Background: When urgently intubating patient in the burn intensive care unit (BICU), various induction agents, including propofol, are utilized that may induce hemodynamic instability. Methods: A retrospective review was performed of consecutive critically ill burn patients who underwent urgent endotracheal intubation in BICU. Basic burn-related demographic data, indication for intubation, and induction agents utilized were recorded. The primary outcomes of interest were clinically significant hypotension requiring immediate fluid resuscitation, initiation or escalation of vasopressors immediately after intubation. Secondary outcomes included ventilator days, stay length, and in-hospital mortality. Results: Between January 2003 and August 2010, we identified 279 urgent intubations in 204 patients. Of these, the criteria for presumed sepsis were met in 60% (n = 168) of the intubations. After intubation, 117 patients (42%) experienced clinically significant hypotension. Propofol (51%) was the most commonly utilized induction agent followed by etomidate (23%), ketamine (15%), and midazolam (11%). On multiple logistic regression, %TBSA (OR 1.016, 95% CI 1.004-1.027, p < 0.001) and presumed sepsis (OR 1.852, 95% CI 1.100-3.117, p = 0.02) were the only significant predictors of hypotension. None of the induction agents, including propofol, were significantly associated with hypotension in patients with or without presumed sepsis. Conclusions: In critically ill burn patients undergoing urgent endotracheal intubation, specific induction agents, including propofol, were not associated with clinically significant hypotension. Presumed sepsis and %TBSA were the most important risk factors.
- Critical care
- Respiratory failure
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Emergency Medicine
- Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine