| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, Vol 39, 780-785, Copyright © 1992 by Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society
ARTICLES |
LJ Weiss-Bloom and DL Reich
Department of Anesthesiology, Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York, NY 10029-6574.
The haemodynamic response to anaesthetic induction and tracheal intubation was studied in 29 patients undergoing elective myocardial revascularization surgery. All patients included in the study were anaesthetized with etomidate, 0.3 mg.kg-1. The patients were randomized to three groups: Group I received fentanyl, 2.5 micrograms.kg-1; Group II received fentanyl, 5 micrograms.kg-1; and Group III received fentanyl, 10 micrograms.kg-1. Haemodynamic variables were measured at baseline (awake), after anaesthetic induction, and at one, three, five, and ten minutes after tracheal intubation. The number of patients with haemodynamic responses to intubation (> 20% increase in heart rate or mean arterial pressure) was greater (P < 0.05) in Group I than in Groups II and III. Statistically significant, but clinically minor, decreases in mean arterial pressure and cardiac output occurred in all groups at the last three study times. The frequency of involuntary muscle movements was 14%, and all of these events occurred in patients in Group I. In conclusion, the authors recommend using fentanyl, 5-10 micrograms.kg-1 to blunt the haemodynamic response to tracheal intubation following anaesthetic induction with etomidate, 0.3 mg.kg-1.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
D. T. Neilipovitz and E. T. Crosby No evidence for decreased incidence of aspiration after rapid sequence induction: [Aucune donnee probante concernant l'incidence reduite d'inhalation apres l'induction en sequence rapide] Can J Anesth, September 1, 2007; 54(9): 748 - 764. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A J Oglesby Should etomidate be the induction agent of choice for rapid sequence intubation in the emergency department? Emerg. Med. J., November 1, 2004; 21(6): 655 - 659. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |