The aim of the study was to compare the effect of remifentanil and sufentanil administered for total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) using target-controlled infusion (TCI) on intraoperative hemodynamic response, tracheal intubation and extubation times in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. METHODS:Sixty patients undergoing open colorectal surgery for colorectal tumors or inflammatory diseases were randomized prospectively into one of two groups: remifentanilgroup R (n = 30) received TIVA-TCI with propofol and remifentanil and sufentanil group S (n = 30) received TIVA-TCI with propofol and sufentanil. Changes of mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) were compared during induction and maintenance of anaesthesia. Response to tracheal intubation was assessed as episodes of hypertension, increased HR and bispectral index values, sweating, lacrimation, and coughing. The numbers of target plasma concentration (Cp) adjustments of opioids and propofol due to painful stimulation were recorded during surgery. Recovery time expressed as extubation time was also evaluated. RESULTS:MAP and HR, expressed as area under the curve (AUC), were not significantly different between groups during anesthesia and surgery. During induction of anesthesia, MAP values decrease from baseline, in both groups (p < 0.001). Intergroup comparison revealed that MAP decreased more in the remifentanil than sufentanil group (p = 0.027). HR decreased from baseline values only in the remifentanil group (p = 0.05). The number of target concentration adjustments for propofol and opioid was higher in the remifentanil group as compared with sufentanil group (p = 0.02 and p = 0.04). Hemodynamic responses to tracheal intubation and extubation times were not significantly different between the groups. CONCLUSION: Both remifentanil and sufentanil TCI produced stable hemodynamic conditions during open colorectal surgery but sufentanil TCI was associated with less decrease in blood pressure and heart rate, and required fewer dose adjustments during anesthesia induction.
RCT Entities:
The aim of the study was to compare the effect of remifentanil and sufentanil administered for total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) using target-controlled infusion (TCI) on intraoperative hemodynamic response, tracheal intubation and extubation times in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. METHODS: Sixty patients undergoing open colorectal surgery for colorectal tumors or inflammatory diseases were randomized prospectively into one of two groups: remifentanil group R (n = 30) received TIVA-TCI with propofol and remifentanil and sufentanil group S (n = 30) received TIVA-TCI with propofol and sufentanil. Changes of mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) were compared during induction and maintenance of anaesthesia. Response to tracheal intubation was assessed as episodes of hypertension, increased HR and bispectral index values, sweating, lacrimation, and coughing. The numbers of target plasma concentration (Cp) adjustments of opioids and propofol due to painful stimulation were recorded during surgery. Recovery time expressed as extubation time was also evaluated. RESULTS: MAP and HR, expressed as area under the curve (AUC), were not significantly different between groups during anesthesia and surgery. During induction of anesthesia, MAP values decrease from baseline, in both groups (p < 0.001). Intergroup comparison revealed that MAP decreased more in the remifentanil than sufentanil group (p = 0.027). HR decreased from baseline values only in the remifentanil group (p = 0.05). The number of target concentration adjustments for propofol and opioid was higher in the remifentanil group as compared with sufentanil group (p = 0.02 and p = 0.04). Hemodynamic responses to tracheal intubation and extubation times were not significantly different between the groups. CONCLUSION: Both remifentanil and sufentanil TCI produced stable hemodynamic conditions during open colorectal surgery but sufentanil TCI was associated with less decrease in blood pressure and heart rate, and required fewer dose adjustments during anesthesia induction.
Authors: Colin Forbes Royse; David F L Liew; Christine E Wright; Alistair G Royse; James A Angus Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: B Steinlechner; M Dworschak; B Birkenberg; T Lang; A Schiferer; A Moritz; B Mora; A Rajek Journal: Br J Anaesth Date: 2007-04-10 Impact factor: 9.166