Comparison of haemodynamic changes between propofol and ketofol as induction agents in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries under general anaesthesia

Journal of Anaesthesiology Clinical Pharmacology - Tập 38 Số 2 - Trang 215-220 - 2022
Sivakumar Segaran1,2, Vikasini Raman1,2, T Ramyavel1,2, SagievKoshy George1,2, Mamie Zachariah1,2
1Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Pondicherry Institute of Medical Sciences, Puducherry, India
2This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Tóm tắt

Background and Aims: Laparoscopic surgeries are more commonly performed procedure nowadays because of its advantages however generation of pneumoperitoneum causes significant physiological changes. Propofol is the most commonly used induction agent but its use is limited by its side effects like dose-dependent hypotension and myocardial depression. So by combining propofol with ketamine to form ketofol may result in better hemodynamic stability. The aim of this study was to compare the haemodynamic changes in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia using propofol and ketofol as induction agents. Material and Methods: In this prospective randomized double blind study, 80 patients of ASA I/II undergoing elective laparoscopic surgery were randomized into two Groups. Group A received 1 mg/kg of propofol + 1 mg/kg ketamine made up to a total volume of 20 ml with normal saline and Group B received 2 mg/kg propofol + normal saline to make up to an equal volume. Hemodynamic profiles like HR, SBP, DBP, and MAP were recorded at different time intervals until pneumoperitoneum. Postoperative recovery profile and complications were recorded. All data were entered in MS excel and analyzed using SPSS Version 20.0. Repeated measures ANOVA and Chi-square test were used to test the level of significance. Results: Demographic character and duration of surgery were comparable. SBP, DBP, MAP and HR showed statistically significant difference in both groups in various time intervals with P < 0.05 with Group A (ketofol ) having a better hemodynamic stability. Recovery profile in ketofol group took longer duration (4.95 min) compared to propofol group B (1.8 min). Postoperative nausea and vomiting were significant (P = 0.004) in ketofol group. Conclusion: We concluded that ketofol had a better hemodynamic stability compared to propofol as an induction agent, however time for recovery in ketofol group took a longer period compared to propofol group, with no complication in either groups.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Bajwa, 2016, Anaesthesia for laparoscopic surgery:General vs regional anaesthesia, J Minimal Access Surg, 12, 4, 10.4103/0972-9941.169952

Hatzinger, 2006, Hans Christian Jacobaeus:Inventor of human laparoscopy and thoracoscopy, J Endourol, 20, 848, 10.1089/end.2006.20.848

Barash, 2017, Clinical Anaesthesia, 1261

McLaughlin, 1995, The adverse hemodynamic effects of laparoscopic cholecystectomy, Surg Endosc, 9, 121, 10.1007/BF00191950

Joris, 1998, Hemodynamic changes induced by laparoscopy and their endocrine correlates:Effects of clonidine, J Am Coll Cardiol, 32, 1389, 10.1016/S0735-1097(98)00406-9

Hug, 1993, Hemodynamic effects of propofol:Data from over 25,000 patients, Anesth Analg, 77, S21

Bassett, 2003, Propofol for procedural sedation in children in the emergency department, Ann Emerg Med, 42, 773, 10.1016/S0196-0644(03)00619-X

Sahinovic, 2018, Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Propofol, Clin Pharmacokinet, 57, 1539, 10.1007/s40262-018-0672-3

Hasanein, 2011, The effect of combined remfentanil and low dose ketamine infusion in patients undergoing laparoscopic gastric bypass, Egypt J Anesth, 27, 255

Bauchat, 2011, Low-dose ketamine with multimodal postcesarean delivery analgesia:A randomized controlled trial, Int J Obstet Anesth, 20, 3, 10.1016/j.ijoa.2010.10.002

Menkiti, 2012, Low-dose intravenous ketamine improves postoperative analgesia after cesarean delivery with spinal bupivacaine in African parturients, Int J Obstet Anesth, 21, 217, 10.1016/j.ijoa.2012.04.004

White, 1988, Clinical pharmacology of intravenous induction agents, Int Anesthesiol Clin, 26, 98, 10.1097/00004311-198802620-00003

Aboeldahab, 2011, Comparative study between propofol, ketamine and their combination (ketofol) as an induction agent, Egypt J Anaesth, 27, 145, 10.1016/j.egja.2011.04.007

Akin, 2005, A comparison of fentanyl-propofol with a ketamine-propofol combination for sedation during endometrial biopsy, J Clin Anesth, 17, 187, 10.1016/j.jclinane.2004.06.019

Atashkhoyi, 2013, Effects of the addition of low-dose ketamine to propofol-fentanyl anaesthesia during diagnostic gynaecological laparoscopy, Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol, 170, 247, 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2013.06.026

Akin, 2005, Comparison of propofol with propofol–ketamine combination in pediatric patients undergoing auditory brainstem response testing, Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol, 69, 1541, 10.1016/j.ijporl.2005.04.011

Willman, 2007, A prospective evaluation of ''ketofol''(ketamine/propofol combination) for procedural sedation and analgesia in the emergency department, Ann Emerg Med, 49, 23, 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2006.08.002

Saeed, 2011, Ketofol infusion as a procedural sedation and analgesia modality for minor orthopedic surgeries:Evaluation of dose-outcome relation, Ain Shams J Anaesthesiol, 4, 63

Erden, 2010, Comparison of two ketamine-propofol dosing regimens for sedation during interventional radiology procedures, Minerva Anestesiol, 76, 260

Kayalha, 2017, Effect of Ketofol instead of Propofol on hemodynamic stabilization for induction of Anesthesia in Laparatomy, J Cell Mol Anesth, 2, 50

Rao, 2015, Comparative study between propofol and propofol with ketamine in ambulatory anaesthesia, IOSR Journal of Dental and Medical Sciences (IOSR-JDMS), 14, 1

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Journal of Anaesthesiology Clinical Pharmacology

Tập 38 Số 2

215-220

Thông tin tác giả