• M Sold, D Papst-Baierl, and K H Weis.
• Anaesthesist. 1985 Aug 1;34(8):377-81.

AbstractThis study compared both etomidate and methohexitone for intravenous anaesthesia with alfentanil and nitrous oxide/oxygen in 2 X 20 patients scheduled for ENT-surgery, in a double blind, random fashion. Apart from the alternative use of etomidate and methohexitone the anaesthetic procedure did not differ: After a small dose of alfentanil anaesthesia was induced by a bolus dose of the hypnotic followed by a continuous infusion of the drug. In case of inadequate analgesia alfentanil was injected. This technique provided a good quality of anaesthesia and a remarkable cardiovascular stability. Critical arterial pressures or heart rates never occurred. During the operation patients receiving etomidate exhibited a moderate rise in blood pressure and a significantly lower heart rate than patients anaesthetised with methohexitone. After some 90 min of anaesthesia patients awoke on the average 7 min after the end of the operation and could be extubated at once. During the first three postoperative hours there was no difference in recovery between groups. Whereas half an hour postoperatively the capacity of immediate memory was limited to 44 bit following etomidate and 48 bit following methohexitone, i.e. to 47 and 54% of its normal capacity, there was only a minimum but significant impairment of cerebral function after 3 h. There was no difference in the need for alfentanil. The dosage of etomidate and methohexitone was lowe than that reported in the literature. It proved to be impossible for the anaesthetist to decide which drug he was using. Hence both anaesthetic techniques compare favourably with each other.

29 keywords...

hide…