Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T07:31:13.406Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

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

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2005

J. Schaeuble ,
T. Heidegger ,
H. J. Gerig ,
B. Ulrich  and
T. W. Schnider
J. Schaeuble
Affiliation:
Cantonal Hospital, Department of Anaesthesiology, St. Gallen, Switzerland
T. Heidegger
Affiliation:
Cantonal Hospital, Department of Anaesthesiology, St. Gallen, Switzerland
H. J. Gerig
Affiliation:
Cantonal Hospital, Department of Anaesthesiology, St. Gallen, Switzerland
B. Ulrich
Affiliation:
Cantonal Hospital, Department of Anaesthesiology, St. Gallen, Switzerland
T. W. Schnider
Affiliation:
Cantonal Hospital, Department of Anaesthesiology, St. Gallen, Switzerland
Get access

Extract

Summary

Background and objective: In 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. Methods: In 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 bispectral index value and time to lowest value. Results: Time 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 bispectral index values were not different. The time of the lowest bispectral index values differed significantly: for etomidate 58 s (51–68 [38–100]), and for propofol 90 s (52–125 [38–172]); P = 0.015. Conclusion: For nasotracheal fibreoptic intubation, where the tube is advanced after induction of anaesthesia, we still recommend etomidate because spontaneous breathing recovers faster than with propofol.

Keywords

INTUBATION, difficultALGORITHMS, difficult airway managementLARYNGOSCOPY, fibreopticANAESTHETICS, INTRAVENOUS, etomidate, propofol
Type
Original Article
Information
European Journal of Anaesthesiology , Volume 22 , Issue 10 , October 2005 , pp. 762 - 767
Copyright
© 2005 European Society of Anaesthesiology

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Presented in part at the Euroanaesthesia Congress, Lisbon, Portugal, 5–8 June 2004.

References

Benumof J. Management of the difficult adult airway with special emphasis on awake tracheal intubation. Anesthesiology 1991; 75: 1087–1110.Google Scholar
Crosby ET, Cooper RM, Douglas MJ et al. The unanticipated difficult airway with recommendations for management. Can J Anaesth 1998; 45: 757–776.Google Scholar
Caplan RA, Benumof JL, Berry FA et al. Practice guidelines for management of the difficult airway: an updated report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on management of the difficult airway. Anesthesiology 2003; 98: 1269–1277.Google Scholar
Heidegger T, Gerig HJ, Ulrich B, Schnider TW. Structure and process quality illustrated by fibreoptic intubation: analysis of 1612 cases. Anaesthesia 2003; 58: 734–739.Google Scholar
Kleeman PP. Fiber optic endoscopic intubation: training with the technique. Anasthesiol Intensivmed Notfallmed Schmerzther 1995; 30: 141–145.Google Scholar
Heidegger T, Gerig HJ, Ulrich B, Kreienbühl G. Validation of a simple algorithm for tracheal intubation: daily practice is the key to success in emergency – an analysis of 13,248 intubations. Anesth Analg 2001; 92: 517–522.Google Scholar
Gerig HJ, Heidegger T. Algorithmen, Richtlinien, Empfehlungen. In: Doerges V, Paschen HR, eds. Management des schwierigen Atemweges. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Verlag, 2004: 177–185.
Morris IR. Fiberoptic intubation. Can J Anaesth 1994; 41: 996–1000.Google Scholar
Popat M. Practical Fibreoptic Intubation. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann, 2001.
Ovassapian A, Yelich SJ, Dykes MHM, Brunner EE. Fiberoptic nasotracheal intubation – incidence and causes of failure. Anesth Analg 1983; 62: 692–695.Google Scholar
Sidhu VS, Whitehead EM, Ainsworth QP, Smith M, Calder I. A technique of awake fibreoptic intubation. Experience in patients with cervical spine disease. Anaesthesia 1993; 48: 910–913.Google Scholar
Machata AM, Gonano C, Holzer A et al. Awake nasotracheal fiberoptic intubation: patient comfort, intubating conditions, and hemodynamic stability during conscious sedation with remifentanil. Anesth Analg 2003; 97: 904–908.Google Scholar
Donaldson ABP, Meyer-Witting M, Roux A. Awake fiberoptic intubation under remifentanil and propofol target-controlled infusion. Anaesth Intens Care 2002; 30: 93–95.Google Scholar
Neidhart G, Bremerich DH, Kessler P. Fiberoptic intubation during remifentanil propofol sedation. Anaesthesist 2001; 50: 242–247.Google Scholar
Sarton E, Romberg R, Nieuwenhuijs D et al. Einfluss von Anästhetika auf die Atemkontrolle. Anaesthesist 2002; 51: 285–291.Google Scholar
Bouillon T, Bruhn J, Radu-Radulescu L et al. Mixed-effects modeling of the intrinsic ventilatory depressant potency of propofol in the non-steady state. Anesthesiology 2004; 100: 1353–1372.Google Scholar
Stoelting RK. Pharmacology and Physiology in Anesthetic Practice, 3rd edn. Philadelphia, New York: Lippincott-Raven, 1999.
Minto CF, Schnider TW, Gregg KM, Henthorn TK, Shafer SL. Using the time of maximum effect site concentration to combine pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Anesthesiology 2003; 99: 324–333.Google Scholar
Sachs L. Statistische Methoden, Planung und Auswertung, 7th edn. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 1993.
Boisson-Betrand D, Bourgain JL, Camboulives J et al. Intubation difficile. Ann Fr Anesth Réanim 1996; 15: 207–214.Google Scholar
Wulf H, Brinkmann G, Rautenberg M. Management of the difficult airway. A case of failed fiberoptic intubation. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1997; 41: 1080–1082.Google Scholar
SIAARTI Task Force on Difficult Airway Management. L'intubazione difficile e la difficoltà di controllo delle vie aeree nell'adulto (SIAARTI). Minerva Anestesiol 1998; 64: 361–371.
Drummond GB, el-Farhan NM. Do anxiety or hypocapnia predispose to apnoea after induction of anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 1997; 78: 153–156.Google Scholar
Doenicke A. Etomidate-Propofol. Klin Anaesthesiol Intensivther 1993; 42: 57–70.Google Scholar
Mayer M, Doenicke A, Nebauer AE, Hepting L. Propofol and etomidate-Lipuro for induction of general anesthesia. Hemodynamics, vascular compatibility, subjective findings and postoperative nausea. Anaesthesist 1996; 45: 1082–1084.Google Scholar
Warden JC, Pickford DR. Fatal cardiovascular collapse following propofol induction in high-risk patients and dilemmas in the selection of a short-acting induction agent. Anaesth Intens Care 1995; 23: 485–487.Google Scholar
Canessa R, Lema G, Urzua J, Dagnino J, Concha M. Anesthesia for elective cardioversion: a comparison of four anesthetic agents. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 1991; 5: 566–568.Google Scholar