CC BY 4.0 · J Neuroanaesth Crit Care 2023; 10(03): 175-182
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1771219
Original Article

Etomidate versus Propofol as Induction Agents in Patients Undergoing Decompressive Procedures for Cervical Compressive Myelopathy with and without Impaired Heart Rate Variability

1   Department of Neuroanesthesia and Neuro Critical Care, Ramaiah Institute of Neurosciences, Ramaiah Medical College and Hospitals, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
,
Arun K. Mohan
2   Department of Physiology, Ramaiah Institute of Neurosciences, Ramaiah Medical College and Hospitals, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
,
Parichay J. Perikal
3   Department of Neurosurgery, Ramaiah Institute of Neurosciences, Ramaiah Medical College and Hospitals, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
,
Smruthi K. Bhat
4   Department of Anaesthesia, Ramaiah Institute of Neurosciences, Ramaiah Medical College and Hospitals, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
,
Umesh Gangadhar
4   Department of Anaesthesia, Ramaiah Institute of Neurosciences, Ramaiah Medical College and Hospitals, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
,
Ashna Manoj
4   Department of Anaesthesia, Ramaiah Institute of Neurosciences, Ramaiah Medical College and Hospitals, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
› Institutsangaben

Abstract

Background Patients with cervical compressive myelopathy (CCM) are known to have autonomic dysfunction, which can impact surgical outcomes. In such patients, screening patients for heart rate variability (HRV) may enable the anesthesiologist to predict hypotension, thereby attempting to modify the anesthetic technique. This study aimed to compare the hemodynamic changes in CCM patients between propofol and etomidate induction.

Methods Sixty CCM patients aged 18 to 70 years underwent an autonomic function test using HRV before decompressive surgery. The selected patients were randomized into two groups of 30 patients each to receive either etomidate or propofol for induction of anesthesia. The groups were compared for hemodynamic changes, the incidence of pain on injection, and the occurrence of myoclonus. While analyzing the hemodynamic changes, the two groups were subdivided into four groups, namely, propofol group with or without autonomic dysfunction (AD) and etomidate group with or without AD.

Results In the abnormal HRV group, patients induced with propofol showed a significantly higher incidence of hypotension at 3-minute (p = 0.02) and 5-minute (p = 0.04) time points. On the other hand, in HRV normal patients, induction with propofol showed a significantly higher (p = 0.03) incidence of hypotension at 5 minutes. During induction, higher grades of pain (p = 0.01) were observed in the propofol group, whereas the occurrence of myoclonus was more in the etomidate group (p = 0.07).

Conclusion As compared with propofol, the use of etomidate in patients with CCM undergoing decompressive procedures reduces hypotensive episodes, more so in patients with impaired HRV. Thus, HRV-based AD categorization may assist in optimal management of postinduction hypotension in patients with CCM.



Publikationsverlauf

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
23. Februar 2024

© 2024. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 
  • References

  • 1 Srihari G, Shukla D, Indira Devi B, Sathyaprabha TN. Subclinical autonomic nervous system dysfunction in compressive cervical myelopathy. Spine 2011; 36 (08) 654-659
  • 2 Karlsson AK. Autonomic dysfunction in spinal cord injury: clinical presentation of symptoms and signs. Prog Brain Res 2006; 152: 1-8
  • 3 Südfeld S, Brechnitz S, Wagner JY. et al. Post-induction hypotension and early intraoperative hypotension associated with general anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 2017; 119 (01) 57-64
  • 4 Bijker JB, van Klei WA, Kappen TH, van Wolfswinkel L, Moons KGM, Kalkman CJ. Incidence of intraoperative hypotension as a function of the chosen definition: literature definitions applied to a retrospective cohort using automated data collection. Anesthesiology 2007; 107 (02) 213-220
  • 5 Wesselink EM, Kappen TH, Torn HM, Slooter AJC, van Klei WA. Intraoperative hypotension and the risk of postoperative adverse outcomes: a systematic review. Br J Anaesth 2018; 121 (04) 706-721
  • 6 Paul A, Sriganesh K, Chakrabarti D, Reddy KRM. Effect of preanesthetic fluid loading on postinduction hypotension and advanced cardiac parameters in patients with chronic compressive cervical myelopathy: a randomized controlled trial. J Neurosci Rural Pract 2022; 13 (03) 462-470
  • 7 Kim H, An J, Kim E. et al. A pilot study on the role of autonomic function testing in predicting hypotension in patients undergoing cesarean section under spinal anesthesia. Anesth Pain Med (Seoul) 2019; 14 (03) 259-265
  • 8 Thomas BL, Claassen N, Becker P, Viljoen M. Validity of commonly used heart rate variability markers of autonomic nervous system function. Neuropsychobiology 2019; 78 (01) 14-26
  • 9 Fenici R, Picerni M, Brisinda D. Quantitative assessment of autonomic nervous system responses induced by graded training workloads in healthy elderly, through indices obtained from heart rate variability analysis. Eur Heart J 2021; 42 (Suppl. 01) ehab724.3045
  • 10 Mohammadian M, Golchoobian R. Potential autonomic nervous system dysfunction in COVID-19 patients detected by heart rate variability is a sign of SARS-CoV-2 neurotropic features. Mol Biol Rep 2022; 49 (08) 8131-8137
  • 11 Koshire AR, Godse AA, Phulkar S, Pawar H. Comparison between propofol and etomidate in general anaesthesia as induction agents at a tertiary care centre. MVP J Med Sci 2022; 8 (02) 179-182
  • 12 Choi SH, Kang CN. Degenerative cervical myelopathy: pathophysiology and current treatment strategies. Asian Spine J 2020; 14 (05) 710-720
  • 13 Claeys MA, Gepts E, Camu F. Haemodynamic changes during anaesthesia induced and maintained with propofol. Br J Anaesth 1988; 60 (01) 3-9
  • 14 Fairfield JE, Dritsas A, Beale RJ. Haemodynamic effects of propofol: induction with 2.5.  mg kg-1. Br J Anaesth 1991; 67 (05) 618-620
  • 15 Masoudifar M, Beheshtian E. Comparison of cardiovascular response to laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation after induction of anesthesia by Propofol and Etomidate. J Res Med Sci 2013; 18 (10) 870-874
  • 16 Hannam JA, Mitchell SJ, Cumin D. et al. Haemodynamic profiles of etomidate vs propofol for induction of anaesthesia: a randomised controlled trial in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Br J Anaesth 2019; 122 (02) 198-205
  • 17 Shaffer F, Ginsberg JP. An overview of heart rate variability metrics and norms. Front Public Health 2017; 5: 258
  • 18 Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and the North American Society of Pacing and Electrophysiology. Heart rate variability: standards of measurement, physiological interpretation and clinical use. Circulation 1996; 93 (05) 1043-1065
  • 19 Vinay AV, Venkatesh D, Ambarish V. Impact of short-term practice of yoga on heart rate variability. Int J Yoga 2016; 9 (01) 62-66
  • 20 Shindo K, Tsunoda S, Shiozawa Z. Decreased sympathetic outflow to muscles in patients with cervical spondylosis. Acta Neurol Scand 1997; 96 (04) 241-246
  • 21 Hanss R, Bein B, Francksen H. et al. Heart rate variability-guided prophylactic treatment of severe hypotension after subarachnoid block for elective cesarean delivery. Anesthesiology 2006; 104 (04) 635-643
  • 22 Frandsen MN, Mehlsen J, Foss NB, Kehlet H. Preoperative heart rate variability as a predictor of perioperative outcomes: a systematic review without meta-analysis. J Clin Monit Comput 2022; 36 (04) 947-960
  • 23 Park S, Kim WJ, Cho NJ. et al. Predicting intradialytic hypotension using heart rate variability. Sci Rep 2019; 9 (01) 2574
  • 24 Kuriyama N, Niwa F, Watanabe Y. et al. Evaluation of autonomic malfunction in HTLV-1 associated myelopathy (HAM). Auton Neurosci 2009; 150 (1-2): 131-135
  • 25 Doenicke AW, Roizen MF, Kugler J, Kroll H, Foss J, Ostwald P. Reducing myoclonus after etomidate. Anesthesiology 1999; 90 (01) 113-119
  • 26 Albert SG, Ariyan S, Rather A. The effect of etomidate on adrenal function in critical illness: a systematic review. Intensive Care Med 2011; 37 (06) 901-910
  • 27 Chan CM, Mitchell AL, Shorr AF. Etomidate is associated with mortality and adrenal insufficiency in sepsis: a meta-analysis*. Crit Care Med 2012; 40 (11) 2945-2953
  • 28 Gropper MA. Intravenous anaesthetics. In: Miller's Anesthesia. 9th ed.. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier; 2019: 639-676
  • 29 Sarkar M, Laussen PC, Zurakowski D, Shukla A, Kussman B, Odegard KC. Hemodynamic responses to etomidate on induction of anesthesia in pediatric patients. Anesth Analg 2005; 101 (03) 645-650
  • 30 Creagh O, Torres H, Rodríguez N, Gatica SR. Alpha-2B adrenergic receptor mediated hemodynamic profile of etomidate. P R Health Sci J 2010; 29 (02) 91-95
  • 31 Hoka S, Yamaura K, Takenaka T, Takahashi S. Propofol-induced increase in vascular capacitance is due to inhibition of sympathetic vasoconstrictive activity. Anesthesiology 1998; 89 (06) 1495-1500
  • 32 Muzi M, Berens RA, Kampine JP, Ebert TJ. Venodilation contributes to propofol-mediated hypotension in humans. Anesth Analg 1992; 74 (06) 877-883
  • 33 Wang HY, Lo MT, Chen KH. et al. Strong early phase parasympathetic inhibition followed by sympathetic withdrawal during propofol induction: temporal response assessed by wavelet-based spectral analysis and photoplethysmography. Front Physiol 2021; 12: 705153
  • 34 Ebert TJ, Muzi M, Berens R, Goff D, Kampine JP. Sympathetic responses to induction of anesthesia in humans with propofol or etomidate. Anesthesiology 1992; 76 (05) 725-733
  • 35 Zheng H, Zhu Y, Chen K, Shen X. The effect of etomidate or propofol on brainstem function during anesthesia induction: a bispectral index-guided study. Drug Des Devel Ther 2019; 13: 1941-1946
  • 36 Ladha S, Prakash A. CON: propofol is better than etomidate for induction in cardiac surgical patients. J Cardiac Crit Care TSS 2021; 5 (01) 72-74
  • 37 Aggarwal S, Goyal VK, Chaturvedi SK, Mathur V, Baj B, Kumar A. A comparative study between propofol and etomidate in patients under general anesthesia. Braz J Anesthesiol 2016; 66 (03) 237-241
  • 38 Joshi A, Sonavdekar S, D'Souza O. et al. Comparative study of the effects of intravenous etomidate and propofol used for induction of general anesthesia. Indian J Anesthesia Analgesia 2019; 6 (05) 1723-1730
  • 39 Onkarappa SM, Shetty SM, Kotekar N. et al. Induction properties of propofol and etomida: a clinical comparative study Int. J Res Med Sci 2016; 4 (10) 4444-4447