The Effect of Etomidate on Patient Outcomes After Single Bolus Doses

Rationale: Although the use of the drug etomidate for continuous sedation in mechanically ventilated patients was found to have detrimental effects on patient mortality shortly after its introduction into clinical practice, etomidate continues to be widely used as an induction agent for endotracheal intubation. Recent data have called into question the safety of using etomidate for even a single bolus in patients at risk of adrenal insufficiency, emphasizing the fact that single bolus doses of etomidate cause measurable adrenal suppression, and consequently may cause an increase in vasopressor requirements and hospital length of stay. Alternative FDA-approved induction agents, such as midazolam, are claimed by many authors to be safer than etomidate; however, no studies have formally compared these agents.

Research Hypothesis: The investigators hypothesize that in critically ill adult patients presenting to the emergency department with sepsis and requiring rapid sequence intubation, the hospital length of stay of patients given etomidate will be increased compared to patients given midazolam for induction.

Specific Aims: The specific aim is to determine the difference in hospital length of stay between septic patients given etomidate and those given midazolam for induction during rapid sequence intubation in the emergency department. The investigators plan to compare the two groups in terms of length of hospital stay, length of ICU stay, and duration of intubation by performing a prospective, randomized, trial of critically ill patients presenting to the emergency department with sepsis requiring intubation. The investigators will also compare the mortality rates in these two groups while controlling for severity of illness and the use of steroids while hospitalized. Significance: If the use of etomidate to induce anesthesia prior to intubation is found to adversely affect the length of stay of septic patients, a reduction in the length of stay in such patients might be achieved by using alternative agents for induction. The current widespread use of an induction agent that may adversely affect the length of stay of septic patients has significant implications for patient management.

Inclusion criteria

• All critically ill adult patients who present to the emergency department in need of ventilatory support and having a traumatic or suspected infectious etiology for their illness. Specifically, all patients meeting criteria for severe sepsis, septic shock, or the sepsis syndrome by fulfillment of two of the four criteria for the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (temperature greater than 38.3°C or less than 36°C, heart rate greater than 90, respiratory rate greater than 20 or PaCO2 less than 32, white blood cell count greater than 12,000 or less than 4000 or greater than 10% bands).
• All patients presenting in respiratory distress from a presumed pulmonary source of infection and requiring ventilatory support.
• All patients presenting after any traumatic injury and requiring ventilatory support.

Exclusion criteria

• An age less than 18
• Pregnancy
• Do-not-resuscitate status