Skip to content

The effect of propofol versus etomidate on blood pressure stability in cardiac patients.

Propofol vs. Etomidate: Is Etomidate Haemodynamically Superior for Induction of Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery: a randomised, controlled trial

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Source
ANZCTR
Registry ID
ACTRN12614000717651
Acronym
PET 1
Enrollment
152
Registered
2014-07-07
Start date
2014-09-18
Completion date
2015-07-16
Last updated
2020-01-13

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

None listed

Brief summary

Anaesthesia is largely standardised for cardiac patients undergoing surgery in the Green Lane Cardiac Unit at Auckland City Hospital. Anaesthesia is normally induced with either etomidate or propofol with relatively standardised use of co-induction agents such as midazolam and fentanyl. Currently there are approximately equal numbers of patients receiving propofol and etomidate. Etomidate is thought to be more stable for blood pressure than propofol in some patients. However, we do not know whether this is true. We wish to determine whether etomidate or propofol is the better drug to give for anaesthesia in cardiac patients, in terms of haemodynamic stability.

Interventions

Cardiac patients at our centre currently receive either iv propofol or intravenous (iv) etomidate for anaesthetic induction, depending on their anaesthetist's preference. We will randomise 152 study participants (stratified by attending anaesthetist) to receive either iv propofol (n=76) or iv etomidate (n=76) for anaesthetic induction. All operating room (OR) staff and postoperative care staff will be blinded to the randomisation. The study will be conducted in two phases. Phase 1: During phase

Cardiac patients at our centre currently receive either iv propofol or intravenous (iv) etomidate for anaesthetic induction, depending on their anaesthetist's preference. We will randomise 152 study participants (stratified by attending anaesthetist) to receive either iv propofol (n=76) or iv etomidate (n=76) for anaesthetic induction. All operating room (OR) staff and postoperative care staff will be blinded to the randomisation. The study will be conducted in two phases. Phase 1: During phase 1, the anaesthetist will be aware of the study drug allocation (38 propofol, 38 etomidate, total n=76). Phase 2: During phase 2, the anaesthetist will also be blinded to the study drug allocation (38 propofol, 38 etomidate, total n=76). This study design will allow us to assess whether blinding the anaesthetist to the study drug in itself impacts our study outcome. All aspects of patient care, with the exception of the choice of induction drug, will be according to standard practice. Data will be collected directly from the patient notes, and extracted from the anaesthetic machine which automatically compiles physiological and dosing data during the anaesthetic.

Sponsors

The University of Auckland
Lead SponsorUniversity

Study design

Allocation
Randomised controlled trial
Intervention model
Parallel
Primary purpose
Treatment
Masking
Blinded (masking used) (Subject, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
All
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

1. Males and females, age 18 years and over 2. ASA physical status II to IV undergoing cardiac surgery at the study site 3. Written, informed consent

Exclusion criteria

1. Known contraindication to etomidate or propofol 2. Poor (English) language comprehension and lack of an appropriate interpreter 3. Undergoing transplant surgery 4. Pregnancy

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ANZCTR · Data processed: Mar 4, 2026