Safety and efficacy of etomidate and propofol anesthesia in elderly patients undergoing gastroscopy: A double-blind randomized clinical study

Meng,Qing‑Tao; Cao,Chen; Liu,Hui‑Min; Xia,Zhong‑Yuan; Li,Wei; Tang,Ling‑Hua; Chen,Rong; Jiang,Meng; Wu,Yang; Leng,Yan; Lee,Chris C.

doi:10.3892/etm.2016.3475

Safety and efficacy of etomidate and propofol anesthesia in elderly patients undergoing gastroscopy: A double-blind randomized clinical study

Authors:
- Qing‑Tao Meng
- Chen Cao
- Hui‑Min Liu
- Zhong‑Yuan Xia
- Wei Li
- Ling‑Hua Tang
- Rong Chen
- Meng Jiang
- Yang Wu
- Yan Leng
- Chris C. Lee
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Anesthesiology, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei 430060, P.R. China, The Medical Department, The Third Hospital of Wuhan, Wuhan, Hubei 430060, P.R. China, Department of Anesthesiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA
Published online on: June 24, 2016 https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2016.3475
Pages: 1515-1524

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

The aim of the present study is to compare the safety, efficacy and cost effectiveness of anesthetic regimens by compound, using etomidate and propofol in elderly patients undergoing gastroscopy. A total of 200 volunteers (65‑79 years of age) scheduled for gastroscopy under anesthesia were randomly divided into the following groups: P, propofol (1.5‑2.0 mg/kg); E, etomidate (0.15‑0.2 mg/kg); P+E, propofol (0.75‑1 mg/kg) followed by etomidate (0.075‑0.1 mg/kg); and E+P, etomidate (0.075‑0.01 mg/kg) followed by propofol (0.75‑1 mg/kg). Vital signs and bispectral index were monitored at different time points. Complications, induction and examination time, anesthesia duration, and recovery and discharge time were recorded. At the end of the procedure, the satisfaction of patients, endoscopists and the anesthetist were evaluated. The recovery (6.1±1.2 h) and discharge times (24.8±2.8 h) in group E were significantly longer compared with groups P, P+E and E+P (P<0.05). The occurrence of injection pain in group P+E was significantly higher compared with the other three groups (P<0.05). In addition, the incidence of myoclonus and post‑operative nausea and vomiting were significantly higher in group P+E compared with the other three groups (P<0.05). There was no statistical difference among the four groups with regards to the patients' immediate, post‑procedure satisfaction (P>0.05). Furthermore, there was no difference in the satisfaction of anesthesia, as evaluated by the anesthetist and endoscopist, among the four groups (P>0.05). The present study demonstrates that anesthesia for gastroscopy in elderly patients can be safely and effectively accomplished using a drug regimen that combines propofol with etomidate. The combined use of propofol and etomidate has unique characteristics which improve hemodynamic stability, cause minimal respiratory depression and less side effects, provide rapid return to full activity and result in high levels of satisfaction.

View Figures

View References

1	Cao H, Wang B, Zhang Z, Zhang H and Qu R: Distribution trends of gastric polyps: An endoscopy database analysis of 24 121 northern Chinese patients. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 27:1175–1180. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
2	Travis AC, Pievsky D and Saltzman JR: Endoscopy in the elderly. Am J Gastroenterol. 107:1495–1501. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
3	Ristikankare M, Julkunen R, Heikkinen M, Mattila M, Laitinen T, Wang SX and Hartikainen J: Sedation, topical pharyngeal anesthesia and cardiorespiratory safety during gastroscopy. J Clin Gastroenterol. 40:899–905. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
4	Fanti L, Agostoni M, Arcidiacono PG, Albertin A, Strini G, Carrara S, Guslandi M, Torri G and Testoni PA: Target-controlled infusion during monitored anesthesia care in patients undergoing EUS: Propofol alone versus midazolam plus propofol. A prospective double-blind randomised controlled trial. Dig Liver Dis. 39:81–86. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5	Seinelä L, Reinikainen P and Ahvenainen J: Effect of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy on cardiopulmonary changes in very old patients. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 37:25–32. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
6	Cha JM, Jeun JW, Pack KM, Lee JI, Joo KR, Shin HP and Shin WC: Risk of sedation for diagnostic esophagogastroduodenoscopy in obstructive sleep apnea patients. World J Gastroenterol. 19:4745–4751. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
7	Yetkin G, Oba S, Uludag M, Paksoy I, Akgün I and Eren N: Effects of sedation during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy on endocrine response and cardiorespiratory function. Braz J Med Biol Res. 40:1647–1652. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
8	Cohen LB, Delegge MH, Aisenberg J, Brill JV, Inadomi JM, Kochman ML and Piorkowski JD Jr: AGA Institute: AGA institute review of endoscopic sedation. Gastroenterology. 133:675–701. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
9	Kitagawa N, Katoku M, Kasahara T, Tsuruta T, Oda M and Totoki T: Does atropine reduce the risk of propofol-induced cardiovascular depression? Anesth Analg. 103:1606–1608. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
10	Olofsen E, Boom M, Nieuwenhuijs D, Sarton E, Teppema L, Aarts L and Dahan A: Modeling the non-steady state respiratory effects of remifentanil in awake and propofol-sedated healthy volunteers. Anesthesiology. 112:1382–1395. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	Morel J, Salard M, Castelain C, Bayon MC, Lambert P, Vola M, Auboyer C and Molliex S: Haemodynamic consequences of etomidate administration in elective cardiac surgery: A randomized double-blinded study. Br J Anaesth. 107:503–509. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
12	Fisher L, Fisher A and Thomson A: Cardiopulmonary complications of ERCP in older patients. Gastrointest Endosc. 63:948–955. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
13	Berzin TM, Sanaka S, Barnett SR, Sundar E, Sepe PS, Jakubowski M, Pleskow DK, Chuttani R and Sawhney MS: A prospective assessment of sedation-related adverse events and patient and endoscopist satisfaction in ERCP with anesthesiologist-administered sedation. Gastrointest Endosc. 73:710–717. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
14	Sipe BW, Rex DK, Latinovich D, Overley C, Kinser K, Bratcher L and Kareken D: Propofol versus midazolam/meperidine for outpatient colonoscopy: Administration by nurses supervised by endoscopists. Gastrointest Endosc. 55:815–825. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
15	Klotz U: Pharmacokinetics and drug metabolism in the elderly. Drug Metab Rev. 41:67–76. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
16	Triantafillidis JK, Merikas E, Nikolakis D and Papalois AE: Sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy: Current issues. World J Gastroenterol. 19:463–481. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
17	Wang D, Chen C, Chen J, Xu Y, Wang L, Zhu Z, Deng D, Chen J, Long A, Tang D and Liu J: The use of propofol as a sedative agent in gastrointestinal endoscopy: A meta-analysis. PLoS One. 8:e533112013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
18	Morel J, Salard M, Castelain C, Bayon MC, Lambert P, Vola M, Auboyer C and Molliex S: Haemodynamic consequences of etomidate administration in elective cardiac surgery: A randomized double-blinded study. Br J Anaesth. 107:503–509. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
19	Ross R and Newton JL: Heart rate and blood pressure changes during gastroscopy in healthy older subjects. Gerontology. 50:182–186. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
20	Gangi S, Saidi F, Patel K, Johnstone B, Jaeger J and Shine D: Cardiovascular complications after GI endoscopy: Occurrence and risks in a large hospital system. Gastrointest Endosc. 60:679–685. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
21	Oberer C, von Ungern-Sternberg BS, Frei FJ and Erb TO: Respiratory reflex responses of the larynx differ between sevoflurane and propofol in pediatric patients. Anesthesiology. 103:1142–1148. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
22	Wu J, Yao S, Wu Z, Wu Z, Chu S, Xia G and Deng F: A comparison of anesthetic regimens using etomidate and propofol in patients undergoing first-trimester abortions: Double-blind, randomized clinical trial of safety and efficacy. Contraception. 87:55–62. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
23	Mizrak A, Koruk S, Bilgi M, Kocamer B, Erkutlu I, Ganidagli S and Oner U: Pretreatment with dexmedetomidine or thiopental decreases myoclonus after etomidate: A randomized, double-blind controlled trial. J Surg Res. 159:e11–e16. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
24	Schenarts CL, Burton JH and Riker RR: Adrenocortical dysfunction following etomidate induction in emergency department patients. Acad Emerg Med. 8:1–7. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
25	Absalom A, Pledger D and Kong A: Adrenocortical function in critically ill patients 24 h after a single dose of etomidate. Anaesthesia. 54:861–867. 1999. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
26	Wang N, Wang XH, Lu J and Zhang JY: The effect of repeated etomidate anesthesia on adrenocortical function during a course of electroconvulsive therapy. J ECT. 27:281–285. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI