Ketamine versus etomidate as an induction agent for tracheal intubation in critically ill adults: a Bayesian meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Tracheal intubation is a high-risk intervention commonly performed in critically ill patients. Due to its favorable cardiovascular profile, ketamine is considered less likely to compromise clinical outcomes. This meta-analysis aimed to assess whether ketamine, compared with other agents, reduces mortality in critically ill patients undergoing intubation. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from inception until April 27, 2023, for randomized controlled trials and matched observational studies comparing ketamine with any control in critically ill patients as an induction agent. The primary outcome was mortality at the longest follow-up available, and the secondary outcomes included Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, ventilator-free days at day 28, vasopressor-free days at day 28, post-induction mean arterial pressure, and successful intubation on the first attempt. For the primary outcome, we used a Bayesian random-effects meta-analysis on the risk ratio (RR) scale with a weakly informative neutral prior corresponding to a mean estimate of no difference with 95% probability; the estimated effect size will fall between a relative risk of 0.25 and 4. The RR and 95% credible interval (CrI) were used to estimate the probability of mortality reduction (RR < 1). The secondary outcomes were assessed with a frequentist random-effects model. We registered this study in Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/2vf79/ ). RESULTS: We included seven randomized trials and one propensity-matched study totaling 2978 patients. Etomidate was the comparator in all the identified studies. The probability that ketamine reduced mortality was 83.2% (376/1475 [25%] vs. 411/1503 [27%]; RR, 0.93; 95% CrI, 0.79-1.08), which was confirmed by a subgroup analysis excluding studies with a high risk of bias. No significant difference was observed in any secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: All of the included studies evaluated ketamine versus etomidate among critically ill adults requiring tracheal intubation. This meta-analysis showed a moderate probability that induction with ketamine is associated with a reduced risk of mortality.

Effects of dexmedetomidine combined with etomidate on postoperative cognitive function in older patients undergoing total intravenous anaesthesia: a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Etomidate has been advocated for anesthesia in older and critically ill patients because of its hemodynamic stability. Clinical studies have shown that dexmedetomidine has neuroprotective and anti-inflammatory properties and improves postoperative cognitive dysfunction in older patients. The present study was to evaluate the effects of the combination of etomidate and dexmedetomidine with different anaesthesia time on postoperative cognitive function in older patients. METHODS: A total of 132 older patients undergoing ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy were randomly divided into EN group and ED group equally. Patients whose surgery time was less than or equal to 1 h in each group were allocated to short-time surgery group (EN1 group and ED1 group), and whose surgery time was more than 1h were allocated to long-term surgery group (EN2 group and ED2 group). The primary outcome was the score of the Mini-Mental State Examination. The secondary outcomes were State-Trait Anxiety Inventory scores, Riker sedation agitation scores, Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale scores, the memory span for Arabic numerals, the plasma concentrations of S-100 calcium-binding protein B and neuron specific enolase, the time to spontaneous respiration, recovery, and extubation. RESULTS: The MMSE scores at t2-3 were higher in ED1 and ED2 groups than in EN1 and EN2 groups (p<0.05). Compared with ED1 and ED2 groups, the ZSDS scores, the S-AI scores and the T-AI scores at t1-2 were higher in EN1 and EN2 groups (p<0.05), respectively. The recalled Arabic numbers at t1-3 were higher in ED2 group than in EN2 group (p<0.05). The plasma concentration of S-100ß at t1-2 in EN1 group and t1-3 in EN2 group were higher than that in ED1 and ED2 groups (p<0.05), respectively. Compared with ED1 and ED2 groups, the plasma concentrations of NSE were higher at t1-3 in EN1 group and t1-4 in EN2 group (p<0.05), respectively. CONCLUSION: The administration of dexmedetomidine could improve postoperative cognitive dysfunction, emergence agitation, depression and anxiety, attenuate the plasma concentrations of S-100ß and NSE in older patients undergoing total intravenous anaesthesia with etomidate. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration number: ChiCTR1800015421, Date: 29/03/2018.

Pharmacological interventions for reducing the incidence of myoclonus in patients receiving etomidate for induction of general anesthesia: an umbrella review.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this umbrella review was to examine various pharmacologic interventions for their potential to reduce etomidate-induced myoclonus. A secondary objective was to compare the relative effectiveness of those medications in reducing the incidence of myoclonus when etomidate is utilized for the induction of general anesthesia. INTRODUCTION: Etomidate is the drug of choice when inducing general anesthesia in hemodynamically unstable patients. However, its use is limited among the general surgical population due to its ability to cause adrenal suppression, vomiting, and myoclonus. Myoclonus can lead to damage of muscle fibers, myalgias, and patient discomfort, and can also be detrimental in patients with low cardiac reserve. Several systematic reviews have reported on the effectiveness of various intravenous medications in reducing mild, moderate, and severe myoclonus; however, a more thorough examination of their influence was lacking. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review included systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials involving the use of pharmacologic interventions to reduce etomidate-induced myoclonus. Reviews in English and conducted after 1965 were considered for inclusion. METHODS: A comprehensive search of 11 databases was conducted to identify published and unpublished reviews up to March 2022. Critical appraisal was conducted by 2 independent reviewers using the standardized JBI appraisal tool. Quantitative findings were summarized according to the dose, timing of administration, and relative risk using a data matrix, and were synthesized in tabular format with supporting narrative text. Results were organized by severity of myoclonus (overall, mild, moderate, and severe) and by type of intervention. RESULTS: Eight systematic reviews were included in this umbrella review, which included 48 relevant studies, after removal of duplicates (3909 participants included in the primary studies). Five of the systematic reviews examined the effectiveness of various types of opioids in the prevention of myoclonus, and 3 systematic reviews examined the effectiveness of non-opioid interventions, such as lidocaine, midazolam, and dexmedetomidine. Seven reviews searched at least 4 databases for pertinent studies and specifically indicated that blinded reviewers appraised the articles. All reviews used a published and validated appraisal instrument. The overall quality of all included reviews was judged to be moderate to high. The absolute risk reduction indicating the effectiveness of the prophylactic medications ranged from 47% to 81% for mild, 52% to 92% for moderate, and 61% to 96% for severe myoclonus. Opioids demonstrated the most consistent and substantial effect on the reduction in myoclonus. CONCLUSIONS: All pharmacologic interventions identified in this review demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in the incidence of myoclonus. Future studies and reviews should focus on elucidating the particular dose range and timing that is most effective. Anesthesia providers should consider a pre-treatment dose of one of the medications described in this umbrella review as a means to reduce myoclonus and the untoward effects of that condition.

Remimazolam vs Etomidate: Haemodynamic Effects in Hypertensive Elderly Patients Undergoing Non-Cardiac Surgery.

Background: Remimazolam tosilate (RT) is a novel ultrashort-acting γ-aminobutyric acid subtype A (GABAA) agonist, with several advantages including rapid induction and recovery, stable haemodynamics, and mild respiratory inhibition. However, studies have not been conducted to explore the haemodynamic effects of RT in elderly hypertensive subjects undergoing non-cardiac surgery. Therefore, we sought to compare the effects of anaesthesia induction using different doses of RT and etomidate on the haemodynamics of this group of patients. Methods: Patients were recruited into this single-center, prospective, randomized, double-blind trial from October 2022 to June 2023. A total of 150 hypertensive elderly undergoing non-cardiac surgery were randomly assigned into 0.2 mg/kg RT group (Group RL), 0.3 mg/kg RT group (Group RH) and 0.3 mg/kg etomidate group (Group E). The primary outcome of the study was haemodynamic changes (mean arterial pressure fluctuation value -∆MAP and heart rate fluctuation value -∆HR) observed during anaesthesia induction. Secondary outcomes included incidence of adverse cardiovascular events and adverse drug reactions (injection pain and myoclonus), cumulative doses of vasoactive drugs and vital signs at different time points. Results: Patients in Group E and Group RL had significantly lower haemodynamic fluctuations (∆MAP), lower incidence of hypotension and cumulative dose of ephedrine than subjects in Group RH. Patients in groups RL and RH had significantly lower incidence of injection pain and myoclonus compared with patients in group E. The results showed no statistically significant differences in ∆HR, hypertension, bradycardia, tachycardia, and time to loss of eye-opening reflex and start of intubation, and vital signs at different time points among the three groups. Conclusion: Use of low-dose RT (0.2 mg/kg) for induction of non-cardiac surgical anaesthesia in elderly hypertensive patients is more effective in maintaining haemodynamic stability and has fewer adverse effects compared with etomidate.

Efficacy of Granisetron versus Sufentanil on Reducing Myoclonic Movements Following Etomidate: Double-blind, randomised clinical trial.

Objectives: This study aimed to reduce the intensity of myoclonus movements by comparing the effectiveness of granisetron and sufentanil in reducing the intensity of etomidate-induced myoclonic movements. Etomidate-induced myoclonus occurs in up to 85% of patients under general anaesthesia. This type of myoclonus can induce significant clinical and economic problems in patients with special conditions. Methods: This double-blind randomised clinical trial study consisted of 96 adult patients recruited between January and July 2021 from Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran. Using block randomisation, subjects were divided into three groups of 32 patients: the group receiving granisetron 40 µg/kg (group G), the group receiving sufentanil 0.2 µg/kg (group S) and the control group who did not receive the pretreatment (group C). Patients received these medications as pretreatments 120 seconds before induction with etomidate. After the injection of etomidate with a dose of 0.3 mg/kg, the incidence of myoclonus was evaluated. After evaluating the myoclonus, the full dose of narcotics (fentanyl 1 µg/kg) and muscle relaxants (atracurium 0.5 mg/kg) were administered to patients and a suitable airway was established for them. Results: The findings indicated that granisetron reduced the intensity and incidence of myoclonic movements more than sufentanil. In addition, myoclonic movements were observed at a significantly higher intensity in the control group (P = 0.001). Conclusion: The results obtained from the current study indicate that granisetron and sufentanil as pretreatments are effective for reducing myoclonus in patients.

Low-dose nalmefene pretreatment reduces etomidate-induced myoclonus: A randomized, double-blind controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: This study compared the effectiveness of nalmefene and fentanyl in reducing the incidence and severity of etomidate-induced myoclonus. METHODS: One hundred fifty patients were randomized to receive 0.25ug/kg of nalmefene, 1ug/kg of fentanyl, or the same volume of normal saline 3 minutes prior to etomidate-induced anesthesia. The primary observational indexes were the severity level and incidence of etomidate-induced myoclonus, and the secondary observational index included blood pressure, heart rate, and the incidence of adverse effects from anesthesia induction to resuscitation, such as cough, chest wall rigidity, dizziness, nausea, pain after awakening, and intraoperative awareness. RESULTS: The incidence of myoclonus was significantly lower in the nalmefene group (8.0%) than in the fentanyl group (32.0%) (P = .003) and in the normal saline group (72.0%) (P = .000). The severity level of myoclonus in the nalmefene group was significantly lower than the fentanyl group (P = .001) and normal saline group (P = .000). Meanwhile, the incidences of cough and chest wall rigidity during anesthesia induction were significantly lower in the nalmefene group compared with the fentanyl group (P = .003, P = .027). There were no statistically significant differences in heart rate and mean arterial pressure among the 3 gruops (P > .05). There was no difference in the incidence of adverse effects among the 3 groups during recovery from anesthesia (P > .05). CONCLUSION: Intravenous injection of 0.25ug/kg of nalmefene 3 minutes prior to etomidate is more effective in preventing etomidate-induced myoclonus during general anesthesia than 1ug/kg of fentanyl.

The Effect of Ketamine Versus Etomidate for Rapid Sequence Intubation on Maximum Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: The use of induction agents for rapid sequence intubation (RSI) has been associated with hypotension in critically ill patients. Choice of induction agent may be important and the most commonly used agents are etomidate and ketamine. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the effects of a single dose of ketamine vs. etomidate for RSI on maximum Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score and incidence of hypotension. METHODS: This single-center, randomized, parallel-group trial compared the use of ketamine and etomidate for RSI in critically ill adult patients in the emergency department. The study was performed under Exception from Informed Consent. The primary outcome was the maximum SOFA score within 3 days of hospitalization. RESULTS: A total of 143 patients were enrolled in the trial, 70 in the ketamine group and 73 in the etomidate group. Maximum median SOFA score for the ketamine group was 6.5 (interquartile range [IQR] 5-9) vs. 7 (IQR 5-9) for etomidate with no significant difference (-0.2; 95% CI -1.4 to 1.1; p = 0.79). The incidence of post-intubation hypotension was 28% in the ketamine group vs. 26% in the etomidate group (difference 2%; 95% CI -13% to 17%). There were no significant differences in intensive care unit outcomes. Thirty-day mortality rate for the ketamine group was 11% (8 deaths) and for the etomidate group was 21% (15 deaths), which was not statistically different. CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences in maximum SOFA score or post-intubation hypotension between critically ill adults receiving ketamine vs. etomidate for RSI.

Sedation with a 1:1 mixture of etomidate and propofol for gastroscopy in hypertensive elderly patients.

We hypothesized that the combined use of etomidate and propofol for endoscopic sedation in elderly hypertensive patients could reduce adverse reactions while providing ideal sedation. To validate our hypothesis, we conducted a prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blinded study. A total of 360 elderly hypertensive patients scheduled for gastroscopy at our hospital were enrolled in the study, of whom 328 completed the trial. The patients were randomly assigned to one of three groups: the propofol group (group P), the etomidate group (group E), or the propofol-etomidate combination group (mixed at a ratio of 1:1, group PE). We collected and analyzed the cardiopulmonary effects and side effects in each group. Regardless of the sedation drug used, the systolic blood pressure, mean blood pressure, and heart rate of involved patients were significantly affected. Oxygen desaturation and injection pain were more common in group P compared to groups E (33.6% vs. 14.8%, 31.8% vs. 2.7%, both P < 0.01) and group PE (33.6% vs. 13.6%, 31.8% vs. 6.4%, both P < 0.01). The incidence of myoclonus in the PE group was lower than that in the E group (10.9% vs. 61.2%, P < 0.01). Our results indeed demonstrated that the combined use of etomidate and propofol appeared to maintain cardiopulmonary stability with minimal side effects in older hypertensive patients scheduled for gastroscopy, which further implied that this sedation strategy could be a safe and pain-free option for managing patients undergoing gastroscopy, particularly those at a higher risk of adverse cardiovascular events.

Sedative Dose for Rapid Sequence Intubation and Postintubation Hypotension: Is There an Association?

STUDY OBJECTIVE: For patients with hemodynamic instability undergoing rapid sequence intubation, experts recommend reducing the sedative medication dose to minimize the risk of further hemodynamic deterioration. Scant data support this practice for etomidate and ketamine. We sought to determine if the dose of etomidate or ketamine was independently associated with postintubation hypotension. METHODS: We analyzed data from the National Emergency Airway Registry from January 2016 to December 2018. Patients aged 14 years or older were included if the first intubation attempt was facilitated with etomidate or ketamine. We used multivariable modeling to determine whether drug dose in milligrams per kilogram of patient weight was independently associated with postintubation hypotension (systolic blood pressure < 100 mm Hg). RESULTS: We analyzed 12,175 intubation encounters facilitated by etomidate and 1,849 facilitated by ketamine. The median drug doses were 0.28 mg/kg (interquartile range [IQR] 0.22 mg/kg to 0.32 mg/kg) for etomidate and 1.33 mg/kg (IQR 1 mg/kg to 1.8 mg/kg) for ketamine. Postintubation hypotension occurred in 1,976 patients (16.2%) who received etomidate and in 537 patients (29.0%) who received ketamine. In multivariable models, neither the etomidate dose (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.90 to 1.01) nor ketamine dose (aOR 0.97, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.17) was associated with postintubation hypotension. Results were similar in sensitivity analyses excluding patients with preintubation hypotension and including only patients intubated for shock. CONCLUSION: In this large registry of patients intubated after receiving either etomidate or ketamine, we observed no association between the weight-based sedative dose and postintubation hypotension.

Etomidate as an induction agent for endotracheal intubation in critically ill patients: A meta-analysis of randomized trials.

PURPOSE: We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to evaluate if etomidate impacted mortality in critically ill adults when compared with other induction agents. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomized controlled trials which compared etomidate with any other induction agent in critically ill adult patients undergoing endotracheal intubation. The primary outcome was mortality at the main timepoint defined by the study. We conducted a fixed-effects meta-analysis for the risk ratio. Using that risk ratio and 95% confidence interval, we then estimated the probability of any harm (RR > 1) and the number needed to harm ≤100 (RR ≥ 1.05). RESULTS: We included 11 randomized trials comprising 2704 patients. We found that etomidate increased mortality (319/1359 [23%] vs. 267/1345 [20%]; risk ratio (RR) = 1.16; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.01-1.33; P = 0.03; I2 = 0%; number needed to harm = 31). The probabilities of any increase and a 1% increase (NNH ≤100) in mortality were 98.1% and 92.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis found a high probability that etomidate increases mortality when used as an induction agent in critically ill patients with a number needed to harm of 31.

Effects of Etomidate on Postintubation Hypotension, Inflammatory Markers, and Mortality in Critically Ill Patients with COVID-19: An International, Multicenter, Retrospective Study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association of etomidate with postintubation hypotension, inflammation, and mortality in critically ill patients with COVID-19. DESIGN: International, multicenter, retrospective study. PARTICIPANTS: Critically ill patients hospitalized specifically for COVID-19 from three major academic institutions in the US and Europe. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: Patients were allocated into the etomidate (ET) group or another induction agent (OA) group. The primary outcome was postintubation hypotension. Secondary outcomes included postintubation inflammatory status, in-hospital mortality, and mortality at 30 days. RESULTS: 171 patients with a median age of 68 (IQR 58-73) years were included (ET, n = 98; OA, n = 73). Etomidate was associated with lower postintubation mean arterial pressure [74.33 (64-85) mm Hg versus 81.84 (69.75-94.25) mm Hg, p = 0.005] compared to other agents. No statistically significant differences were generally observed in inflammatory markers between the two groups at 7- and 14-days after admission to the intensive care unit. In-hospital mortality [77 (79%) versus 41 (56%), p = 0.003] and mortality at 30-days [78 (80%) versus 43 (59%), p = 0.006] were higher in the ET group. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, only etomidate (p = 0.009) and postintubation mean arterial pressure (p < 0.001) had a statistically significant effect on mortality, in contrast to stress-dose steroids (p = 0.301), after adjusting for creatinine (p = 0.695), blood urea nitrogen (p = 0.153), age (p = 0.055), oxygen saturation of hemoglobin (SpO2) (p = 0.941), and fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) (p = 0.712). CONCLUSIONS: Administration of a single-bolus dose of etomidate in critically ill patients with COVID-19 is associated with lower postintubation mean arterial pressure and higher in-hospital and 30-day mortality compared to other induction agents.

Effects of total intravenous anesthesia with etomidate and propofol on postoperative cognitive dysfunction.

Increased incidence of postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) is observed in elderly patients underwent intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with endotracheal intubation. Modulation of anesthetics compatibility may reduce the severity of POCD. Elderly patients scheduled for TIVA with endotracheal intubation were randomly divided into the control group (1.00?2.00 mg/kg propofol) and the etomidate and propofol combination group (1.00?2.00 mg/kg propofol and 0.30 mg/kg etomidate). Serum cortisol, S100?, and neuron-specific enolase (NSE), interleukin (IL)-6, and IL-10 were monitored during or after the operation. Mini-mental State Examination (MMSE) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) were utilized to assess the severity of POCD. 63 elderly patients in the etomidate and propofol combination group and 60 patients in the control group were enrolled, and there was no significant difference in gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status, surgical specialty, intraoperative blood loss, and operation time between the two groups. Significantly increased serum cortisol, S100?, NSE, IL-6, and reduced MMSE and MoCA scores were detected in the control group at different time points after the operation (0-72 h post operation) when compared to those before the operation. Similar trends for these observed factors were found in the etomidate and propofol combination group. In addition, the etomidate and propofol combination group showed better effects in reducing the serum levels of cortisol, S100?, NSE, IL-6, and increasing the MMSE and MoCA scores when compared to the control group. The present study demonstrates that the combination of propofol with etomidate could alleviate POCD in elderly patients underwent TIVA with endotracheal intubation anesthesia.

Clinical outcomes after a single induction dose of etomidate versus ketamine for emergency department sepsis intubation: a randomized controlled trial.

Patients with sepsis often require emergency intubation. In emergency departments (EDs), rapid-sequence intubation with a single-dose induction agent is standard practice, but the best choice of induction agent in sepsis remains controversial. We conducted a randomized, controlled, single-blind trial in the ED. We included septic patients who were aged at least 18 years and required sedation for emergency intubation. Patients were randomly assigned by a blocked randomization to receive 0.2-0.3 mg/kg of etomidate or 1-2 mg/kg of ketamine for intubation. The objectives were to compare the survival outcomes and adverse events after intubation between etomidate and ketamine. Two hundred and sixty septic patients were enrolled; 130 patients/drug arm whose baseline characteristics were well balanced at baseline. In the etomidate group, 105 patients (80.8%) were alive at 28 days, compared with 95 patients (73.1%) in the ketamine group (risk difference [RD], 7.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI], - 2.5 to 17.9%; P = 0.092). There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients who survived at 24 h (91.5% vs. 96.2%; P = 0.097) and survived at 7 days (87.7% vs. 87.7%; P = 0.574). A significantly higher proportion of the etomidate group needed a vasopressor within 24 h after intubation: 43.9% vs. 17.7%, RD, 26.2% (95% CI, 15.4 to 36.9%; P < 0.001). In conclusion, there were no differences in early and late survival rates between etomidate and ketamine. However, etomidate was associated with higher risks of early vasopressor use after intubation. Trial registration: The trial protocol was registered in the Thai Clinical Trials Registry (identification number: TCTR20210213001). Registered 13 February 2021-Retrospectively registered, https://www.thaiclinicaltrials.org/export/pdf/TCTR20210213001 .

