SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Propofol”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 91 records · Page 5Linked to original sources

PubMed1999

[Comparative study of 3 techniques for total intravenous anesthesia: midazolam-ketamine, propofol-ketamine, and propofol-fentanyl].

OBJECTIVE: To compare the characteristics of induction, maintenance and awakening for three techniques of combined total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA): propofol-ketamine, midazolam-ketamine and propofol-fentanyl. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sixty patients were randomly assigned to three TIVA groups. Group 1 (n = 20) received midazolam, ketamine and vecuronium. Group 2 (n = 20) received propofol, ketamine and vecuronium. Group 3 (n = 20) received propofol, fentanyl and vecuronium. The variables compared were hemodynamic changes during induction and maintenance and upon awakening; time until awakening; and the incidence of postanesthetic complications. We also assessed whether propofol was better than midazolam at preventing the psychomimetic effects of ketamine. RESULTS: The demographic characteristics of the three groups were similar. Hemodynamic variables were most stable in group 2. Perfusion of midazolam-ketamine was accompanied by a significantly higher number of hypertensive peaks. Time to awakening was significantly shorter in Group I (11.8 +/- 5 min) than in group 2 (20.2 +/- 12.5 min); in group 2 time to awakening was 16.6 +/- 5.6 min. Eight patients in group 1, 5 in group 2 and 1 in group 3 reported having bad dreams, the difference between groups 1 and 3 reaching statistical significance. No patient experienced hallucinations and all reported satisfaction with the anesthetic technique used. CONCLUSIONS: TIVA with ketamine and propofol is comparable to the most commonly used combination of propofol and fentanyl and may be an appropriate choice when hemodynamic stability is of great importance; withdrawal 15 min before ending surgery prevents prolonged awakening. Perfusion of midazolam-ketamine is not recommendable for scheduled surgery because it induces too many hypertensive peaks. Although neither midazolam nor propofol completely prevents the psychomimetic effects of ketamine, such effects are not so severe that patients reject the anesthetic technique used.

Adolescent↗

PubMedDate not supplied

[Does propofol have advantages over midazolam and isoflurane? Comparative study of 2 total intravenous anesthesia techniques using midazolam and propofol, versus balanced anesthesia with isoflurane].

OBJECTIVES: To compare two techniques for total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA): midazolam-alfentanil-flumazenil and propofol-alfentanil, contrasting them with combined anesthesia (thiopental-isoflurane-alfentanil) and assessing the efficacy of flumazenil in continuous perfusion for preventing resedation in TIVA with midazolam. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The efficacy and clinical tolerance of the 3 anesthetic techniques with propofol, midazolam or isoflurane were studied in 63 patients undergoing elective breast, lumbar or gynecological surgery. Anesthetic induction was achieved with midazolam 0.3 mg/kg-1 (group M), propofol 2.5 mg/kg-1 (group P) or thiopental 3 mg/kg-1 (group I); all patients also received 50 micrograms/kg-1 alfentanil and vecuronium bromide 0.12 mg/kg-1/h-1. Maintenance was achieved with midazolam in perfusion at 0.12 mg/kg-1/h-1 (group M); propofol in perfusion at 7 mg/kg-1/h-1 and a pre-incision dose of 1.5 mg/kg-1 (group P); and isoflurane at 1.15% (group I). The 3 groups also received one pre-incision dose of alfentanil 25 micrograms/kg-1 and post-incision perfusion at 60 micrograms/kg-1/h-1. The infusion of alfentanil was changed by amounts of 20 micrograms/kg-1/h-1 in accordance with the patient's response to surgery. After surgery patients in group M received flumazenil 0.5 mg i.v. over 30 sec and a perfusion of flumazenil 0.5 mg over 60 min. Parameters indicating efficacy were: 1) total dose and timing of alfentanil; 2) number of instances of inadequate anesthesia; 3) peri-operative amnesia; 4) times of awakening and extubation after surgery, and 5) the number of patients in each group who required naloxone. Parameters indicating tolerance were: 1) hemodynamic variables; 2) the number of postoperative desaturations; 3) level of sedation, comprehension and motor coordination and orientation; 4) the "G/g detection" test and the memory recall test; 5) adverse side effects; 6) need for postoperative analgesia, and 7) evaluation of the anesthetic technique. RESULTS: The 3 techniques afforded effective control of hemodynamic response to intubation and surgical incision. Anesthetic maintenance was easy and safe with isoflurane and propofol. Higher doses of alfentanil, however, were needed with midazolam and we found a higher incidence of signs of superficial anesthesia. Reversion of midazolam with flumazenil 0.5 mg i.v. produced earlier awakening, although this was followed later by relapse into hypno-sedation that could not be prevented with a perfusion of flumazenil. Although recovery from anesthesia was slower with propofol than with isoflurane, we observed no differences in level of sedation, motor coordination and postoperative comprehension. Maintenance with isoflurane produced a higher incidence of adverse side effects such as tremors and nausea after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: None of the TIVA techniques proved superior in all the parameters studied during anesthetic maintenance when compared with balanced isoflurane-alfentanil, although the propofol-alfentanil combination was found to be superior to that of midazolam-alfentanil. After anesthesia, however, recovery was better with the association of propofol-alfentanil and adverse side effects were fewer. Flumazenil at the doses used was ineffective for preventing resedation due to midazolam.

