Afghaniyan Parsa, Farhadian Maryam, Tarbiat Masoud, Bakhshaei Mohammad Hossein, Salimbahrami Seyed Ahmadreza
Faculty of Medicine, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran.
Research Center for Health Sciences, Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran.
J Tehran Heart Cent. 2024 Apr;19(2):89-95. doi: 10.18502/jthc.v19i2.16197.
Hemodynamic disorders during anesthesia lead to complications. To reduce hemodynamic complications, this study was conducted to compare midazolam, etomidate, and propofol following anesthesia induction in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting surgery (CABG).
A double-blind, randomized clinical trial was conducted involving 90 patients with coronary artery disease. These patients were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups receiving propofol, etomidate, or midazolam. Hemodynamic variables, including systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial blood pressure (MABP), and heart rate (HR), were measured at baseline, before intubation, and 1 and 5 minutes after intubation.
Ninety patients with coronary artery disease (mean age: 60.83 y) were included in the study. Women and men comprised 74.4% and 25.6% of the study population. HR, SBP, DBP, and MABP exhibited significant decreases in all 3 groups after intubation. The etomidate group demonstrated the least change in SBP (P<0.001) and MABP (P<0.001), followed by the midazolam group. Concerning HR, the least change was observed in the midazolam group, followed by the propofol group (P=0.688). After intubation, blood pressure increased almost equally in the etomidate and midazolam groups compared with the levels during intubation. In contrast, the propofol group exhibited a downward trend in blood pressure during intubation, a significant difference across all 3 groups (P<0.001).
This study, conducted on candidates for CABG, demonstrated that anesthesia induction with etomidate and midazolam resulted in less variation in hemodynamic variables compared with propofol.
麻醉期间的血流动力学紊乱会导致并发症。为减少血流动力学并发症,本研究旨在比较冠状动脉搭桥手术(CABG)患者麻醉诱导后咪达唑仑、依托咪酯和丙泊酚的效果。
进行了一项双盲随机临床试验,纳入90例冠心病患者。这些患者被随机分为3组,分别接受丙泊酚、依托咪酯或咪达唑仑。在基线、插管前、插管后1分钟和5分钟测量血流动力学变量,包括收缩压(SBP)、舒张压(DBP)、平均动脉压(MABP)和心率(HR)。
本研究纳入了90例冠心病患者(平均年龄:60.83岁)。女性和男性分别占研究人群的74.4%和25.6%。插管后,所有3组的HR、SBP、DBP和MABP均显著下降。依托咪酯组SBP(P<0.001)和MABP(P<0.001)的变化最小,其次是咪达唑仑组。关于HR,咪达唑仑组变化最小,其次是丙泊酚组(P=0.688)。插管后,依托咪酯组和咪达唑仑组的血压与插管时相比几乎同等程度升高。相比之下,丙泊酚组在插管期间血压呈下降趋势,3组间差异有统计学意义(P<0.001)。
本研究对CABG候选患者进行,结果表明与丙泊酚相比,依托咪酯和咪达唑仑麻醉诱导导致血流动力学变量变化较小。