Original Article

Comparing the Hemodynamic Effects of Midazolam, Etomidate, and Propofol following Anesthesia Induction in Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery: A Double-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial

Abstract

Background: 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).
Methods: 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.
Results: 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).
Conclusion: 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.

1. Roth GA, Mensah GA, Johnson CO, Addolorato G, Ammirati E, Baddour LM, Barengo NC, Beaton AZ, Benjamin EJ, Benziger CP, Bonny A, Brauer M, Brodmann M, Cahill TJ, Carapetis J, Catapano AL, Chugh SS, Cooper LT, Coresh J, Criqui M, DeCleene N, Eagle KA, Emmons-Bell S, Feigin VL, Fernández-Solà J, Fowkes G, Gakidou E, Grundy SM, He FJ, Howard G, Hu F, Inker L, Karthikeyan G, Kassebaum N, Koroshetz W, Lavie C, Lloyd-Jones D, Lu HS, Mirijello A, Temesgen AM, Mokdad A, Moran AE, Muntner P, Narula J, Neal B, Ntsekhe M, Moraes de Oliveira G, Otto C, Owolabi M, Pratt M, Rajagopalan S, Reitsma M, Ribeiro ALP, Rigotti N, Rodgers A, Sable C, Shakil S, Sliwa-Hahnle K, Stark B, Sundström J, Timpel P, Tleyjeh IM, Valgimigli M, Vos T, Whelton PK, Yacoub M, Zuhlke L, Murray C, Fuster V; GBD-NHLBI-JACC Global Burden of Cardiovascular Diseases Writing Group. Global Burden of Cardiovascular Diseases and Risk Factors, 1990-2019: Update From the GBD 2019 Study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2020;76:2982-3021.
2. Dadkhah-Tirani H, Hasandokht T, Agostoni P, Salari A, Shad B, Soltanipour S. Comparison of cardiovascular risk factors among coronary artery bypass graft patients in 2010 and 2016: A single-center study in Guilan province, Iran. ARYA Atheroscler 2018;14:205-211.
3. Montrief T, Koyfman A, Long B. Coronary artery bypass graft surgery complications: A review for emergency clinicians. Am J Emerg Med 2018;36:2289-2297.
4. Merkouris A, Apostolakis E, Pistolas D, Papagiannaki V, Diakomopoulou E, Patiraki E. Quality of life after coronary artery bypass graft surgery in the elderly. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs 2009;8:74-81.
5. Reddy P, Song J. Cost comparisons of pharmacological strategies in open-heart surgery. Pharmacoeconomics 2003;21:249-262.
6. An R, Pang QY, Liu HL. Association of intra-operative hypotension with acute kidney injury, myocardial injury and mortality in non-cardiac surgery: A meta-analysis. Int J Clin Pract 2019;73:e13394.
7. Park S, Lee HC, Jung CW, Choi Y, Yoon HJ, Kim S, Chin HJ, Kim M, Kim YC, Kim DK, Joo KW, Kim YS, Lee H. Intraoperative Arterial Pressure Variability and Postoperative Acute Kidney Injury. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2020;15:35-46.
8. Mitrev L, Krickus C, DeChiara J, Huseby R, Desai N, van Helmond N. Association of Preoperative Pulse Pressure and Oxygen Delivery Index During Cardiopulmonary Bypass With Postoperative Acute Kidney Injury. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2022;36:4070-4076.
9. Basagan-Mogol E, Goren S, Korfali G, Turker G, Kaya FN. Induction of anesthesia in coronary artery bypass graft surgery: the hemodynamic and analgesic effects of ketamine. Clinics (Sao Paulo) 2010;65:133-138.
10. Yancey R. Anesthetic Management of the Hypertensive Patient: Part II. Anesth Prog 2018;65:206-213.
11. Iribarren JL, Jiménez JJ, Hernández D, Lorenzo L, Brouard M, Milena A, Mora ML, Martínez R. Relative adrenal insufficiency and hemodynamic status in cardiopulmonary bypass surgery patients. A prospective cohort study. J Cardiothorac Surg 2010;5:26.
12. Aggarwal S, Goyal VK, Chaturvedi SK, Mathur V, Baj B, Kumar A. Estudo comparativo entre propofol e etomidato em pacientes sob anestesia geral [A comparative study between propofol and etomidate in patients under general anesthesia]. Rev Bras Anestesiol 2016;66:237-241.
13. Yao YT, He LX, Fang NX, Ma J. Anesthetic Induction With Etomidate in Cardiac Surgical Patients: A PRISMA-Compliant Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2021;35:1073-1085.
14. Legrand M, Plaud B. Etomidate and general anesthesia: the butterfly effect? Anesth Analg 2013;117:1267-1269.
15. Alwardt CM, Redford D, Larson DF. General anesthesia in cardiac surgery: a review of drugs and practices. J Extra Corpor Technol 2005;37:227-235.
16. Nascimento Jdos S, Modolo NS, Silva RC, Santos KP, Carvalho HG. Sedative and cardiovascular effects of midazolam and diazepam alone or combined with clonidine in patients undergoing hemodynamic studies for suspected coronary artery disease. Arq Bras Cardiol 2007;89:403-408.
17. Rosli MSA, Heidari E. Re-audit of the use of flumazenil following midazolam-induced conscious sedation. BDJ Open 2023;9:36.
18. Soleimani A, Heidari N, Habibi MR, Kiabi FH, Khademloo M, Emami Zeydi A, Sohrabi FB. Comparing Hemodynamic Responses to Diazepam, Propofol and Etomidate During Anesthesia Induction in Patients with Left Ventricular Dysfunction Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery: a Double-blind, Randomized Clinical Trial. Med Arch 2017;71:198-203.
19. Kaushal RP, Vatal A, Pathak R. Effect of etomidate and propofol induction on hemodynamic and endocrine response in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting/mitral valve and aortic valve replacement surgery on cardiopulmonary bypass. Ann Card Anaesth 2015;18:172-178.
20. Masoudifar M, Beheshtian E. Comparison of cardiovascular response to laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation after induction of anesthesia by Propofol and Etomidate. J Res Med Sci 2013;18:870-874.
21. Li S, Lei Z, Zhao M, Hou Y, Wang D, Xu X, Lin X, Li J, Tang S, Yu J, Meng T. Propofol Inhibits Ischemia/Reperfusion-Induced Cardiotoxicity Through the Protein Kinase C/Nuclear Factor Erythroid 2-Related Factor Pathway. Front Pharmacol 2021;12:655726.
22. Keating SC, Sage AM, Ambrisko TD, Somrak A, Carroll MQ, Oba PM, Martins B, Swanson KS. The effect of midazolam or lidocaine administration prior to etomidate induction of anesthesia on heart rate, arterial pressure, intraocular pressure and serum cortisol concentration in healthy dogs. Vet Anaesth Analg 2020;47:160-167.
Files
IssueVol 19 No 2 (2024): J Teh Univ Heart Ctr QRcode
SectionOriginal Article(s)
DOI https://doi.org/10.18502/jthc.v19i2.16197
Keywords
Coronary Artery Bypass Etomidate Midazolam Propofol
Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
1.
Afghaniyan P, Farhadian M, Tarbiat M, Bakhshaei MH, Salim Bahrami SAR. Comparing the Hemodynamic Effects of Midazolam, Etomidate, and Propofol following Anesthesia Induction in Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery: A Double-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial. J Tehran Heart Cent. 2024;19(2):89-95.