Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Effects of lidocaine and esmolol on hemodynamic response to tracheal intubation: a randomized clinical trial.
Mendonça, Fabrício Tavares; Silva, Samuel Laurindo da; Nilton, Tiago Maurmann; Alves, Igor Reis Rodrigues.
Afiliação
  • Mendonça FT; Centro de Ensino e Treinamento em Anestesiologia (CET), Hospital de Base do Distrito Federal, Brasília, DF, Brazil; Título Superior em Anestesiologia (TSA), Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil; Universidade de Brasília, Mestrado em Ciências Médicas, Brasília, DF, Brazi
  • Silva SLD; Centro de Ensino e Treinamento em Anestesiologia (CET), Hospital de Base do Distrito Federal, Brasília, DF, Brazil.
  • Nilton TM; Centro de Ensino e Treinamento em Anestesiologia (CET), Hospital de Base do Distrito Federal, Brasília, DF, Brazil.
  • Alves IRR; Centro de Ensino e Treinamento em Anestesiologia (CET), Hospital de Base do Distrito Federal, Brasília, DF, Brazil.
Braz J Anesthesiol ; 72(1): 95-102, 2022.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34582903
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Although lidocaine is widely used to prevent cardiovascular changes resulting from laryngoscopy and orotracheal intubation, it is still unclear whether there are more efficacious drugs. This study aimed to compare the beta-blocker esmolol with lidocaine regarding the effects on hemodynamic response after orotracheal intubation. METHODS: The study has a prospective, randomized, double-blind, superiority design, and assessed 69 participants between 18 and 70 years of age, ASA I-II, scheduled for elective or emergency surgery under general anesthesia with orotracheal intubation. Participants were randomly allocated to receive 1.5 mg.kg-1 esmolol bolus followed by 0.1 mg.kg-1.min-1 esmolol infusion (n = 34) or 1.5 mg.kg-1 lidocaine bolus followed by 1.5 mg.kg-1.h-1 lidocaine infusion (n = 35). We recorded changes in heart rate, arterial blood pressure and incidence of adverse events. RESULTS: Post-intubation tachycardia episodes were significantly less frequent in the esmolol group (5.9% vs. 34.3%; Relative Risk (RR) 0.17; 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI) 0.04-0.71; Number Needed to Treat (NNT) 3.5; p = 0.015. After orotracheal intubation, mean heart rate was significantly lower in the esmolol group (74.5 vs. 84.5, p = 0.006). Similar results were observed in the subsequent 3 and 6 minutes (75.9 vs. 83.9, p = 0.023 and 74.6 vs. 83.0, p = 0.013, respectively). CONCLUSION: Esmolol was a safe and more effective intervention to reduce incidence of tachycardia and control heart rate immediately after tracheal intubation when compared to lidocaine.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave
Texto completo
Adicionar na Minha BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar no Google

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Propanolaminas / Lidocaína Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Braz J Anesthesiol Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article País de publicação: Brasil
Texto completo
Adicionar na Minha BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar no Google

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Propanolaminas / Lidocaína Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Braz J Anesthesiol Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article País de publicação: Brasil