Literature DB >> 21823378

Comparison of the effect-site concentrations of remifentanil for Streamlined Liner of the Pharynx Airway (SLIPA) versus laryngeal mask airway SoftSealTM insertion during target-controlled infusion of propofol.

S H Kim1, E M Choi, C H Chang, H K Kim, M H Chung, Y R Choi.   

Abstract

This study was designed to determine the optimal dose of remifentanil required for the successful insertion of Streamlined Liner of the Pharynx Airway (SLIPA) and to compare it to that required for laryngeal mask airway (LMA) insertion in patients receiving a propofol infusion at a standard effect-site concentration. Fifty-eight patients scheduled to undergo general anaesthesia were randomly assigned to either the SLIPA (n = 29) or LMA (n = 29) group. All patients were premedicated with midazolam 0.05 mg x kg(-1) and glycopyrrolate 0.004 mg x kg(-1) intramuscularly. After the administration of lignocaine 1 mg x kg(-1) intravenously, a propofol infusion was started at an effect-site concentration of 3.5 microg x ml(-1) with a remifentanil infusion without a neuromuscular blocking agent. The remifentanil dose was determined by the modified up-and-down method starting in each group at 4 ng x ml(-1). Six minutes after induction, the airway device was inserted. Airway device insertion was classified as 'success' or 'failure' based on patient response. From the isotonic regression analysis and bootstrap distribution, the EC50 of remifentanil for SLIPA and LMA were 0.93 ng x ml(-1) (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.81 to 1.50 ng x ml(-1) and 1.36 ng x ml(-1) (95% CI 1.19 to 2.06 ng x ml(-1)) respectively, and the EC95 for SLIPA and LMA insertions were 1.90 ng x ml(-1) (95% CI 1.39 to 1.95) and 2.43 ng x ml(-1) (95% CI 1.80 to 2.46 ng x ml(-1)) respectively. Using the 83% CIs from the bootstrap distribution, EC50 for SLIPA was significantly less than that of LMA (0.83 to 1.23 vs 1.26 to 2.00, respectively) (P < 0.05). These findings suggest that the insertion of SLIPA needs about a 32% lower depth of anaesthesia than LMA insertion.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21823378     DOI: 10.1177/0310057X1103900412

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


  5 in total

1.  Comparison of remifentanil EC50 for facilitating i-gel and laryngeal mask airway insertion with propofol anesthesia.

Authors:  Jong Bum Choi; Hyun Jeong Kwak; Kyung Cheon Lee; Se Ryeon Lee; Sook Young Lee; Jong Yeop Kim
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2016-01-13       Impact factor: 2.078

2.  Effect-site concentration of propofol required for LMA-Supreme™ insertion with and without remifentanil: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Matilde Zaballos; Emilia Bastida; Salomé Agustí; Maite Portas; Consuelo Jiménez; Maite López-Gil
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2015-10-06       Impact factor: 2.217

3.  Comparison of the Disposable Streamlined Liner of the Pharynx Airway and the Disposable I-gel in Anaesthetized, Paralyzed Adults: A Randomized Prospective Study.

Authors:  Khaled El-Radaideh; Ala A Alhowary; Diab Bani Hani
Journal:  Anesthesiol Res Pract       Date:  2015-12-01

4.  Optimal effective-site concentration of remifentanil for sedation during plate removal of maxilla.

Authors:  Jeong-Hoon Park; Ji-Young Yoon; Eun-Jung Kim; Ji-Uk Yoon; Byung-Moon Choi; Ji-Hye Ahn
Journal:  J Dent Anesth Pain Med       Date:  2018-10-31

5.  Effect of sex differences in remifentanil requirements for the insertion of a laryngeal mask airway during propofol anesthesia: A prospective randomized trial.

Authors:  Han Bum Joe; Jong Yeop Kim; Hyun Jeong Kwak; Sang Eon Oh; Sook Young Lee; Sung Yong Park
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 1.889

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.