Literature DB >> 19115644

Comparison between sevoflurane/remifentanil and propofol/remifentanil anaesthesia in providing conditions for somatosensory evoked potential monitoring during scoliosis corrective surgery.

N Y Fung1, Y Hu, M G Irwin, B E M Chow, M Y Yuen.   

Abstract

Somatosensory evoked potential (SSEP) monitoring is an important tool in spinal corrective surgery. Anaesthesia has a significant influence on SSEP monitoring and a technique which has the least and shortest suppressant effect on SSEP while facilitating a fast recovery from anaesthesia is ideal. We compared the effect of sevoflurane/ remifentanil and propofol/remifentanil anaesthesia on SSEPs during scoliosis corrective surgery and assessed patients' clinical recovery profiles. Twenty patients with idiopathic scoliosis receiving surgical correction with intraoperative SSEP monitoring were prospectively randomised to receive sevoflurane/remifentanil anaesthesia or propofol/remifentanil anaesthesia. During surgery, changes in anaesthesia dose and physiological variables were recorded, while SSEP was continuously monitored. A simulated 'wake-up' test was performed postoperatively to assess speed and quality of recovery from anaesthesia. The effects of propofol and sevoflurane resulted in SSEP amplitude variability between 18.0% +/- 3.5% to 28.7% +/- 5.9% and SSEP latency variability within 1.3% +/- 0.4% to 2.6% +/- 1.2%. Patients receiving sevoflurane had faster suppression and faster recovery of SSEP amplitude compared to propofol (P < 0.05), although propofol anaesthesia showed less within-patient variability in Cz amplitude and latency (P < 0.05). On cessation of anaesthesia, time to eye-opening (5.2 vs. 16.5 minutes) and toe movement (5.4 vs. 17.4 minutes) was shorter following sevoflurane (all P < 0.05). These findings indicate that propofol produces a better SSEP signal than sevoflurane. However adjustments in sevoflurane concentration result in faster changes in the SSEP signal than propofol. Assessment of neurological function was facilitated more rapidly after sevoflurane anaesthesia.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19115644     DOI: 10.1177/0310057X0803600605

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anaesth Intensive Care        ISSN: 0310-057X            Impact factor:   1.669


  6 in total

Review 1.  Propofol: a review of its role in pediatric anesthesia and sedation.

Authors:  Vidya Chidambaran; Andrew Costandi; Ajay D'Mello
Journal:  CNS Drugs       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 5.749

2.  Recovery Profile and Patient Satisfaction After Ambulatory Anesthesia for Dental Treatment-A Crossover Comparison Between Propofol and Sevoflurane.

Authors:  Keita Ohkushi; Ken-Ichi Fukuda; Yoshihiko Koukita; Yuzuru Kaneko; Tatsuya Ichinohe
Journal:  Anesth Prog       Date:  2016

Review 3.  [Intraoperative electrophysiological monitoring with evoked potentials].

Authors:  R Nitzschke; N Hansen-Algenstaedt; J Regelsberger; A E Goetz; M S Goepfert
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 1.041

4.  The Suitability of Propofol Compared with Urethane for Anesthesia during Urodynamic Studies in Rats.

Authors:  Adam A Moheban; Huiyi H Chang; Leif A Havton
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 1.232

Review 5.  Anaesthetic interventions for prevention of awareness during surgery.

Authors:  Anthony G Messina; Michael Wang; Marshall J Ward; Chase C Wilker; Brett B Smith; Daniel P Vezina; Nathan Leon Pace
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-10-18

6.  Median effective effect-site concentration of sufentanil for wake-up test in adolescents undergoing surgery: a randomized trial.

Authors:  Cheng-Hua Zhang; Wei-Qing Ma; Yun-Li Yang; Hui-Ming Wang; Fa-Tuan Dong; Zhang-Xiang Huang
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2015-03-08       Impact factor: 2.217

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.