Abstract

To investigate the safety and changes of hemodynamic profiles when using etomidate for general anesthesia in laparoscopic cholecystectomy compared to propofol was the objective of the study. Adult patients who received laparoscopic cholecystectomy were retrospectively categorized as etomidate and propofol group. Time to extubation, time to eye opening, pain scores at rest, postoperative nausea, vomiting and lengths of hospital stay were studied as safety outcomes. Changes in hemodynamic profiles are evaluated by coefficients of variation of systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, mean arterial pressure and heart rates were compared between groups. 291 patients were categorized as the etomidate group and 388 patients as the propofol group. There was no significant difference in age, sex, body mass index and hemodynamic profiles at baseline between the two groups (p all>0.05). Compared to propofol, the etomidate group showed similar safety outcomes (p all>0.05). Similar change patterns in the hemodynamic profiles over time were observed between the two groups, but the coefficients of variation of systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure and mean arterial pressure in the etomidate group were significantly lower than that in the propofol group (p<0.05). There was no difference in safety outcomes but a more stable hemodynamic profile when comparing intraoperative target-controlled infusion of etomidate to propofol used for general anesthesia in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.