Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Email
 |
Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid | |
Excerpt
Materials and Methods: 40 patients (ASA I-II) with acceptance of faculty ethic committee were divided into two random groups as group E (n: 30) esmolol and group P (n: 10) plasebo.100 mg/10cc/2 min esmolol for group E and 10 cc 0.9% NaCl/2 min for group P were applied. Anesthesia induction was achieved for both groups with 5-7 mg tiopental Na, 0.1 mg/kg vecuronyum bromür. ECG 50/s speed with 12 derivations was performed for all patients before drug application, 30th minute of induction and 5th minute of intubation. Heart rate, systolic-diastolic and mean blood pressure values were recorded in 1st, 3rd minutes of induction, 1st, 3rd, 5th minutes of intubation. P wave period was measured for all derivations of ECG. The difference between maximum and minimum P wave period was defined as PWD. Measurements were evaluated by a cardiologist and statistical analysis was made with t-test.
Result: There was not istatistical meaningful difference between the groups according to demographic and hemodynamic data. PWD period for group E before induction 35 ± 13 msn, 3rd min of induction 33 ± 11 msn; 5th min of intubation 29 ± 10 msn; for group P 31 ± 11 msn 3rd min of induction 36 ± 11 msn; 5th min of intubation 40 ± 6 msn. PWD values for group E in 5th min of intubation was statistically shorter compared with group P (p < 0.03).
Discussion: Compared with the control group, hemodynamic response was not different in the esmolol group. Although more evaluations are necessary for a definite decision, we believed thet esmolol can be used to prevent atrial arythmias.
