Prophylactic Ephedrine versus Phenylephrine Administration on Hemodynamic Parameters in Surgical Patients in the Prone Position: A Prospective Randomized Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59784/glosains.v7i2.704Keywords:
Ephedrine, Phenylephrine, Prone Position, HemodynamicsAbstract
Background: The changes in position of the patient from supine to prone during general anesthesia often led to hemodynamic disturbances, especially hypotension due to decreased venous return and vasodilation induced by anesthetics. Intraoperative hypotension can jeopardize perfusion of vital organs, and preventive strategies are warranted. Prophylactically, vasopressors like ephedrine and phenylephrine are administered to maintain hemodynamic stability; however, their mechanisms of action and clinical effects vary.
Objective: This study aims to compare the effectiveness of prophylactic ephedrine and phenylephrine on hemodynamic stability for surgical patients in the prone position at Dr. Zainoel Abidin Regional General Hospital, Banda Aceh.
Methods: This is a prospective randomized study of 38 patients who were divided into two groups receiving ephedrine or phenylephrine. The hemodynamic parameters assessed were the systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, MAP, and heart rate. Measurements were made prior to induction of anesthesia and at 5 and 10 minutes after patients were positioned in the prone position.
Results: There was no statistically significant difference in systolic and diastolic blood pressure between the two groups. Patients who received ephedrine showed a higher and more prolonged rise in MAP. Furthermore, ephedrine induced a significantly greater heart rate at 10 minutes versus phenylephrine.
Conclusion: In conclusion, ephedrine produced higher and longer-lasting MAP and HR increases via β-adrenergic stimulation; phenylephrine showed shorter, moderate hemodynamic effects with stable HR via α₁-mediated vasoconstriction.
References
Addissouky, T. A. (2025). Innovations in combined cardiac-liver transplantation: robotic-assisted surgery and advanced organ preservation techniques. The Cardiothoracic Surgeon, 33(1), 14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43057-025-00158-0
Chen, B., Pang, Q.-Y., An, R., & Liu, H.-L. (2021). A systematic review of risk factors for postinduction hypotension in surgical patients undergoing general anesthesia. European Review for Medical & Pharmacological Sciences, 25(22).
De La Hoz, M. A., Rangasamy, V., Bastos, A. B., Xu, X., Novack, V., Saugel, B., & Subramaniam, B. (2022). Intraoperative hypotension and acute kidney injury, stroke, and mortality during and outside cardiopulmonary bypass: a retrospective observational cohort study. Anesthesiology, 136(6), 927–939. https://doi.org/10.1097/ALN.0000000000004175
Edgcombe, H., Carter, K., & Yarrow, S. (2008). Anaesthesia in the prone position. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 100(2), 165–183.
Finsterwald, M., Muster, M., Farshad, M., Saporito, A., Brada, M., & Aguirre, J. A. (2018). Spinal versus general anesthesia for lumbar spine surgery in high risk patients: perioperative hemodynamic stability, complications and costs. Journal of Clinical Anesthesia, 46, 3–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinane.2018.01.004
Fuchita, M., Pattee, J., Russell, D. W., Driver, B. E., Prekker, M. E., Barnes, C. R., Brewer, J. M., Doerschug, K. C., Gaillard, J. P., & Gandotra, S. (2023). Prophylactic administration of vasopressors prior to emergency intubation in critically ill patients: a secondary analysis of two multicenter clinical trials. Critical Care Explorations, 5(7), e0946. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCE.0000000000000946
Hassabelnaby, Y. S., Hasanin, A. M., Shamardal, M., Mostafa, M., Zaki, R. M., Elsherbiny, M., & Refaat, S. (2024). Epinephrine vs. phenylephrine infusion for prophylaxis against maternal hypotension after spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Anesthesia, 38(4), 500–507. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00540-024-03344-2
Heesen, M., Rijs, K., Hilber, N., Kee, W. D. N., Rossaint, R., van der Marel, C., & Klimek, M. (2019). Ephedrine versus phenylephrine as a vasopressor for spinal anaesthesia-induced hypotension in parturients undergoing high-risk caesarean section: meta-analysis, meta-regression and trial sequential analysis. International Journal of Obstetric Anesthesia, 37, 16–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijoa.2018.10.006
Jin, D., Liu, H., Kong, X., Wei, G., Peng, K., Cheng, H., & Ji, F. (2022). Effects of driving pressure-guided ventilation on postoperative pulmonary complications in prone-positioned patients undergoing spinal surgery: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Journal of InvestIgatIve Surgery, 35(10), 1754–1760. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941939.2022.2107250
Kee, W. D. N., Lee, A., Khaw, K. S., Ng, F. F., Karmakar, M. K., & Gin, T. (2008). A randomized double-blinded comparison of phenylephrine and ephedrine infusion combinations to maintain blood pressure during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery: the effects on fetal acid-base status and hemodynamic control. Anesthesia & Analgesia, 107(4), 1295–1302. https://doi.org/10.1213/ane.0b013e31818065bc
Meng, L., Cannesson, M., Alexander, B. S., Yu, Z., Kain, Z. N., Cerussi, A. E., Tromberg, B. J., & Mantulin, W. W. (2011). Effect of phenylephrine and ephedrine bolus treatment on cerebral oxygenation in anaesthetized patients. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 107(2), 209–217. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aer150
Park, H.-S., & Choi, W.-J. (2024). Use of vasopressors to manage spinal anesthesia-induced hypotension during cesarean delivery. Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, 19(2), 85–93. https://doi.org/10.17085/apm.24037
Santarpino, G., Bonifazi, R., Albanese, M., Nicoletti, A., Fiore, F., Nasso, G., & Speziale, G. (2022). Prone positioning in postoperative cardiac surgery patients: a narrative review. Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia, 36(8), 2636–2642. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jvca.2021.07.045
Sessler, D. I., Meyhoff, C. S., Zimmerman, N. M., Mao, G., Leslie, K., Vásquez, S. M., Balaji, P., Alvarez-Garcia, J., Cavalcanti, A. B., & Parlow, J. L. (2018). Period-dependent associations between hypotension during and for four days after noncardiac surgery and a composite of myocardial infarction and death. Anesthesiology, 128(2), 317–327. https://doi.org/10.1097/ALN.0000000000001985
Shakir, H. M., Abdulrazaq, A., & Fadhl, R. (2026). Comparison between Effects of Ephedrine and Phenylephrine on Hemodynamic Parameters of Patients going under Spinal Anesthesia. Perinatal Journal, 34(1), 355–362.
Smajic, S., Konieczny, M., Kabir, K., Scrofani, R., Migliorini, F., & Dracic, A. (2025). Influence of prone, supine, and lateral positions during spine surgery on vascular, abdominal, and postural anatomy: a comprehensive review and Bayesian meta-analysis. European Journal of Medical Research, 30(1), 932. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40001-025-03239-2
Tamunobelema, D.-M. S., & Uruaka, C. I. (2023). General anaesthetic agents and their implication on the cardiovascular system: a systematic review. Saudi J Med Pharm Sci, 9(3), 171–184. https://doi.org/10.36348/sjmps.2023.v09i03.00
Uemura, Y., Kinoshita, M., Sakai, Y., & Tanaka, K. (2023). Hemodynamic impact of ephedrine on hypotension during general anesthesia: a prospective cohort study on middle-aged and older patients. BMC Anesthesiology, 23(1), 283. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-023-02244-4
Wesselink, E. M., Kappen, T. H., Torn, H. M., Slooter, A. J. C., & Van Klei, W. A. (2018). Intraoperative hypotension and the risk of postoperative adverse outcomes: a systematic review. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 121(4), 706–721. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2018.04.036
Zahid, A., Al-Faruque, A., Rahman, S., & Sultana, S. (2024). Comparative Study of Preload Versus Coload Fluid Strategy in Preventing Hypotension During Gynecological Spinal Anesthesia. Naogaon Medical College Journal, 1(1), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.70818/nmcj.v01i01.04
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Reza Irawan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC-BY-SA). that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
