Electrocardiographic Effects of Propofol versus Etomidate in Patients with Brugada Syndrome.
Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Anesthesia, General
/ adverse effects
Anesthetics, Intravenous
/ adverse effects
Brugada Syndrome
/ physiopathology
Double-Blind Method
Electrocardiography
/ drug effects
Etomidate
/ adverse effects
Female
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Propofol
/ adverse effects
Prospective Studies
Young Adult
Journal
Anesthesiology
ISSN: 1528-1175
Titre abrégé: Anesthesiology
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 1300217
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 2020
03 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
20
11
2019
medline:
23
6
2020
entrez:
20
11
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Brugada Syndrome is an inherited arrhythmogenic disease, characterized by the typical coved type ST-segment elevation in the right precordial leads from V1 through V3. The BrugadaDrugs.org Advisory Board recommends avoiding administration of propofol in patients with Brugada Syndrome. Since prospective studies are lacking, it was the purpose of this study to assess the electrocardiographic effects of propofol and etomidate on the ST- and QRS-segments. In this trial, it was hypothesized that administration of propofol or etomidate in bolus for induction of anesthesia, in patients with Brugada Syndrome, do not clinically affect the ST- and QRS-segments and do not induce arrhythmias. In this prospective, double-blinded trial, 98 patients with established Brugada syndrome were randomized to receive propofol (2 to 3 mg/kg) or etomidate (0.2 to 0.3 mg/kg) for induction of anesthesia. The primary endpoints were the changes of the ST- and QRS-segment, and the occurrence of new arrhythmias upon induction of anesthesia. The analysis included 80 patients: 43 were administered propofol and 37 etomidate. None of the patients had a ST elevation greater than or equal to 0.2 mV, one in each group had a ST elevation of 0.15 mV. An ST depression up to -0.15mV was observed eleven times with propofol and five with etomidate. A QRS-prolongation of 25% upon induction was seen in one patient with propofol and three with etomidate. This trial failed to establish any evidence to suggest that changes in either group differed, with most percentiles being zero (median [25th, 75th], 0 [0, 0] vs. 0 [0, 0]). Finally, no new arrhythmias occurred perioperatively in both groups. In this trial, there does not appear to be a significant difference in electrocardiographic changes in patients with Brugada syndrome when propofol versus etomidate were administered for induction of anesthesia. This study did not investigate electrocardiographic changes related to propofol used as an infusion for maintenance of anesthesia, so future studies would be warranted before conclusions about safety of propofol infusions in patients with Brugada syndrome can be determined.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Brugada Syndrome is an inherited arrhythmogenic disease, characterized by the typical coved type ST-segment elevation in the right precordial leads from V1 through V3. The BrugadaDrugs.org Advisory Board recommends avoiding administration of propofol in patients with Brugada Syndrome. Since prospective studies are lacking, it was the purpose of this study to assess the electrocardiographic effects of propofol and etomidate on the ST- and QRS-segments. In this trial, it was hypothesized that administration of propofol or etomidate in bolus for induction of anesthesia, in patients with Brugada Syndrome, do not clinically affect the ST- and QRS-segments and do not induce arrhythmias.
METHODS
In this prospective, double-blinded trial, 98 patients with established Brugada syndrome were randomized to receive propofol (2 to 3 mg/kg) or etomidate (0.2 to 0.3 mg/kg) for induction of anesthesia. The primary endpoints were the changes of the ST- and QRS-segment, and the occurrence of new arrhythmias upon induction of anesthesia.
RESULTS
The analysis included 80 patients: 43 were administered propofol and 37 etomidate. None of the patients had a ST elevation greater than or equal to 0.2 mV, one in each group had a ST elevation of 0.15 mV. An ST depression up to -0.15mV was observed eleven times with propofol and five with etomidate. A QRS-prolongation of 25% upon induction was seen in one patient with propofol and three with etomidate. This trial failed to establish any evidence to suggest that changes in either group differed, with most percentiles being zero (median [25th, 75th], 0 [0, 0] vs. 0 [0, 0]). Finally, no new arrhythmias occurred perioperatively in both groups.
CONCLUSIONS
In this trial, there does not appear to be a significant difference in electrocardiographic changes in patients with Brugada syndrome when propofol versus etomidate were administered for induction of anesthesia. This study did not investigate electrocardiographic changes related to propofol used as an infusion for maintenance of anesthesia, so future studies would be warranted before conclusions about safety of propofol infusions in patients with Brugada syndrome can be determined.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31743136
doi: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000003030
doi:
Substances chimiques
Anesthetics, Intravenous
0
Propofol
YI7VU623SF
Etomidate
Z22628B598
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
440-451Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn