Next article Search Articles Instructions for authors  Access Statistics | Citation Manager  
ORIGINAL ARTICLE  

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed7697    
    Printed128    
    Emailed4    
    PDF Downloaded418    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 3    

Recommend this journal

Cardioversion: What to choose? Etomidate or propofol


Department of Anesthesiology, Seth GSMC and KEM Hospital, Parel, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

Correspondence Address:
Pushkar M Desai
Department of Anesthesiology, Seth GSMC and KEM Hospital, Parel, Mumbai, Maharashtra
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0971-9784.159798

Rights and Permissions

Year : 2015  |  Volume : 18  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 306-311

 

SEARCH
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles

  Article in PDF (532 KB)
Email article
Print Article
Add to My List
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.






[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
 

 

 

 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 
 
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
  *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 
 ORIGINAL ARTICLE
 




Department of Anesthesiology, Seth GSMC and KEM Hospital, Parel, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

Correspondence Address:
Pushkar M Desai
Department of Anesthesiology, Seth GSMC and KEM Hospital, Parel, Mumbai, Maharashtra
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0971-9784.159798

Rights and Permissions

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.






[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*


        
Print this article     Email this article