Adolescent↗

PubMed1995

Propofol versus propofol with midazolam for laryngeal mask insertion.

We evaluated the addition of midazolam to propofol during induction of anaesthesia by assessing laryngeal mask tolerance, haemodynamic variables, recovery times and cost. Forty patients (ASA grades I-IV) undergoing elective surgery were allocated randomly to receive a standard dose of propofol or a smaller dose of propofol combined with midazolam. A laryngeal mask was inserted and any episodes of coughing or hiccuping during its insertion or removal were recorded. Anaesthesia was maintained with nitrous oxide and enflurane with fentanyl for analgesia. After surgery, recovery times, pain, shivering, nausea, vomiting and analgesic requirements were recorded. The cost of the drugs used was also calculated. No significant differences were detected in any variables, except that patients given propofol needed more morphine in the recovery ward. The average cost of propofol alone was 3.47 pounds per anaesthetic, while the midazolam plus propofol cost was 2.03 pounds. Adding midazolam to propofol allowed a reduced dose of propofol to be used without adverse effects, while reducing the anaesthetic costs.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2002

Propofol for electrical storm; a case report of cardioversion and suppression of ventricular tachycardia by propofol.

PURPOSE: To present a case report where propofol abolished recurrent ventricular tachycardia (VT) and to suggest a mechanism by which this may have occurred. CLINICAL FEATURES: A 65-yr-old male was admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with electrical storm. Recurrent episodes of VT persisted despite maximal anti-arrhythmic therapy and resulted in a prolonged ICU course and the need for intra-aortic balloon pump support. This was complicated by an ischemic limb, necessitating an anesthetic for femoral thrombectomy. On several occasions while in the ICU, episodes of VT had resolved with boluses of propofol prior to planned cardioversion. In the operating room, episodes of non-sustained VT resolved after a bolus of propofol and remained suppressed for the duration of the case with the use of a propofol infusion. CONCLUSION: The effects of propofol on cardiac conduction and on the autonomic nervous system have been studied but its effects on arrhythmias are not well documented. In this case report, propofol was associated with the resolution and suppression of VT. Recent evidence suggests that sympathetic blockade may be an effective treatment for electrical storm. This may be the mechanism by which propofol can abolish this arrhythmia intraoperatively.

Aged↗

PubMed2002

Remifentanil-clonidine-propofol versus sufentanil-propofol anesthesia for coronary artery bypass surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To compare a remifentanil-clonidine-propofol regimen with conventional sufentanil-propofol anesthesia. DESIGN: Randomized, nonblinded trial. SETTING: A single university hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Male patients scheduled for coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. INTERVENTIONS: In the control group, anesthesia was induced with 0.5 microg/kg of sufentanil and 0.2 to 0.3 mg/kg of etomidate after preoxygenation. Propofol (50 to 100 microg/kg/min) and sufentanil (0.5 to 1.0 microg/kg/h) were started after endotracheal intubation. Sufentanil was stopped after aortic decannulation. In the remifentanil-clonidine group, anesthesia was started with remifentanil (0.15 to 0.3 microg/kg/min), followed by etomidate (0.2 to 0.3 mg/kg). Propofol was started at 50 to 100 microg/kg/min, and after endotracheal intubation, clonidine infusion was started (6 to 20 microg/h). Patients received piritramide (0.15 mg/kg) and metamizole (20 mg/kg) for transitional analgesia. In both groups, propofol infusion was reduced to 30 to 60 microg/kg/min at skin closure and stopped when assisted spontaneous breathing led to adequate gas exchange. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The main outcomes were recovery times; somatic variables; plasma catecholamine levels; and self-recorded pain, nausea, and vomiting. Patients in the remifentanil-clonidine group were extubated earlier and had lower plasma epinephrine and norepinephrine levels. After transitional analgesia, the remifentanil-clonidine patients had similar postoperative analgesic use and self-reported pain and side-effect scores. CONCLUSION: Compared with a sufentanil-propofol regimen, an anesthetic regimen for CABG surgery that combines remifentanil, clonidine, and propofol provides similar hemodynamics. The remifentanil-clonidine regimen reduces catecholamine levels and hastens recovery from anesthesia.

Adjuvants, Anesthesia↗

PubMed1996

Growth of microorganisms in propofol, thiopental, and a 1:1 mixture of propofol and thiopental.

To assess and compare the growth of four microorganisms in solutions of intravenous anesthetics, known quanta of Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Candida albicans were inoculated into propofol, thiopental, a 1:1 mixture of propofol and thiopental, and normal saline. All microorganisms were taken from standard stock cultures and incubated for 24 h (48 h for C. albicans). Growth of microorganism in each drug was compared by counting the number of colony forming units (CFUs) grown from a subculture of each inoculated anesthetic at 0, 3, 6, 12, and 24 h. The study shows that propofol strongly supports the growth of E. coli and C. albicans but is bacteriostatic toward S. aureus and weakly bactericidal toward P. aeruginosa. In contrast, both thiopental and the 1:1 mixture of propofol and thiopental behaved differently, exhibiting markedly bactericidal properties toward E. coli, S. aureus, and P. aeruginosa and a bacteriostatic effect on C. albicans. This finding supports recommendations that a strict aseptic technique should be used when handling propofol and that the contents of an ampoule should be used within 6 h of aspirating. The measured high pH of both thiopental and the 1:1 mixture of propofol and thiopental compared to propofol alone suggests pH to be a major factor in determining whether a given drug will support microbial growth.

Anesthetics, Intravenous↗

PubMed1997

The effects of midazolam on propofol-induced anesthesia: propofol dose requirements, mood profiles, and perioperative dreams.

