Literature DB >> 29599632

Comparison of the Effects of Dexmedetomidine on the Induction of Anaesthesia Using Marsh and Schnider Pharmacokinetic Models of Propofol Target-Controlled Infusion.

Wan Mohd Nazaruddin Wan Hassan1, Hai Siang Tan1, Rhendra Hardy Mohamed Zaini1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The study aimed to determine the effects of dexmedetomidine on the induction of anaesthesia using different models (Marsh and Schnider) of propofol target-controlled infusion (TCI).
METHODS: Sixty-four patients aged 18-60 years, American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) class I-II who underwent elective surgery were randomised to a Marsh group (n = 32) or Schnider group (n = 32). All the patients received a 1 μg/kg loading dose of dexmedetomidine, followed by TCI anaesthesia with remifentanil at 2 ng/mL. After the effect-site concentration (Ce) of remifentanil reached 2 ng/mL, propofol TCI induction was started. Anaesthesia induction commenced in the Marsh group at a target plasma concentration (Cpt) of 2 μg/mL, whereas it started in the Schnider group at a target effect-site concentration (Cet) of 2 μg/mL. If induction was delayed after 3 min, the target concentration (Ct) was gradually increased to 0.5 μg/mL every 30 sec until successful induction. The Ct at successful induction, induction time, Ce at successful induction and haemodynamic parameters were recorded.
RESULTS: The Ct for successful induction in the Schnider group was significantly lower than in the Marsh group (3.48 [0.90] versus 4.02 [0.67] μg/mL; P = 0.01). The induction time was also shorter in the Schnider group as compared with the Marsh group (134.96 [50.91] versus 161.59 [39.64]) sec; P = 0.02). There were no significant differences in haemodynamic parameters and Ce at successful induction.
CONCLUSION: In the between-group comparison, dexmedetomidine reduced the Ct requirement for induction and shortened the induction time in the Schnider group. The inclusion of baseline groups without dexmedetomidine in a four-arm comparison of the two models would enhance the validity of the findings.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Marsh; dexmedetomidine; pharmacokinetic; propofol; remifentanil; target-controlled infusion

Year:  2018        PMID: 29599632      PMCID: PMC5862048          DOI: 10.21315/mjms2018.25.1.4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Malays J Med Sci        ISSN: 1394-195X


  18 in total

1.  TCI : Target controlled infusion, or totally confused infusion? Call for an optimised population based pharmacokinetic model for propofol.

Authors:  Mats Enlund
Journal:  Ups J Med Sci       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 2.384

2.  The effect of low-dose dexmedetomidine on hemodynamics and anesthetic requirement during bis-spectral index-guided total intravenous anesthesia.

Authors:  Hee Yeon Park; Jong Yeop Kim; Sang Hyun Cho; Dongchul Lee; Hyun Jeong Kwak
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2015-07-11       Impact factor: 2.502

3.  Effects of different loading doses of dexmedetomidine on bispectral index under stepwise propofol target-controlled infusion.

Authors:  Tingting Wang; Shengjin Ge; Wanxia Xiong; Peiwen Zhou; Jing Cang; Zhanggang Xue
Journal:  Pharmacology       Date:  2012-10-19       Impact factor: 2.547

4.  Hemodynamic responses during induction: comparison of Marsh and Schnider pharmacokinetic models.

Authors:  Xiao-Yu Yang; Zhi-Bin Zhou; Lu Yang; Xue Zhou; Li-Jun Niu; Xia Feng
Journal:  Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 1.366

5.  Comparison of propofol pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic models for awake craniotomy: A prospective observational study.

Authors:  Martin Soehle; Christina F Wolf; Melanie J Priston; Georg Neuloh; Christian G Bien; Andreas Hoeft; Richard K Ellerkmann
Journal:  Eur J Anaesthesiol       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 4.330

6.  Dexmedetomidine use in general anaesthesia.

Authors:  A Arcangeli; C D'Alò; R Gaspari
Journal:  Curr Drug Targets       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 3.465

7.  Dexmedetomidine as an anesthetic adjuvant for intracranial procedures: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Ke Peng; Shaoru Wu; Huayue Liu; Fuhai Ji
Journal:  J Clin Neurosci       Date:  2014-06-25       Impact factor: 1.961

Review 8.  Comparison of recovery profile after ambulatory anesthesia with propofol, isoflurane, sevoflurane and desflurane: a systematic review.

Authors:  Anil Gupta; Tracey Stierer; Rhonda Zuckerman; Neal Sakima; Stephen D Parker; Lee A Fleisher
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 5.108

9.  The effect of dexmedetomidine on the adjuvant propofol requirement and intraoperative hemodynamics during remifentanil-based anesthesia.

Authors:  Woon-Seok Kang; Sung-Yun Kim; Jong-Chan Son; Ju-Deok Kim; Hasmizy Bin Muhammad; Seong-Hyop Kim; Tae-Gyoon Yoon; Tae-Yop Kim
Journal:  Korean J Anesthesiol       Date:  2012-02-20

10.  Cross-simulation between two pharmacokinetic models for the target-controlled infusion of propofol.

Authors:  Jong-Yeop Kim; Dae-Hee Kim; A-Ram Lee; Bong-Ki Moon; Sang-Kee Min
Journal:  Korean J Anesthesiol       Date:  2012-04-23
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.