Comparison of Hemodynamic Effect of Propofol and Ketofol during Induction of Anaesthesia in General Surgery Patients


  • Kashif Naeem Consultant anaesthetist, Indus Hospital Karachi
  • Muhammad Hamood Farooqi Senior registrar, Department of Anesthesia, Baqai medical University hospital
  • Aimen Zafar Senior registrar, Department of Anesthesia, Baqai medical University
  • Shahzad Asfandyar Haider Assistant Professor of Pharmacology, Muhmmad Medical and Dental College Mirpur Khas
  • Hira Saeed Khan Assistant Professor of Physiology, Muhmmad Medical and Dental College Mirpur Khas
  • Qamar Zaman Phull Assistant Professor of Pharmacology, Bilawal Medical College for Boys LUMHS Jamshoro



Ketamine, Propofol, Ketofol, Homodynamic effect


Objective: To determine the comparison of homodynamic effect of propofol and ketofol during
induction in general surgery patients.
Study design: Randomized control trial
Setting: Department of Anesthesia, Surgical ICU and Pain management, Civil Hospital Karachi.
Duration: Seven months from June 2019 to January 2020.
Methods: Patients scheduled for elective general surgery procedures, aged 20 to 60 years, both
male and female patients were included. Patients were randomly allocated into two groups.
Group A received a combination of ketofol while Group B received propofol as the induction
agent. After recording of the base line values of mean arterial pressure patient was induced using
propofol or ketofol. Mean arterial pressure readings were noted at 30 seconds after drug
injection, as well as at 1 minute, 5 minutes, and 10 minutes after intubation, to capture the
immediate hemodynamic effects of the drugs and to observe any potential changes over time
following intubation.
Results: The average age of the patients was 37.38±13.78 years. Out of 64 patients, 30(46.9%)
were male and 34(53.1%) were female. Homodynamic effect was significantly high in those
patients who received ketofol than those who received propofol (100% vs. 59.4% p=0.0005).
The findings observed also with significant differences in hemodynamic effects between the two
groups, even after controlling for age, gender, and ASA classification (p-<0.05).
Conclusion: Combination of Ketofol with ketofol was observed to be the better
hemodynamically as compared to Propofol. Additionally, the use of ketofol reduces the cost of
induction and decreasing the economic burden on the patient.






Original Articles