UNLABELLED: This study examined the effects of midazolam on the doses of propofol required for the induction of hypnosis and the maintenance of propofol/nitrous oxide anesthesia. In addition, the effects of midazolam on the time to patient recovery, perioperative mood profiles, incidence of perioperative dreams, patient satisfaction scores, and requirement for postoperative analgesics were assessed. This investigation was a prospective, randomized, and double-blind study of female patients undergoing dilatation and curettage. Patients received midazolam (30 microg/kg, n = 30) or an equal volume of placebo (n = 30) immediately before the induction of anesthesia. Recall of dreams was assessed immediately postoperatively, in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU), and on the day after surgery using a questionnaire designed for surgical patients. Mood profiles were quantified using the Multiple Affect Adjective Check List-Revised, which was completed preoperatively and 1 h postoperatively. The Client Satisfaction Questionnaire-8, an eight-item self-administered version of the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire, was used to assess patient satisfaction on the day after surgery. Our results indicate that although the time to the loss of the lid reflex was significantly shorter in patients receiving midazolam (43.8 +/- 2.7 vs 74.7 +/- 7.6 s, P < 0.0003), there was no significant difference in the dose of propofol required to induce hypnosis or maintain anesthesia. There were no group differences in postoperative sedation and orientation scores, perioperative mood profiles, incidence of dreams, and patient satisfaction scores. More patients who received midazolam requested analgesics in the PACU (11 vs 4, P < 0.05). In conclusion, midazolam did not reduce the anesthetic dose requirement of propofol in patients undergoing anesthesia with nitrous oxide, nor did it accelerate patient recovery. Our results call into question the benefit of coinducing anesthesia with propofol and midazolam. IMPLICATIONS: Midazolam, administered immediately before anesthetic induction with propofol, did not decrease the dose of propofol necessary for hypnosis, nor the maintenance of surgical anesthesia, in female patients undergoing diagnostic dilatation and curettage. In addition, midazolam did not alter patient recovery characteristics, postoperative mood, incidence of perioperative dreams, or patient satisfaction. The use of midazolam was associated with an increased need for postoperative analgesics. Our study calls into question the benefit of administering midazolam immediately before anesthetic induction with propofol.

Affect↗

PubMed2004

The pharmacodynamic effects of a lower-lipid emulsion of propofol: a comparison with the standard propofol emulsion.

UNLABELLED: Using a randomized, double-blind protocol design, we compared a new lower-lipid emulsion of propofol (Ampofol) containing propofol 1%, soybean oil 5%, and egg lecithin 0.6% with the most commonly used formulation of propofol (Diprivan) with respect to onset of action and recovery profiles, as well as intraoperative efficacy, when administered for induction and maintenance of general anesthesia as part of a "balanced" anesthetic technique in 63 healthy outpatients. Anesthesia was induced with sufentanil 0.1 microg/kg (or fentanyl 1 microg/kg) and propofol 2 mg/kg IV and maintained with a variable-rate propofol infusion, 120-200 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1). Onset times to loss of the eyelash reflex and dropping a syringe were recorded. Severity of pain on injection, speed of induction, intraoperative hemodynamic variables, and electroencephalographic bispectral index values were assessed. Recovery times to opening eyes and orientation were noted. The results demonstrated that there were no significant differences between Ampofol and Diprivan with respect to onset times, speed of induction, anesthetic dose requirements, bispectral index values, hemodynamic variables, recovery variables, or patient satisfaction. However, the incidence of pain on injection was more frequent in the Ampofol group (26% versus 6%, P < 0.05). We conclude that Ampofol is equipotent to Diprivan with respect to its anesthetic properties but was associated with a more frequent incidence of mild pain on injection. IMPLICATIONS: The pharmacodynamic profile of a lower-lipid containing emulsion of propofol (Ampofol) was compared with Diprivan when administered for induction and maintenance of general anesthesia. This preliminary study demonstrated that the two formulations of propofol were equivalent with respect to their induction and maintenance properties. However, Ampofol was associated with a more frequent incidence of pain on injection.

Adult↗

PubMed2006

Evaluation of total intravenous anesthesia with propofol or ketamine-medetomidine-propofol combination in horses.

