ArticleJournal of cardiovascular and thoracic research2015
Haemodynamic Responses to Tracheal Intubation Using Propofol, Etomidate and Etomidate-Propofol Combination in Anaesthesia Induction.
Article in Journal of cardiovascular and thoracic research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advances in the Clinical Application of MAC: A Review of Drug Selection, Combination Therapy, and Administration Methods.Drug design, development and therapy · 2025Review
- Sevoflurane may be more beneficial than propofol in patients receiving endoscopic variceal ligation and endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy: A randomized, double-blind study.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2017Article
- Is Two Better Than One? Anticipation of a Favorable Hemodynamic Profile by Combining the Hypnotic Drugs for Induction of Anesthesia.Journal of cardiovascular and thoracic research · 2015Article
- Comparison of the Sedative, Hemodynamic, and Anesthetic Effect of Dexmedetomidine, Ketamine, and Etomidate on Cataract Surgery by Phacoemulsification Method: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Journal of current ophthalmologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe aim of this study was to measure the haemodynamic responses to a etomidate-propofol combination used for anaesthesia induction and to compare the haemodynamic responses with the separate use of each drug.
methodsThe patients were randomly divided into three groups as group P (n = 30, propofol 2.5 mg kg(-1)), group E (n = 30, etomidate 0.3 mg kg(-1)) and group PE (n = 30, propofol 1.25 mg kg(-1) + etomidate 0.15 mg kg(-1)). For each patient, the times of measurement of the heart rate (HR) and mean arterial pressure values were defined as baseline, after the induction, before the intubation, immediately after the intubation and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 10 minutes after the intubation.
resultsIn all 3 groups, a significant decrease in MAP values were seen at T2 and T3 compared to the baseline values, and this decrease was greater in group P compared to that in group E and PE (P < 0.001, P < 0.01). A significant increase was seen in all 3 groups in the mean arterial pressure (MAP) value at T4 after the intubation. When the groups were compared with each other, this increase was greater in group E than in the other two groups (with group P, P < 0.001; with group PE, P < 0.01).
conclusionEtomidate-propofol combination may be a valuable alternative when extremes of hypotensive and hypertensive responses due to propofol and etomidate are best to be avoided.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.