The PDF file you selected should load here if your Web browser has a PDF reader plug-in installed (for example, a recent version of Adobe Acrobat Reader).

If you would like more information about how to print, save, and work with PDFs, Highwire Press provides a helpful Frequently Asked Questions about PDFs.

Alternatively, you can download the PDF file directly to your computer, from where it can be opened using a PDF reader. To download the PDF, click the Download link above.

Fullscreen Fullscreen Off

Aims: To compare hemodynamic changes occurring due to Propofol and Etomidate during general anesthesia as induction agents at a Tertiary Care Centre. Materials and Methods: 68 Adult ASA1 and ASA 2 Patients undergoing elective surgeries under gender anaesthesia in the department of Anaesthesia, Medical college and tertiary health care Centre after considering and satisfying the inclusion and exclusion criteria were selected and divided in two equal groups. They were given Propofol (2mg/kg) and Etomidate (0.3mg/kg) and hemodynamics were compared. Results: Etomidate was having more stable hemodynamic conditions as compared to Propofol induced anaesthesia. There was significant reduction in heart rate and blood pressure leading to hypotension in propofol group while etomidate group had stable hemodynamics. Conclusion: This study concludes that etomidate is a better agent for induction than propofol in view of hemodynamic stability.


Induction Agents, Hemodynamic Changes, Propofol, Etomidate
Font Size