Objective-To compare the anesthetic and cardiorespiratory effects of total IV anesthesia with propofol (P-TIVA) or a ketamine-medetomidine-propofol combination (KMP-TIVA) in horses. Design-Randomized experimental trial. Animals-12 horses. Procedure-Horses received medetomidine (0.005 mg/kg [0.002 mg/lb], IV). Anesthesia was induced with midazolam (0.04 mg/kg [0.018 mg/lb], IV) and ketamine (2.5 mg/kg [1.14 mg/lb], IV). All horses received a loading dose of propofol (0.5 mg/kg [0.23 mg/lb], IV), and 6 horses underwent P-TIVA (propofol infusion). Six horses underwent KMP-TIVA (ketamine [1 mg/kg/h {0.45 mg/lb/h}] and medetomidine [0.00125 mg/kg/h {0.0006 mg/lb/h}] infusion; the rate of propofol infusion was adjusted to maintain anesthesia). Arterial blood pressure and heart rate were monitored. Qualities of anesthetic induction, transition to TIVA, and maintenance of and recovery from anesthesia were evaluated. Results-Administration of KMP IV provided satisfactory anesthesia in horses. Compared with the P-TIVA group, the propofol infusion rate was significantly less in horses undergoing KMP-TIVA (0.14 +/- 0.02 mg/kg/min [0.064 +/- 0.009 mg/lb/min] vs 0.22 +/- 0.03 mg/kg/min [0.1 +/- 0.014 mg/lb/min]). In the KMP-TIVA and P-TIVA groups, anesthesia time was 115 +/- 17 minutes and 112 +/- 11 minutes, respectively, and heart rate and arterial blood pressure were maintained within acceptable limits. There was no significant difference in time to standing after cessation of anesthesia between groups. Recovery from KMP-TIVA and P-TIVA was considered good and satisfactory, respectively. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance-In horses, KMP-TIVA and P-TIVA provided clinically useful anesthesia; the ketamine-medetomidine infusion provided a sparing effect on propofol requirement for maintaining anesthesia.

Anesthesia, Intravenous↗

PubMed2001

Post-operative nausea and vomiting in out-patient gynecologic laparoscopy: a comparison of thiopental-nitrous oxide, propofol-nitrous oxide and total intravenous anesthesia using propofol.

An intravenous anesthetic drug, propofol was considered to pose antiemetic action. A randomized controlled trial was conducted to evaluate whether propofol could effectively reduce post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) compared to thiopental-nitrous oxide (N2O). One-hundred and eight patients undergoing outpatient gynecologic laparoscopy were assigned to receive 3 techniques of anesthesia; thiopental-N2O (T/N), propofol-N2O (P/N) and total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) using propofol (P/P). The results showed that in the early period (0-5 hours), post-operative nausea in T/N, P/N and P/P groups was 72 per cent, 44 per cent and 31 per cent, respectively (P = 0.002), and post-operative vomiting was 58 per cent, 36 per cent and 11 per cent respectively (P = 0.00014). Patients in the P/N and P/P groups experienced nausea less frequently than the T/N group [relative risk (RR) = 0.62, (95% CI 0.41-0.93) and RR = 0.42 (0.25-0.72) respectively]. Patients in the P/N and P/P groups experienced vomiting less frequently than the T/N group [RR = 0.62 (0.37-1.04) and RR = 0.19 (0.07-0.5) respectively]. Two patients in the T/N group were admitted because of severe nausea and vomiting. In conclusion, TIVA using propofol and propofol-N2O anesthesia can significantly reduce the incidence of PONV in the early period. Concerning the economic crisis of the country as well as the quality of care, propofol-N2O would be the most appropriate anesthetic of choice.

Adult↗

PubMed2001

[Efficacy of simultaneous bolus injection of lidocaine with propofol on pain caused by propofol injection].

To investigate the effect of simultaneous bolus injection of 2% lidocaine 2 ml on preventing the pain on propofol injection, 80 patients were randomly assigned to one of four study groups; Group I received simultaneous bolus injection of 2% lidocaine 2 ml with infusion of propofol; Group II received bolus injection of saline 2 ml, 10 s before the start of infusion of propofol-lidocaine mixture; Groups III and IV received bolus injections of lidocaine and saline, separately 10 s before starting propofol infusion. Incidence of propofol-induced pain was significantly more frequent (P < 0.001) in Group IV (70%) than in the other groups (20% each). Number of patients who were satisfied with this anesthetic induction and requested for the same induction method in the next anesthesia was significantly larger in the groups receiving lidocaine (P < 0.05). Simultaneous bolus injection of lidocaine with propofol showed a similar clinical efficacy compared with both preadministration and premixing of lidocaine in preventing the propofol-induced pain.

Adult↗

PubMed1989

Hemodynamic and cardiodynamic effects of propofol and etomidate: negative inotropic properties of propofol.