Comparison of etomidate and methohexital as anesthetic agents for continuation and maintenance electroconvulsive therapy: A retrospective analysis of seizure quality and safety.

BACKGROUND: The ideal hypnotic agent for electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is still under debate and previous studies comparing etomidate and methohexital have produced conflicting results. This retrospective study compares etomidate and methohexital as anesthetic agents in continuation and maintenance (m)ECT with regard to seizure quality and anesthetic outcomes. METHODS: All subjects undergoing mECT at our department between October 1st, 2014 and February 28th, 2022 were included in this retrospective analysis. Data for each ECT session were obtained from the electronic health records. Anesthesia was performed with either methohexital/succinylcholine or etomidate/succinylcholine. Standard seizure quality parameters, anesthesiological monitoring data, pharmacological interventions and side-effects were recorded. RESULTS: 573 mECT treatments in 88 patients were included (methohexital n = 458, etomidate n = 115). Seizures lasted significantly longer after using etomidate (electroencephalography: +12.80 s [95 %-CI:8.64-16.95]; electromyogram +6.59 s [95 %-CI:4.14-9.04]). Time to maximum coherence was significantly longer with etomidate (+7.34 s [95 %-CI:3.97-10.71]. Use of etomidate was associated with longer procedure duration (+6.51 min [95 %-CI:4.84-8.17]) and higher maximum postictal systolic blood pressure (+13.64 mmHg [95 %-CI:9.33-17.94]). Postictal systolic blood pressure > 180 mmHg, the use of antihypertensives, benzodiazepines and clonidine (for postictal agitation), as well as the occurrence of myoclonus was significantly more common under etomidate. CONCLUSIONS: Due to longer procedure duration and an unfavorable side effect profile, etomidate appears inferior to methohexital as an anesthetic agent in mECT despite longer seizure durations.

Electroconvulsive Therapy Anesthetic Choice and Clinical Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Etomidate and methohexital are the 2 commonly used anesthetics for electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in the United States. The objective of this study was to examine how anesthetic choice between etomidate and methohexital is associated with real-world clinical outcomes. METHODS: This naturalistic retrospective cohort study examined longitudinal electronic health records for 495 adult patients who received 2 or more ECT treatments from 2010 to 2019 in Kaiser Permanente North California, a large integrated health care system. Study outcomes included 12-month posttreatment depression remission as measured by the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire, psychiatric and all-cause emergency department visits, and psychiatric and all-cause hospitalizations. RESULTS: Anesthetic choice was not significantly related to depression severity, emergency department visits, or psychiatric hospitalizations at 12 months after completing ECT. In exploratory analyses, we found that etomidate compared with methohexital was associated with higher rates of patient discomfort adverse effects-postictal agitation, phlebitis, and myoclonus (2.4% vs 0.4%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We present the first large comparison of etomidate and methohexital as anesthetics for ECT and their associations with real-world outcomes. Our study showed no significant difference on depression remission, emergency department visits, or hospitalizations 12-months posttreatment. Thus, clinicians should focus on other patient or treatment characteristics when deciding on anesthetics for ECT. Further investigation is needed to confirm our exploratory findings that etomidate use was correlated with a higher rate of patient discomfort adverse effects relative to methohexital.

Etomidate versus propofol for sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Propofol is increasingly being used for sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy; however, owing to its side effects, an alternative drug is needed. We aimed to compare the safety, satisfaction, and efficacy outcomes of etomidate versus propofol in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy, including advanced endoscopic procedures. METHODS: We systematically searched Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL (via EBSCO), China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Web of Science (1946-April 2020) databases for randomized controlled trials of gastrointestinal endoscopy (upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, colonoscopy, and advanced endoscopy) using etomidate or propofol as sedatives. We pooled odds ratios (ORs) for the safety profile and patient and anesthesiologist satisfaction using mixed-effects conditional logistic models and standardized mean differences for efficiency outcomes using random-effects models. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies involving 3875 patients were included. Compared with propofol, etomidate resulted in significantly reduced apnea (OR: 0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.13-0.37; P < .001), hypoxemia (OR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.35-0.54; P < .001), hypotension (OR: 0.20; 95% CI: 0.11-0.36; P < .001), and bradycardia (OR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.30-0.91; P = .02) but led to increased myoclonus (OR: 8.54; 95% CI: 5.20-14.01; P < .001) and lowered anesthesiologist satisfaction (OR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.39-0.91; P = .02). CONCLUSION: Etomidate may be a good alternative to propofol for gastrointestinal endoscopy, especially advanced endoscopy. Etomidate appears to be safe as an inducer for hemodynamically unstable patients or older adult patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Comparison of Remimazolam Tosilate and Etomidate on Hemodynamics in Cardiac Surgery: A Randomised Controlled Trial.

Background: Remimazolam tosilate (RT) is a new ultrashort-acting γ-aminobutyric acid subtype A (GABAA) agonist, with the characteristics of rapid onset and offset, minimal cardiorespiratory depression. Currently, few studies have compared the effect of RT and etomidate on hemodynamics during anesthesia induction. Here, we aimed to compare the hemodynamic effects of different doses of RT and etomidate for anesthesia induction in patients undergoing cardiac surgeries. Methods: Patients were recruited from January to September 2022 in this single-center, prospective, randomized, double-blind trial. A total of 117 patients undergoing selective valve replacement surgery were randomly divided into low-dose RT (0.2 mg/kg) group (group LR), high-dose RT (0.3 mg/kg) group (group HR), or etomidate (1.5 mg/kg) group (group E), respectively. The primary outcome was hemodynamic fluctuations (mean arterial pressure fluctuation value [∆MAP]; heart rate fluctuation value [∆HR]) during anesthesia induction. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of adverse drug reactions (injection pain and myoclonus) and adverse cardiovascular events, vital signs at different time points and the cumulative doses of vasoactive drugs. Results: The hemodynamic fluctuations (∆MAP) in group LR and group E were significantly lower than that in group HR. In addition, the incidence of hypotension and the cumulative norepinephrine doses in group E and group LR were also significantly lower than that in group HR. Furthermore, the incidence of injection pain and myoclonus in group LR and group HR were less frequently recorded compared with group E. There were no significant differences in terms of ∆HR, tachycardia, hypertension, severe bradycardia, vital signs at different time points, lactic acid and blood glucose between both groups. Conclusion: Compared with etomidate, low-dose RT (0.2mg/kg) can not only provide stable hemodynamic parameters but also cause fewer adverse reactions when used for anesthesia induction in patients with cardiac disease.

Application of low-dose etomidate combined with oxycodone and midazolam in endoscopic injection sclerotherapy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the adverse effects and particularly the anesthetic effect of low-dose etomidate combined with oxycodone and midazolam in endoscopic injection sclerotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We herein report a prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial. It included patients with liver cirrhosis (age, 18 - 65 years; BMI, 18 - 25 kg/m2) who were treated with endoscopic injection sclerotherapy, and the patients were randomly assigned to the propofol group or the etomidate group. The incidence of respiratory depression was the primary outcome measure. The occurrence of various adverse effects and endoscopist satisfaction score were the secondary outcome measures. RESULTS: In this study, we enrolled a total of 96 patients. The incidence of respiratory depression in the propofol group was 19%, while that in the etomidate group was only 4% (9/47 vs. 2/49; p = 0.026). Regarding the secondary outcome measures, the incidence of hypoxia in the propofol group was 15%, while that in the etomidate group was only 2% (7/47 vs. 1/49; p = 0.029). Injection-site pain occurred in 0% and 23% of the patients in the etomidate group and propofol group, respectively (p < 0.001). Endoscopist satisfaction scores were classified as "poor", "fair", "good", and "very good". The scores were 17% higher (46/49 vs. 36/47; p = 0.026) for the "very good" level and 15% lower (3/49 vs. 10/47; p = 0.038) for the "good" level in the etomidate group than in the propofol group. CONCLUSION: Low-dose etomidate combined with oxycodone and midazolam for endoscopic injection sclerotherapy could reduce the incidence of hypoxia without increasing the incidence of complications.