Minna Kallioinen1,2, Jussi P Posti3,4, Melissa Rahi3, Deepak Sharma5, Ari Katila1, Juha Grönlund1, Tero Vahlberg6, Janek Frantzén3, Klaus T Olkkola7, Teijo I Saari1,2, Riikka Takala1,2. 1. Division of Perioperative Services, Intensive Care Medicine and Pain Management, Turku University Hospital and University of Turku, Turku, Finland. 2. Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, University of Turku, Turku, Finland. 3. Division of Clinical Neurosciences, Department of Neurosurgery, Turku University Hospital and University of Turku, Turku, Finland. 4. Turku Brain Injury Centre, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland. 5. Department of Anaesthesiology & Pain Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. 6. Department of Clinical Medicine, Biostatistics, University of Turku and Turku University Hospital, Finland. 7. Department of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, University of Helsinki and HUS Helsinki University Hospital, Turku, Finland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cerebral autoregulation is often impaired after aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage (aSAH). Dexmedetomidine is being increasingly used, but its effects on cerebral autoregulation in patients with aSAH have not been studied before. Dexmedetomidine could be a useful sedative in patients with aSAH as it enables neurological assessment during the infusion. The aim of this preliminary study was to compare the effects of dexmedetomidine on dynamic and static cerebral autoregulation with propofol and/or midazolam in patients with aSAH. METHODS: Ten patients were recruited. Dynamic and static cerebral autoregulation were assessed using transcranial Doppler ultrasound during propofol and/or midazolam infusion and then during three increasing doses of dexmedetomidine infusion (0.7, 1.0 and 1.4 μg/kg/h). Transient hyperaemic response ratio (THRR) and strength of autoregulation (SA) were calculated to assess dynamic cerebral autoregulation. Static rate of autoregulation (sRoR)% was calculated by using noradrenaline infusion to increase the mean arterial pressure 20 mm Hg above the baseline. RESULTS: Data from nine patients were analysed. Compared to baseline, we found no statistically significant changes in THRR or sROR%. THRR was (mean ± SD) 1.20 ± 0.14, 1.17 ± 0.13 (P = .93), 1.14 ± 0.09 (P = .72) and 1.19 ± 0.18 (P = 1.0) and sROR% was 150.89 ± 84.37, 75.22 ± 27.75 (P = .08), 128.25 ± 58.35 (P = .84) and 104.82 ± 36.92 (P = .42) at baseline and during 0.7, 1.0 and 1.4 μg/kg/h dexmedetomidine infusion, respectively. Dynamic SA was significantly reduced after 1.0 μg/kg/h dexmedetomidine (P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to propofol and/or midazolam, dexmedetomidine did not alter static cerebral autoregulation in aSAH patients, whereas a significant change was observed in dynamic SA. Further and larger studies with dexmedetomidine in aSAH patients are warranted.
BACKGROUND: Cerebral autoregulation is often impaired after aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage (aSAH). Dexmedetomidine is being increasingly used, but its effects on cerebral autoregulation in patients with aSAH have not been studied before. Dexmedetomidine could be a useful sedative in patients with aSAH as it enables neurological assessment during the infusion. The aim of this preliminary study was to compare the effects of dexmedetomidine on dynamic and static cerebral autoregulation with propofol and/or midazolam in patients with aSAH. METHODS: Ten patients were recruited. Dynamic and static cerebral autoregulation were assessed using transcranial Doppler ultrasound during propofol and/or midazolam infusion and then during three increasing doses of dexmedetomidine infusion (0.7, 1.0 and 1.4 μg/kg/h). Transient hyperaemic response ratio (THRR) and strength of autoregulation (SA) were calculated to assess dynamic cerebral autoregulation. Static rate of autoregulation (sRoR)% was calculated by using noradrenaline infusion to increase the mean arterial pressure 20 mm Hg above the baseline. RESULTS: Data from nine patients were analysed. Compared to baseline, we found no statistically significant changes in THRR or sROR%. THRR was (mean ± SD) 1.20 ± 0.14, 1.17 ± 0.13 (P = .93), 1.14 ± 0.09 (P = .72) and 1.19 ± 0.18 (P = 1.0) and sROR% was 150.89 ± 84.37, 75.22 ± 27.75 (P = .08), 128.25 ± 58.35 (P = .84) and 104.82 ± 36.92 (P = .42) at baseline and during 0.7, 1.0 and 1.4 μg/kg/h dexmedetomidine infusion, respectively. Dynamic SA was significantly reduced after 1.0 μg/kg/h dexmedetomidine (P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to propofol and/or midazolam, dexmedetomidine did not alter static cerebral autoregulation in aSAH patients, whereas a significant change was observed in dynamic SA. Further and larger studies with dexmedetomidine in aSAH patients are warranted.