You are here

Home » Content

ENTÜBASYONDA OLUŞAN HEMODİNAMİK YANITIN ÖNLENMESİNDE ESMOLOL VE FENTANİLİN ETKİNLİKLERİNİN KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI

COMPERATIVE ASSESSMENT ON PREVENTING HAEMODYNAMIC RESPONSE OF ESMOLOL AND FENTANYL DURING INTUBATION

Journal Name:

  • Selçuk Tıp Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2008

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
Aim: We aimed to compare the effects of esmolol and fentanyl on haemodynamic responses dur¬ing tracheal intubation in this placebo-controlled, prospective and single blind study. Material and Method: The ASA I-II group consisted of ninety patients, whose age ranged between 18-65, were divided into three groups. 150 mg esmolol were given to the first (Group E), 1,5 pg/kg fentanyl to the second (Group F) and 4 ml isotonic to the third group (Group K) by intravenous route. Propofol 2mg/kg and roküronyum 0,6 mg/kg was given during induction then intubation was performed.The systolic, diastolic and mean blood pressure and heart rate were measured and recorded at fol¬lowing times: before and after the induction, before the intubation and 1., 2., 3., 5., 7., 9. and 11. minutes after the intubation. Results: When it was compared between the groups, increasing heart rate of 1., 2., 3. and 5. minutes after the intubation were lower than both Group F and Group K (p<0.05). There were no significant results belonging to the systolic, diastolic and mean blood pres¬sure between the groups (p> 0.05). Conclusion: As a result, in preventing increased heart rate after intubation esmolol was found to be more succcessful than fentanyl, although both esmolol and fen-tanyl were not found to be sufficient in preventing blood pressures alone
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Amaç: Plasebo kontrollü, prospektif, randomize, tek-kör olarak yapılan bu çalışmada, esmolol ve fen-tanilin trakeal entübasyondaki hemodinamik yanıt üzerine etkilerinin karşılaştırılması amaçlanmıştır. Gereç ve Yöntem: ASA I-II grubu 18-65 yaş arası 90 olgu üç grupta çalışmaya alındı (n=30). Birinci gruba 150 mg esmolol (Grup E), ikinci gruba 1,5 pg/kg fentanil (Grup F), üçüncü gruba 4 cc serum fizyolojik (SF) (Grup K) intravenöz (iv) yoldan verildi. indüksiyonda 2mg/kg propofol ve 0,6 mg/kg roküronyum verilerek entübasyon yapıldı. Hastaların sistolik, diastolik, ortalama arter basınçları ve kalp atım hızları indüksiyon öncesi, indüksiyon sonrası, entübasyon öncesi, entübasyon sonrası 1., 2., 3., 5., 7., 9., ve 11. dakikalarda ölçülüp kaydedildi. Bulgular: Gruplar arası karşılaştırmada, entübasyon sonrası kalp atım hızındaki artış Grup E'de 1, 2, 3 ve 5. dakikalarda Grup F ve Grup K' ya göre düşük bulundu (p<0.05). Her üç grup arasında sistolik, diyastolik ve ortalama arter basınçları arasında anlamlı fark bulunmadı (p>0.05). Sonuç: Entübasyon sonrası kalp atım hızındaki artışları önlemede esmolol fentanile göre üstün bulunsa da, kan basınçlarındaki artışı önlemede tek başına verilen her iki ajanın da tam olarak yeterli olmadığı görüldü.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-entubasyonda-olusan-hemodinamik-yanitin-onlenmesinde-esmolol-fentanilin-etkinliklerinin-karsilastirilmasi.pdf
  • 4
203-209
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

1. Derbyshire DR, Chimelewski A, Fell D, Vater M, Achola K, Smith G. Plasma catecolamine respons¬es to tracheal intubation. Br J Anesth 1993; 55: 855-9.
2. Barak M, Ziser A, Greenberg A, Lischinsky S, Rosenberg B. Hemodynamic and catecholamine response to tracheal intubation: direct laryn¬goscopy compared with fiberoptic intubation. J Clin Anesth 2003; 15:132-6.
3. Kayhan Z. Entübasyonun fizyopatolojik etkileri ve komplikasyonları. Klinik Anestezi. 2. baskı, logos yayıncılık, 1997; 239-40.

4. Bruder N, Ortega D, Granthill C. Consequences and prevention methods of hemodynamic changes during laringoscopy and intratracheal intubation. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim 1992;11:57-71.
5. Sum CY, Yacobi A, Kartzinel R, Stampfli H, Davis CS, Lai CM. Kinetics of esmolol, an ultra-short-act¬ing beta blocker, and of its major metabolite. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1993; 34:427-34.
6. Barth C, Ojle M, Pearson AC. Ultra short-acting intravenous ß-adrenergic blockade as add-on ther¬apy in acute unstable angina. Am Heart J 1991; 121:782-8.

7. Sinetos AL, Hulse J, Pritchett EL. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of esmolol administered as an intravenous bolus. Clin Pharmacol Ther
1987; 41:112-7.
8. Figueredo E, Garcia-Fuentes EM. Assessment of the efficacy of esmolol on the haemodynamic changes induced by laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation: A meta-analysis. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2001; 45:1011-22.
9. Stoelting RK. Opioid Agonist and Antagonist. Pharmacology and Physiology in Anesthetic Practice 3 rd edition, Lippincot-Raven,
Philadelphia 1999; 77-111.
10. Sear JW. Recent advances and developments in the clinical use of iv opioids during the peropera¬tive period. Br J Anaesth 1998; 81:38-50.
11. Hung O. Understanding hemodynamic responses to tracheal intubation. Can J Anaesth 2001;
48:723-6.
12. Shephard LC, Gelman S, Reves JG. Humoral response of hypertensive patients to laryn-goscopy. Anesth Analg 1981; 60:276-7.
13. JG, Sear JW, Johnson LL, Khombatta HJ. Risk of
myocardial ischaemia during anesthesia in treated and untreated hypertensive patients. Br J Anaesth
1988; 61:675-9.
14. Seegobin RD, Wilmshurst TH, Johnston J, Clewlow F, Murrills A, Seegobin AH, et al. Early postoperative myocardial morbidity in patients with coronary artery disease undergoing major non-cardiac surgery: correlation with periopera¬tive ischaemia. Can J Anaesth 1991; 38:1012-22.
15. Bucx MJL, Van Geel RTM, Scheck PAE, Stjnen T. Cardiovascular effects of forces applied during laryngoscopy. Anesthesiology 1992; 47:1029-33.
16. Stoelting RK. Circulatory response to laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation with or without prior oropharyngeal viscous lidocaine. Anesth Analg
1977; 56:618-21.
17. Pernerstorfer T, Krafft R, Fitzgerald R, Fridrich P, Koc D, Hammerlen AF, et al. Stress response to tracheal intubation: direct laryngoscopy com¬pared with blind oral intubation. Anaesthesia
1995; 50:17-22.
18. Ebert TJ, Bernstein JS, Stowe DF, Roering D, Kampine JP. Attenuation of hemodynamic responses to rapid sequence induction and intu¬bation in healthy patients with a single bolus of esmolol. J Clin Anesth 1990; 2(4):243-52.
19. Parnass SM, Rothenberg DM, Kerchberger JP, Ivankovich AD. A single bolus dose of esmolol in the prevention of intubation-induced tachycardia and hypertension in an ambulatory surgery unit. J
Clin Anesth 1990; 2:232-7.
20. Kapnoudhis P, Vaghadia H, Jenkins LC, Turnbull KW, Gofton EA, Grant RP, et al. Esmolol versus fentanyl for preventing haemodynamic response to intubation in cardiovascular disease. Can J
Anaesth 1990; 37:145-6.
21. Miller D, Martineau R, Hull K. Effects of esmolol on hemodynamics and ventricular function during Anaesthetic Induction. Anaesthesiology 1989; 71(supp):A-15.
22. Mikawa K, Nishina K, Maekawa N, Obara H. Comparison of nicardipine, diltiazem and vera-pamil for controlling the cardiovascular responses to tracheal intubation. Br J Anaesth 1996; 76:221¬6.
23. Mikawa K, Maekawa N, Nishina K, Hasegawa M, Kaetsu H, Goto R, et al. Partial attenuation of the cardiovascular response to tracheal intubation with oral manidipine. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand
1994; 38:266-70.
24. Helfman SM, Gold MI, Delisser EA, Herrington CA.
Which drug prevents tachycardia and hyperten¬sion associated with tracheal intubation: lido-caine, fentanyl or esmolol? Anesth Analg 1991;
72:482-6.
25. Chung F, Evans D. Low dose fentanyl: haemody-namic response during induction and intubation in geriatric patients. Can Anaesth Soc J 1985;
32:622-8.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com