, Sundaravadivel Pandarisamy, Shruti V. Palakuzhiyil, S. Kamath","doi":"10.4103/joacp.joacp_315_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n Anesthetic induction plays a pivotal role in determining the operative course and the outcome in patients with acute traumatic brain injury (TBI). The present study compared the effect of anesthetic induction with etomidate, thiopentone, and propofol primarily on systemic hemodynamics and regional cerebral oxygenation (rScO2) and secondarily on the serum cortisol levels in TBI patients.\n \n \n \n In this prospective observational study, eligible patients were recruited and divided into three groups as per the induction agent received. Data collected were hemodynamic parameters and rScO2 levels at baseline, following 3 min of preoxygenation, and over 10 min of induction. Serum cortisol levels were measured before and after 24 h of induction. The statistical analysis was done using R software.\n \n \n \n A total of 115 patients were included: 32, 33, and 50 in thiopentone, propofol, and etomidate groups, respectively. A significant increase (P < 0.001) in bilateral rScO2 was noted in all three groups following anesthetic induction. Intergroup comparison of the propofol and the etomidate groups revealed significantly lesser increase in contralateral rScO2 (P = 0.019) and a greater fall in mean arterial pressure (P = 0.003) on using propofol as an induction agent. Trend changes in bilateral rScO2 and hemodynamic parameters were comparable between thiopentone and etomidate groups. An insignificant fall in serum cortisol was observed in etomidate (P = 0.332) and thiopentone (P = 0.364) groups, but a significant increase was observed in the propofol group (P = 0.004). The Glasgow coma scale (GCS) score at discharge improved significantly in all the groups (P < 0.001).\n \n \n \n In TBI patients, anesthetic induction with etomidate resulted in least hemodynamic changes compared to induction with thiopentone and propofol. The rScO2 increased in all three groups after induction, with the maximal increase observed with etomidate compared to propofol and thiopentone. Insignificant fall in serum cortisol was observed with etomidate and thiopentone, but not with propofol. Outcome at discharge, assessed with GCS, was comparable in all the groups.\n \n Key Messages: Anesthetic induction with etomidate produced least hemodynamic changes compared to induction with thiopentone and propofol in patients with traumatic brain injury. Consequently, maximal increase in cerebral oxygen saturation occurred with etomidate among the three induction agents. An insignificant decrease in serum cortisol was observed with etomidate and thiopentone, but not with propofol. Neurological outcome at discharge was similar with all drugs.\n","PeriodicalId":508221,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anaesthesiology Clinical Pharmacology","volume":" 32","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Anaesthesiology Clinical Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/joacp.joacp_315_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Anesthetic induction plays a pivotal role in determining the operative course and the outcome in patients with acute traumatic brain injury (TBI). The present study compared the effect of anesthetic induction with etomidate, thiopentone, and propofol primarily on systemic hemodynamics and regional cerebral oxygenation (rScO2) and secondarily on the serum cortisol levels in TBI patients. In this prospective observational study, eligible patients were recruited and divided into three groups as per the induction agent received. Data collected were hemodynamic parameters and rScO2 levels at baseline, following 3 min of preoxygenation, and over 10 min of induction. Serum cortisol levels were measured before and after 24 h of induction. The statistical analysis was done using R software. A total of 115 patients were included: 32, 33, and 50 in thiopentone, propofol, and etomidate groups, respectively. A significant increase (P < 0.001) in bilateral rScO2 was noted in all three groups following anesthetic induction. Intergroup comparison of the propofol and the etomidate groups revealed significantly lesser increase in contralateral rScO2 (P = 0.019) and a greater fall in mean arterial pressure (P = 0.003) on using propofol as an induction agent. Trend changes in bilateral rScO2 and hemodynamic parameters were comparable between thiopentone and etomidate groups. An insignificant fall in serum cortisol was observed in etomidate (P = 0.332) and thiopentone (P = 0.364) groups, but a significant increase was observed in the propofol group (P = 0.004). The Glasgow coma scale (GCS) score at discharge improved significantly in all the groups (P < 0.001). In TBI patients, anesthetic induction with etomidate resulted in least hemodynamic changes compared to induction with thiopentone and propofol. The rScO2 increased in all three groups after induction, with the maximal increase observed with etomidate compared to propofol and thiopentone. Insignificant fall in serum cortisol was observed with etomidate and thiopentone, but not with propofol. Outcome at discharge, assessed with GCS, was comparable in all the groups. Key Messages: Anesthetic induction with etomidate produced least hemodynamic changes compared to induction with thiopentone and propofol in patients with traumatic brain injury. Consequently, maximal increase in cerebral oxygen saturation occurred with etomidate among the three induction agents. An insignificant decrease in serum cortisol was observed with etomidate and thiopentone, but not with propofol. Neurological outcome at discharge was similar with all drugs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
依托咪酯、硫喷酮和丙泊酚麻醉诱导对区域脑氧合的影响:脑外伤患者的观察研究
麻醉诱导在决定急性创伤性脑损伤(TBI)患者的手术过程和预后方面起着举足轻重的作用。本研究比较了依托咪酯、硫喷酮和丙泊酚麻醉诱导对创伤性脑损伤患者全身血流动力学和区域脑氧合(rScO2)的影响,以及对血清皮质醇水平的影响。 在这项前瞻性观察研究中,研究人员招募了符合条件的患者,并根据所使用的诱导剂将其分为三组。收集的数据包括基线时、预氧 3 分钟后和诱导 10 分钟内的血液动力学参数和 rScO2 水平。血清皮质醇水平是在诱导前和诱导 24 小时后测量的。统计分析使用 R 软件进行。 共纳入 115 名患者:硫喷酮组、异丙酚组和依托咪酯组分别有 32 人、33 人和 50 人。所有三组患者在麻醉诱导后双侧 rScO2 均明显增加(P < 0.001)。异丙酚组和依托咪酯组的组间比较显示,使用异丙酚作为诱导剂时,对侧 rScO2 的增加幅度明显较小(P = 0.019),平均动脉压的下降幅度较大(P = 0.003)。硫喷妥组和依托咪酯组的双侧 rScO2 和血液动力学参数的趋势变化相当。依托咪酯组(P = 0.332)和硫喷酮组(P = 0.364)观察到血清皮质醇下降不明显,但丙泊酚组观察到血清皮质醇显著上升(P = 0.004)。出院时的格拉斯哥昏迷量表(GCS)评分在所有组别中均有明显改善(P < 0.001)。 在创伤性脑损伤患者中,与使用硫喷酮和异丙酚进行麻醉诱导相比,使用依托咪酯进行麻醉诱导导致的血流动力学变化最小。诱导后,所有三组的 rScO2 都有所增加,与异丙酚和硫喷酮相比,依托咪酯的增幅最大。依托咪酯和硫喷酮可使血清皮质醇显著下降,而丙泊酚则没有。根据 GCS 评估的出院结果在所有组别中不相上下。 关键信息:与使用硫喷酮和丙泊酚进行麻醉诱导相比,使用依托咪酯进行麻醉诱导对脑外伤患者产生的血流动力学变化最小。因此,在三种诱导药物中,依托咪酯能最大程度地提高脑氧饱和度。依托咪酯和硫喷酮能显著降低血清皮质醇,而丙泊酚则不能。出院时的神经功能结果与所有药物相似。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Analgesic efficacy of ultrasound-guided retrolaminar block in truncal surgeries: A narrative review Anesthetic challenges in using posterior retroperitoneoscopic approach for phaeochromocytoma in pregnancy A case of lost endotracheal tube PONV, beyond “Apfel” score Clinical experience with stellate ganglion block in a neonate
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1