Literature DB >> 16490090

Propofol anesthesia in spontaneously breathing children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging: comparison of two propofol emulsions.

Anton Gutmann1, Klaus Pessenbacher, Andrea Gschanes, Udo Eggenreich, Manfred Wargenau, Wolfgang Toller.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated a propofol-based anesthesia regimen with spontaneous breathing in pediatric patients scheduled for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).
METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, double-blind study propofol formulated with long-chain triglycerides (LCT) and mixed medium-chain/long-chain triglycerides (MCT/LCT) were used. Ninety patients aged 2.4 months to 7.3 years were premedicated with intravenous midazolam. Lidocaine was injected prior to propofol to reduce injection pain. Anesthesia was induced and maintained by propofol. Glycopyrronium bromide was administered for saliva reduction. Hemodynamics, blood oxygen saturation and endtidal capnography were continuously monitored. All patients received additional oxygen. The aggregated propofol dose for induction and maintenance of anesthesia was analyzed for therapeutic equivalence. Incidence of injection pain, laboratory safety values, vital signs, and the adverse event profile were analyzed to compare tolerability and safety.
RESULTS: Propofol anesthesia was safe and successful in all children. Both propofol formulations were equivalent regarding dose requirements (mean induction and maintenance doses for anesthesia 2.0-4.0 mg.kg(-1) and 6.0-8.8 mg.kg(-1).h(-1) respectively; aggregated doses 8-13.26 mg.kg(-1)). There were no differences in drug safety such as hemodynamics, spontaneous breathing, injection pain, and laboratory values. Duration of induction and of recovery from anesthesia were short and all examinations were completed with minimal interruption.
CONCLUSIONS: Propofol-based short-term anesthesia was well suited for anesthesia during MRI procedures in the studied pediatric patients. There were no clinically relevant differences between the two propofol formulations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16490090     DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-9592.2005.01777.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Paediatr Anaesth        ISSN: 1155-5645            Impact factor:   2.556


  3 in total

1.  Is procedural sedation with propofol acceptable for complex imaging? A comparison of short vs. prolonged sedations in children.

Authors:  Mark A Griffiths; Pradip P Kamat; Courtney E McCracken; Harold K Simon
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2013-05-07

Review 2.  Clinical efficacy of dexmedetomidine versus propofol in children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Hongwei Fang; Liu Yang; Xiangrui Wang; Hao Zhu
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-08-15

3.  A Simulation Study of Propofol Effect-Site Concentration for Appropriate Sedation in Pediatric Patients Undergoing Brain MRI: Pharmacodynamic Analysis.

Authors:  Se Hee Na; Young Song; So Yeon Kim; Hyo Jin Byon; Hwan Ho Jung; Dong Woo Han
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 2.759

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.