J G Triem1, K D Röhm, J Boldt, S N Piper. 1. Klinik für Anästhesiologie und Operative Intensivmedizin, Klinikum Ludwigshafen gGmbH, Ludwigshafen. triemj@klilu.de
Abstract
BACKGROUND: During anaesthesia propofol is administered either by manual controlled infusion (MCI) or by target controlled infusion (TCI) techniques. In this study two different TCI systems for propofol administration were evaluated with regard to handling, patient safety, and costs and compared to administration of propofol by the MCI technique. METHODS: In a prospective study, 90 patients scheduled for elective surgery of the nose or nasal sinuses were randomly enrolled in three groups. The two TCI systems were examined in two groups of 30 patients: one group received propofol following the pharmacokinetic TCI model of Schnider (TCI-Schnider) and the other group received propofol following the TCI model of Marsh (TCI-Marsh). A manual perfusion technique (MCI, n=30) was used in the control group. Depth of anesthesia was controlled using the bispectral index (BSI) which was adjusted to fall within the range of 40-55. Hemodynamics, extubation times and time of awaking, rate and quality of propofol dose adjustment, total drug requirements, costs, and quality of recovery were documented. The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) as well as shivering and patient satisfaction were also documented. RESULTS:Demographics, hemodynamics and perioperative data did not differ between the groups. Propofol consumption within the first 60 min also showed no significant differences. In the course of extended anaesthesia, propofol consumption was significantly less in both TCI groups compared to the control group (MCI) and the TCI-Schnider group also showed less episodes of bradycardia. The necessity of propofol dose adjustment did not differ significantly between the TCI groups. Administration and consumption of anaesthesia co-medication (fentanyl, remifentanil, cisatracurium) did not differ between the groups. CONCLUSION: The investigated propofol administration procedures using the MCI or TCI techniques were safe and easy to handle under BIS monitoring. No differences were found concerning extubation times and time of awaking. During extended anaesthesia procedures (>60 min), propofol consumption was lower with both TCI techniques and thus costs could be saved.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: During anaesthesia propofol is administered either by manual controlled infusion (MCI) or by target controlled infusion (TCI) techniques. In this study two different TCI systems for propofol administration were evaluated with regard to handling, patient safety, and costs and compared to administration of propofol by the MCI technique. METHODS: In a prospective study, 90 patients scheduled for elective surgery of the nose or nasal sinuses were randomly enrolled in three groups. The two TCI systems were examined in two groups of 30 patients: one group received propofol following the pharmacokinetic TCI model of Schnider (TCI-Schnider) and the other group received propofol following the TCI model of Marsh (TCI-Marsh). A manual perfusion technique (MCI, n=30) was used in the control group. Depth of anesthesia was controlled using the bispectral index (BSI) which was adjusted to fall within the range of 40-55. Hemodynamics, extubation times and time of awaking, rate and quality of propofol dose adjustment, total drug requirements, costs, and quality of recovery were documented. The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) as well as shivering and patient satisfaction were also documented. RESULTS: Demographics, hemodynamics and perioperative data did not differ between the groups. Propofol consumption within the first 60 min also showed no significant differences. In the course of extended anaesthesia, propofol consumption was significantly less in both TCI groups compared to the control group (MCI) and the TCI-Schnider group also showed less episodes of bradycardia. The necessity of propofol dose adjustment did not differ significantly between the TCI groups. Administration and consumption of anaesthesia co-medication (fentanyl, remifentanil, cisatracurium) did not differ between the groups. CONCLUSION: The investigated propofol administration procedures using the MCI or TCI techniques were safe and easy to handle under BIS monitoring. No differences were found concerning extubation times and time of awaking. During extended anaesthesia procedures (>60 min), propofol consumption was lower with both TCI techniques and thus costs could be saved.