The hemodynamic effects of an induction dose of propofol, 2.5 mg/kg, or etomidate, 0.3 mg/kg, were studied in eight dogs. In addition, cardiodynamic changes were measured using a left ventricular catheter and needle force probes. Propofol was associated with significant decreases in systolic (19.9%) and diastolic (25.3%) arterial pressures associated with a 17.3% decrease in cardiac output (CO) and a 11.6% reduction in systemic vascular resistance (SVR) without change in pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP). These changes were most pronounced 1 min after the injection of propofol. At 5 and 10 min after the administration of propofol, heart rate (HR) decreased significantly. Minimal changes in hemodynamics were observed with etomidate. Propofol lowered systolic left ventricular pressure (LVPsys) by 17.6%. Signals generated by the force probes in the left ventricular myocardium showed a significant reduction (16.3%) in left ventricular force (LVF) and a decrease in early systolic rates of increase in force (dF/dt max) by 23.5% associated with propofol. In the presence of an unchanged preload, an unchanged HR, and a decreased SVR, the reduction in CO suggests that propofol has a negative inotropic effect. This negative inotropic effect was confirmed by a reduction in LVF and dF/dt max.

Anesthetics↗

PubMed2003

A combination of alfentanil-lidocaine-propofol provides better intubating conditions than fentanyl-lidocaine-propofol in the absence of muscle relaxants.

PURPOSE: To compare the ease of tracheal intubation without the use of muscle relaxants following an alfentanil-lidocaine-propofol sequence vs a fentanyl-lidocaine-propofol sequence. CLINICAL FEATURES: In 80 ASA I and II adult patients undergoing elective laparoscopic surgery, we compared the intubating conditions following alfentanil 20 microg x kg(-1), lidocaine 1.5 mg x kg(-1), propofol 3 mg x kg(-1) (Group I; n = 40) vs fentanyl 2 microg x kg(-1), lidocaine 1.5 mg x kg(-1), propofol 3 mg x kg(-1) (Group II; n = 40). The intubating conditions were scored by jaw relaxation, vocal cord position and response to intubation, as well as by blood pressure and heart rate changes. The intubating conditions were good or excellent in 95% of patients in Group I vs 62.5% of patients in Group II (P < 0.05). Blood pressure decreased from a preinduction value of 86 +/- 13 mmHg to 72 +/- 28 mmHg and 74 +/- 19 mmHg in Group I, and from 85 +/- 12 mmHg to 78 +/- 15 mmHg and 78 +/- 12 mmHg in Group II, one and five minutes following intubation (P < 0.05). This drop in blood pressure was not different between the two groups. CONCLUSION: An alfentanil-lidocaine-propofol sequence offers significantly better intubating conditions than a fentanyl-lidocaine-propofol sequence in healthy adult patients.

Adult↗

PubMed2002

Co-administration of alfentanil-propofol improves laryngeal mask airway insertion compared to fentanyl-propofol.

PURPOSE: Insertion of the laryngeal mask airway (LMA) requires sufficient depth of anesthesia to relax the jaw and obtund airway reflexes. Recent studies suggest that the short-acting opioid alfentanil provides the best insertion conditions. We therefore compared the insertion conditions following co-administration of alfentanil-propofol with more commonly used fentanyl-propofol. METHODS: One hundred forty ASA I or II patients, age 18-81 yr, requiring minor surgery were recruited. They were randomized to receive either alfentanil (10 microg x kg(-1); n = 73) or fentanyl (1 microg x kg(-1); n = 67) with propofol (2.5 mg x kg(-1)) 90 sec prior to LMA (size 3 or 4) insertion. A six variable (mouth opening, ease of insertion, swallowing, coughing, movement and laryngospasm) three-point (nil / partial / total) score was used to assess insertion conditions. Duration of post-insertion apnea was recorded. Insertion conditions were compared using Chi-square for trends. RESULTS: The two groups were demographically similar. Mouth opening and ease of insertion were not improved with alfentanil co-administration. Alfentanil-propofol reduced the incidence of swallowing, gagging, movement and laryngospasm (P < 0.05), with 29% (alfentanil) compared to 45% (fentanyl) of patients responding (P = 0.05) to LMA insertion. Apnea [mean (SD)] following alfentanil lasted 154 (139) sec compared to 82 (61) sec following fentanyl (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Co-administration of alfentanil-propofol provided better insertion conditions than fentanyl-propofol, though apnea was prolonged by 72 sec.

