Comparative Analysis of Hemodynamic Responses to Propofol and Etofol during Elective Surgery Induction

Background: The selection of an ideal induction agent for general anaesthesia is pivotal in ensuring intraoperative hemodynamic stability. While propofol is widely preferred for its rapid onset and smooth recovery, it is often associated with hypotension. Etofol, a novel combination of etomidate and propofol, is being explored for its ability to preserve cardiovascular function during induction. Aim: To evaluate and compare the hemodynamic effects of propofol and etofol as induction agents in elective surgeries under general anaesthesia. Materials and Methods: A prospective, randomized, double-blinded study was conducted on 80 adult patients undergoing elective surgeries. Patients were divided into two groups: Group I (n=40) received propofol 2 mg/kg and Group II (n=40) received etofol (etomidate 0.15 mg/kg + propofol 1 mg/kg) Hemodynamic parameters— heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and mean arterial pressure (MAP)—were recorded at baseline, during induction, and at intervals up to 60 minutes post-induction. Results: Baseline parameters were comparable between the two groups. Group II (etofol) exhibited significantly higher SBP, DBP, and MAP at all post-induction time points (p < 0.001), indicating better cardiovascular stability. Group I (propofol) showed marked hypotension following induction. HR was mostly comparable, though a significant difference was noted at 1 minute post-induction (p = 0.041). Conclusion: Etofol demonstrates superior hemodynamic stability compared to propofol during induction of general anaesthesia. It may serve as a safer and more effective alternative in patients where maintaining blood pressure is critical.