European Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine

Background: General anaesthesia is associated with marked cardiovascular changes. Previous studies say that etomidate can be used in patients with limited hemodynamic reserve and propofol can lead to more hemodynamic instabilities. Hence, the present study was undertaken to compare the effects of propofol and etomidate on hemodynamicA changes during induction of general anaesthesia. Method: total 70 patients of ASA grade I & II, aged 18-60 years, weighs 40-80 kg, undergoing surgeries with general anesthesia were included and randomly divided into two equal groups.Induction of anaesthesia was carried out by using 0.3 mg/kg of etomidate in group A patients and 2.0 mg/kg of propofol in group B patients. Hemodynamic parameters such as: heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP) and O2 saturation (SpO2) was measured and recorded at 1,3,5 and 10 minutes after intubation.Results: Both the groups were comparable and found no significant difference regarding demographic profile of patients, (p>0.05).At various time intervals i.e., T0 (before induction), T1 (after 1 min), T2 (after 3 mins), T3 (after 5 mins) and T4 (after 10 mins) the mean values of HR and SpO2 was comparable between two groups, (p>0.05) while the mean values of SBP, DBP and MAP were significantly lower in group B compared to group A, (p<0.05). Conclusion:Etomidate is haemodynamically more stable compared to propofol as the incidence and severity of hypotension are higher with propofol. Etomidate is a better option in patient’s particularly prone to hemodynamic instability at induction.