Hongbin Gu1, Jie Bai1, Jinfen Liu2. 1. Department of Anesthesiology, Shanghai Children's Medical Center, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University Shanghai 200127, China. 2. Department of Pediatric Cardiothoracic Surgery, Shanghai Children's Medical Center, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University Shanghai 200127, China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine effects of DEX versus propofol on saturation of pulse oximetry (SPO2) in children with Tetralogy of Fallot (TOF) during anesthesia. METHODS: 54 children with TOF who planned to receivecorrected operation were randomly assigned to two groups: group DEX and group Propofol. Indicators were compared at T0 (immediate induction of anesthesia), T1 (tracheal catheterization), T2 (skin incision), T3 (sternal exposure) and T4 (aortic catheterization). RESULTS: In group DEX, the hear rate (HR) and partial pressure difference between alveolar air and arteries [P(A-a)O2] at T1 were lower than those at T0, while systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean blood pressure (MBP) and SPO2 at T1 were higher than those at T0, with statistically significant differences (P<0.05, respectively). In the group Propofol, SBP, DBP, MBP and SPO2 at T1 were lower than those at T0, while P(A-a)O2 at T1 was higher than that at T0, with statistically significant differences (P<0.05, respectively). There were statistically significant differences in all indicators at T1 between two groups (P<0.05, respectively). The group DEX had lower HR and P(A-a)O2, and higher SBP, DBP, MBP and SPO2 than group Propofol. There were no statistically significant differences in all indicators (except for lower HR) at other points between two groups. CONCLUSION: During induction of anesthesia, DEX was better than propofol to improve alveolar oxygenation, reduce myocardial oxygen consumption, increase arterial oxygen content and induce stable induction in patients with TOF, though they were comparable during maintenance of anesthesia.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To determine effects of DEX versus propofol on saturation of pulse oximetry (SPO2) in children with Tetralogy of Fallot (TOF) during anesthesia. METHODS: 54 children with TOF who planned to receive corrected operation were randomly assigned to two groups: group DEX and group Propofol. Indicators were compared at T0 (immediate induction of anesthesia), T1 (tracheal catheterization), T2 (skin incision), T3 (sternal exposure) and T4 (aortic catheterization). RESULTS: In group DEX, the hear rate (HR) and partial pressure difference between alveolar air and arteries [P(A-a)O2] at T1 were lower than those at T0, while systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean blood pressure (MBP) and SPO2 at T1 were higher than those at T0, with statistically significant differences (P<0.05, respectively). In the group Propofol, SBP, DBP, MBP and SPO2 at T1 were lower than those at T0, while P(A-a)O2 at T1 was higher than that at T0, with statistically significant differences (P<0.05, respectively). There were statistically significant differences in all indicators at T1 between two groups (P<0.05, respectively). The group DEX had lower HR and P(A-a)O2, and higher SBP, DBP, MBP and SPO2 than group Propofol. There were no statistically significant differences in all indicators (except for lower HR) at other points between two groups. CONCLUSION: During induction of anesthesia, DEX was better than propofol to improve alveolar oxygenation, reduce myocardial oxygen consumption, increase arterial oxygen content and induce stable induction in patients with TOF, though they were comparable during maintenance of anesthesia.
Entities:
Keywords:
Tetralogy of fallot; anesthesia; dexmedetomidine; propofol
Authors: Gregory B Hammer; Bridget M Philip; Alan R Schroeder; Frederick S Rosen; Peter J Koltai Journal: Paediatr Anaesth Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 2.556
Authors: Richard R Riker; Yahya Shehabi; Paula M Bokesch; Daniel Ceraso; Wayne Wisemandle; Firas Koura; Patrick Whitten; Benjamin D Margolis; Daniel W Byrne; E Wesley Ely; Marcelo G Rocha Journal: JAMA Date: 2009-02-02 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Laura E Nelson; Jun Lu; Tianzhi Guo; Clifford B Saper; Nicholas P Franks; Mervyn Maze Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Christopher L Carroll; Diane Krieger; Margaret Campbell; Daniel G Fisher; Leonard L Comeau; Aaron R Zucker Journal: J Hosp Med Date: 2008-03 Impact factor: 2.960