Hemodynamic response to Sevoflurane and Propofol induction: a comparative study

Authors

  • Prabhat Rawal Nepal Armed Police Force Hospital, Balambu, Kathmandu.
  • Uday Bajracharya Shree Birendra Hospital and National Academy of Medical Sciences, Kathmandu

Keywords:

Anesthesia, Hemodynamics, Propofol, Sevoflurane

Abstract

Background: Induction of anesthesia is a critical event and hemodynamic stability is an important factor during this period. Propofol is a commonly used intravenous anesthetic and Sevoflurane is a newly introduced inhalational anesthetic in the context of a developing country. This study compared the hemodynamics on induction of anesthesia with Propofol and Sevoflurane.

Methodology: A total of 108 American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I patients undergoing elective surgical procedures under general anesthesia were randomized into two groups. Group 'P' patients were induced with intravenous 1% Propofol and Group 'S' patients were induced with inhalation of 8% Sevoflurane. Mean arterial pressures and heart rates were recorded at baseline, before induction, during induction and at 1, 3 and 5 minutes after induction of anesthesia before endotracheal intubation.

Results: The two groups were comparable with respect to demographics and baseline hemodynamic parameters. There was a significant decrease in mean arterial pressure and heart rate from pre-induction values within both groups during and after induction. The reduction in mean arterial pressure was significantly more in Propofol group transiently during induction. The reduction in heart rate was significantly more in Sevoflurane group at 1, 3 and 5 minutes after induction (P < 0.05).

Conclusion: Induction of anesthesia with Propofol demonstrated a greater decrease in mean arterial pressure whereas induction with Sevoflurane was associated with greater reduction in heart rate.

Keywords

Anesthesia, Hemodynamics, Propofol, Sevoflurane

Author Biographies

Prabhat Rawal, Nepal Armed Police Force Hospital, Balambu, Kathmandu.

Anesthesiologist, Nepal Armed Police Force Hospital.

Uday Bajracharya, Shree Birendra Hospital and National Academy of Medical Sciences, Kathmandu

Head, Department of Anesthesiology, Shree Birendra Hospital, Chhauni, Kathmandu and Associate Professor, National Academy of Medical Sciences, Kathmandu

References

1. Ozkocak I, Altunkaya H, Ozer Y, Ayoglu H, Demirel CB, Cicek E. Comparison of ephedrine and ketamine in prevention of injection pain and hypotension due to propofol induction. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2005;22:44-8.
2. Joshi GP. Inhalational techniques in ambulatory anesthesia. Anesthesiology Clin N Am 2003;21:263-72.
3. Samad K, Khan F,Azam I. Hemodynamic effects of anesthetic induction in patients treated with beta and calcium channel blockers. M E J Anesth 2008;19:1111-28.
4. Bharti N, Chari P, Kumar P. Effect of Sevoflurane versus Propofol based anesthesia on the hemodynamic response and recovery characteristics in patients undergoing microlaryngeal surgery. Saudi J Anaesth 2012;6:380-4.
5. Zahoor MU, Mansoor R, Buland K, Kazi WA, Ul Haq ME. Comparison of haemodynamic changes after laryngeal mask airway insertion with Propofol versus Sevoflurane. Pakistan Armed Forces Medical Journal 2010 Sept;(3).
6. Watson KR, Shah MV. Clinical comparison of single agent anesthesia with Sevoflurane versus target controlled infusion of Propofol. Br J Anaesth 2000;85:541-6.
7. Priya V, Divatiya JV, Dasgupta D. A comparison of Propofol versus Sevoflurane for laryngeal mask airway insertion. Indian J Anaesth 2002;46:31-4.
8. Katoh T, Ikeda K. The minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) of sevoflurane in humans. Anesthesiology 1987;66:301-3.
9. Van den Berg AA, Chitty DA, Jones RD, Sohel MS, Shahen A. Intravenous or inhaled induction of anesthesia in adults? An audit of preoperative patient preferences. Anesth Analg 2005;100:1422-4.
10. Kirkbride DA, Parker JL Williams GD, Buggy DJ. Induction of anesthesia in the elderly ambulatory patient: a double-blinded comparison of Propofol and Sevoflurane. Anesth Analg 2001;93:1185-7.
11. Husedzinovic I, Tonkovic D, Barisin S, Bradic N, Gasparovic S. Hemodynamic differences in Sevoflurane versus Propofol anesthesia. Coll Antropol 2003;27:205-12.
12. Lakhal K, Macq C, Ehrmann S, Boulain T, Capdevila X. Noninvasive monitoring of blood pressure in the critically ill: reliability according to the cuff site (arm, thigh, or ankle). Crit Care Med 2012;40:1207-13.
13. Thwaites A, Edmends S, Smith I. Inhalation induction with Sevoflurane: a double-blind comparison with Propofol. Br J Anaesth 1997;78:356-61.
14. Smith I, Thwaites AJ. Target-controlled Propofol vs. Sevoflurane: a double-blind, randomised comparison in day-case anaesthesia. Anaesthesia 1999;54:745-52.
15. Patel N, Patel MM, Patel V. Comparison of cardiovascular and respiratory changes during induction, maintenance and recovery with Sevoflurane and Propofol in pediatric day care anesthesia. Journal of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Research 2013;5:562-5.
16. Konstantopoulos K, Makris A, Moustaka A, Karmaniolou I, Konstantopoulos G, Mela A. Sevoflurane versus Propofol anesthesia in patients undergoing lumbar spondylodesis: a randomized trial. Journal of surgical research 2013;179:72-77.
17. Kanaya N, Hirata N, Kurosawa S, Nakayama M, Namiki A. Differential effects of Propofol and Sevoflurane on heart rate variability. Anesthesiology 2003;98(1):34-40.
18. Jellish WS, Lien CA, Fontenot HJ. The comparative effects of Sevoflurane versus Propofol in the induction and maintenance of anesthesia in adult patients. Anesth Analg 1996; 82:479-485.
19. Maenpaa M, Penttila J, Laitio T, Kaisti K, Kuusela T, Hinkka S, et al. The effects of surgical levels of Sevoflurane and Propofol anesthesia on heart rate variability. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2007;24:626-33.

Downloads

Published

2015-02-26

How to Cite

Rawal, P., & Bajracharya, U. (2015). Hemodynamic response to Sevoflurane and Propofol induction: a comparative study. Journal of Society of Anesthesiologists of Nepal, 2(1), 2-7. Retrieved from http://www.jsan.org.np/jsan/index.php/jsan/article/view/5

Issue

Vol. 2 No. 1 (2015): 2015 March Issue

Section

Original Article

License

Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY-NC-4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.