Adolescent↗

PubMed1994

[No better vigilance after general anesthesia with propofol in colonic surgery. A comparison of three procedures for general anesthesia (propofol, halothane and midazolam/fentanyl) in combination with catheter epidural anesthesia].

Early mental and psychomotor recovery was studied in 67 patients undergoing colorectal surgery under continuous epidural anaesthesia and light general anaesthesia using propofol, halothane, and midazolam/fentanyl. The study was approved by the local ethics committee. All patients received epidural anaesthesia with 0.25% bupivacaine and were then randomly allocated to one of three groups. In group I (halothane), light general anaesthesia was induced with thiopental 3-5 mg/kg and maintained with halothane. The propofol group (II) received 2 mg/kg for induction and a mean continuous infusion of 1.7 mg/kg.h. In group III (Mi/Fe), midazolam and fentanyl were used for induction and maintenance. All patients were intubated, received non-depolarising muscle relaxants, and were manually ventilated with nitrous oxide-oxygen (2:1.2). For postoperative analgesia, 0.05 mg/kg morphine was administrated epidurally 30 min before the end of the operation; 30, 60, 90, and 120 min after arriving in the recovery room, vigilance was assessed using a modified Steward score, the Trieger test, the ability to recall a column of numbers (KAI test), and symbol counting (CI test). Heart rate, blood pressure, arterial oxygen saturation, and blood gases were recorded. RESULTS. The three groups were comparable with regard to age, sex, ASA classification, and duration of anaesthesia and operation (Table 3). There was no difference between the groups in performance of the recovery tests (Figs. 2-5), blood pressure, heart rate, arterial blood gas analysis (Fig. 6), or oxygen saturation. Comparing pre- and postoperative values, we found severe psychomotor and mental impairment in all groups. pCO2 was slightly elevated in all groups, but only 3 patients in the propofol group and 6 in the midazolam/fentanyl group developed hypercapnia above 50 mm Hg. Patients receiving propofol or midazolam/fentanyl had significantly less postoperative nausea and vomiting than those receiving halothane (Table 5). CONCLUSION. It is concluded that propofol offers no advantage over halothane or midazolam/fentanyl where early postoperative recovery is concerned. Intraoperatively, all three techniques provided good anaesthesia. Propofol and midazolam/fentanyl caused less postoperative nausea and vomiting than halothane anaesthesia.

Adult↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Propofol and propofol-ketamine in pediatric patients undergoing cardiac catheterization.

We investigated the effects of propofol and propofol-ketamine on hemodynamics, sedation level, and recovery period in pediatric patients undergoing cardiac catheterization. We performed a prospective, randomized, double-blind study. The study included 60 American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status II or III (age range, 1 month-13 years) undergoing cardiac catheterization for evaluation of congenital heart disease. Propofol and ketamine were prepared in 5% glucose solution to a final concentration of 5 and 1 mg/ml, respectively; similar injectors containing 5% glucose solution only were prepared. Fentanyl (1 microg/kg) and propofol (1.5 mg/kg) were given to both groups. Then, group 1 received 0.5 ml/kg of 5% glucose and group 2 0.5 ml/kg of ketamine solution by an anesthesiologist who was unaware of the groups of patients. Local anesthesia with 1% lidocaine was administered before intervention in all patients. The noninvasively measured mean arterial pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, and peripheral oxygen saturation were recorded at the baseline, following drug administration, at 3, 5, 10, 15, 20, and 30 minutes and then at 15-minute intervals until the end of the procedure. Additional drug and fentanyl requirements to maintain a sedation level of 4 or 5 were recorded. After the procedure, the time to a Steward recovery score of 6 and adverse effects in the first 24 hours were recorded. The number of patients with more than a 20% decrease in mean arterial pressure was 11 in group 1 and 3 in group 2 (p < 0.05). The number of patients who experienced more than a 20% decrease in heart rate was 12 in group 1 and 5 in group 2 (p = 0.054). Ten patients in group 1 and 3 patients in group 2 required additional fentanyl doses (p = 0.057). The number of additional propofol doses was lower in group 2 (p < 0.05). Propofol combined with low-dose ketamine preserves mean arterial pressure better without affecting the recovery and thus is a good option in pediatric patients undergoing cardiac catheterization.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2004

