• Eur J Anaesthesiol · Oct 2005

    Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study

    Comparision of etomidate and propofol for fibreoptic intubation as part of an airway management algorithm:a prospective, randomizes, double-blind study.

    • J Schaeuble, T Heidegger, H J Gerig, B Ulrich, and T W Schnider.
    • Cantonal Hospital, Department of Anaesthesiology, St. Gallen, Switzerland. thomas.heidegger@kssg.ch
    • Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2005 Oct 1;22(10):762-7.

    Background And ObjectiveIn our algorithm for management of the anticipated difficult airway the induction agent (etomidate) is administered after the tip of the fibreoptic is placed in the trachea but before the tube is advanced over it. In a previous investigation we demonstrated the safety of this method. Due to its popularity as an induction agent, some would like to replace etomidate with propofol. However, because rapid recovery of spontaneous breathing is crucial with this technique, substitution might not be advisable. We compared the speed of recovery of spontaneous breathing after fibreoptic intubation between etomidate and propofol.MethodsIn this prospective, randomized, double-blind study we used either 0.2 mg kg[-1] etomidate or 2 mg kg[-1] propofol for induction. Our technique of nasotracheal fibreoptic intubation consists of using fentanyl, cocaine instillation into the lower nasal canals, cricothyroid injection of lidocaine, performing bronchoscopy, administration of etomidate and advancing the tube after loss of consciousness. We measured time to loss of consciousness, time to recovery of spontaneous breathing, lowest bi-spectral index value and time to lowest value.ResultsTime to loss of consciousness did not differ. The time to recovery of spontaneous breathing differed significantly: the median time (interquartile range [range]) for etomidate was 81 s (62--102 [0--166]), and for propofol 146 s (95--260 [65--315]); P=0.001. The lowest bi-spectral index values were not different. The time of the lowest bi-spectral index values differed significantly: for etomidate 58 s (51--68 [38--100]), and for propofol 90 s (52--125 [38--172]); P=0.015.ConclusionFor nasotracheal fibreoptic intubation, where the tube is advanced after induction of anaesthesia, we still recommend etomidate because spontaneous breathing recovers faster than with propofol.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.