Correlation of Narcotrend Index, entropy measures, and spectral parameters with calculated propofol effect-site concentrations during induction of propofol-remifentanil anaesthesia.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the EEG parameter Narcotrend Index with the spectral and entropy-based EEG parameters median frequency, 95% spectral edge frequency, burst-compensated 95% spectral edge frequency, spectral entropy, amplitude entropy, and approximate entropy with regard to their ability to describe cerebral anaesthetic drug effects during induction of propofol-remifentanil anaesthesia. METHODS: Three induction schemes were studied with 10 patients each receiving 2 mg propofol/kg/60s (group 1), 4 mg/kg/120s (group 2), and 4 mg/kg/240s (group 3). The EEG was recorded with the EEG monitor Narcotrend. To analyse the relation between drug effect and EEG parameters, Spearman rank correlation of the different EEG parameters with the calculated propofol effect-site concentration was computed. RESULTS: In all groups Narcotrend Index showed the highest correlation with the propofol effect-site concentration and the lowest variability of individual correlation values. Furthermore, only the Narcotrend Index showed a monophasic behaviour over the entire time period analysed. In the group of entropy parameters approximate entropy yielded the best results. Among the spectral parameters the burst-compensated 95% spectral edge frequency had the highest correlation with the propofol effect-site concentration. It was markedly higher than for the standard spectral edge frequency. The correlations of median frequency and amplitude entropy with propofol effect-site concentration were the lowest. CONCLUSIONS. Changes in the propofol effect-site concentration during induction of anaesthesia were best described by the multivariate Narcotrend Index compared to conventional spectral EEG parameters and different entropy measures.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2002

Propofol-ketamine versus propofol-fentanyl for outpatient laparoscopy: comparison of postoperative nausea, emesis, analgesia, and recovery.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare postoperative nausea, emesis, analgesia, and recovery between propofol-ketamine and propofol-fentanyl in outpatient laparoscopic tubal ligations with general anesthesia. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, blinded study. SETTING: Tertiary-care women's hospital. PATIENTS: 120 ASA physical status I and II ambulatory patients scheduled for elective laparoscopic tubal ligation. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to two groups to receive either ketamine (1-1.5 mg/kg) or fentanyl (3-5 microg/kg). MEASUREMENTS: Measured variables included total dose of ketamine, fentanyl, propofol, and operating time. Vital signs, pain visual analog scale scores (VAS), nausea VAS, presence of emesis, treatment for nausea and vomiting, pruritus, sedation, and presence of dreaming were recorded on postanesthesia care unit (PACU) admission, PACU discharge, stepdown unit admission, and hospital discharge. Results are expressed as means +/- SD or medians and analyzed using t-test, Chi-square, or Mann-Whitney (p < 0.05). MAIN RESULTS: No differences were noted with respect to propofol dose, operating times, pain or nausea VAS scores, emesis, treatment for nausea and vomiting, pruritus, and sedation on PACU admission, PACU discharge, stepdown unit admission, and hospital discharge. The ketamine group had a higher heart rate, required more pain medication, and had a higher frequency of dreaming on PACU admission than the fentanyl group. These differences became insignificant on PACU discharge. CONCLUSIONS: For outpatient laparoscopic tubal ligations with general anesthesia, propofol-ketamine does not improve postoperative nausea, emesis, analgesia or recovery compared with the propofol-fentanyl combination.

Adult↗