Literature DB >> 7840401

[Endocrine stress reaction, hemodynamics and recovery in total intravenous and inhalation anesthesia. Propofol versus isoflurane].

H A Adams1, C S Schmitz, B Baltes-Götz.   

Abstract

This prospective, randomised study compared total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) and inhalation anaesthesia with respect to endocrine stress response, haemodynamic reactions, and recovery. METHODS. The investigation included two groups of 20 ASA I-II patients 18-60 years of age scheduled for orthopaedic surgery. For premedication of both groups, 0.1 mg/kg midazolam was injected IM. Patients in the propofol group received TIVA (CPPV, PEEP 5 mbar, air with oxygen FiO2 33%) with propofol (2 mg/kg for induction followed by an infusion of 12-6 mg/kg.h) and fentanyl (0.1 mg before intubation, total dose 0.005 mg/kg before surgery, repetition doses 0.1 mg). For induction of patients in the isoflurane-group, 5 mg/kg thiopentone and 0.1 mg fentanyl was administered. Inhalation anaesthesia was maintained with 1.2-2.4 vol.% isoflurane in nitrous oxide and oxygen at a ratio of 2:1 (CPPV, PEEP 5 mbar). For intubation of both groups, 2 mg vecuronium and 1.5 mg/kg suxamethonium were injected, followed by a total dose of 0.1 mg/kg vecuronium. Blood samples were taken through a central venous line at eight time points from before induction until 60 min after extubation for analysis of adrenaline, noradrenaline (by HPLC/ECD), antidiuretic hormone (ADH), adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH), and cortisol (by RIA). In addition, systolic arterial pressure (SAP) heart rate (HR), arterial oxygen saturation (SpO2), and recovery from anaesthesia were observed. RESULTS. Group mean values are reported; biometric data from both collectives were comparable (Table 1). Plasma levels of adrenaline (52 vs. 79 pg/ml), noradrenaline 146 vs. 217 pg/ml), and cortisol (82 vs. 165 ng/ml) were significantly lower in the propofol group (Table 2, Figs. 1 and 3). Plasma levels of ADH (4.8 vs. 6.1 pg/ml) and ACTH (20 vs. 28 pg/ml) did not differ between the groups (Table 2, Figs 2 and 3). SAP (128 vs. 131 mmHg) was comparable in both groups, HR (68/min vs. 83/min) was significantly lower in the propofol group, and SpO2 (97.1 vs 97.4%) showed no significant difference (Table 3). Recovery from anaesthesia was slightly faster in the propofol group (following of simple orders 1.9 vs. 2.4 min, orientation with respect to person 2.4 vs. 3.4 min, orientation with respect to time and space 2.8 vs. 3.7 min), but differences failed to reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS. When compared with isoflurane inhalation anaesthesia, moderation of the endocrine stress response was significantly improved during and after TIVA with propofol and fentanyl. Slightly shorter recovery times did not lead to an increased stress response. With respect to intra- and postoperative stress reduction, significant attenuation of sympatho-adrenergic reaction comparable SAP and reduced HR, sympatholytic and hypodynamic anaesthesia with propofol and fentanyl seems to be advantageous for patients with cardiovascular and metabolic disorders. For this aim, careful induction and application of individual doses is essential.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1994        PMID: 7840401     DOI: 10.1007/s001010050115

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anaesthesist        ISSN: 0003-2417            Impact factor:   1.041


  12 in total

1.  Effects of high-volume, rapid-fluid therapy on cardiovascular function and hematological values during isoflurane-induced hypotension in healthy dogs.

Authors:  Alexander Valverde; Giacomo Gianotti; Eva Rioja-Garcia; Amanda Hathway
Journal:  Can J Vet Res       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 1.310

Review 2.  Propofol. An update of its use in anaesthesia and conscious sedation.

Authors:  H M Bryson; B R Fulton; D Faulds
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 3.  Propofol. An overview of its pharmacology and a review of its clinical efficacy in intensive care sedation.

Authors:  B Fulton; E M Sorkin
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 9.546

4.  General anesthesia delays the inflammatory response and increases survival for mice with endotoxic shock.

Authors:  Joseph M Fuentes; Mark A Talamini; William B Fulton; Eric J Hanly; Alexander R Aurora; Antonio De Maio
Journal:  Clin Vaccine Immunol       Date:  2006-02

5.  Case study of hepatic radiofrequency ablation causing a systemic inflammatory response under total intravenous anesthesia.

Authors:  Gereon Schälte; Dietrich Henzler; Christian Waning; Josef Tacke; Rolf Rossaint; Andreas H Mahnken
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2010-10-29       Impact factor: 3.500

6.  The effects of deep and light propofol anesthesia on stress response in patients undergoing open lung surgery: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Sung Mee Jung; Choon Kyu Cho
Journal:  Korean J Anesthesiol       Date:  2015-05-28

7.  Anesthetic experience during a laparoscopic appendectomy in a pregnant patient with isolated cor triatriatum sinister.

Authors:  Jun Hyun Kim; Myeong Eun Jeong; Kyung Tae Kim; Ji Yeon Kim
Journal:  Saudi J Anaesth       Date:  2020-03-05

Review 8.  Nitrous oxide-based techniques versus nitrous oxide-free techniques for general anaesthesia.

Authors:  Rao Sun; Wen Qin Jia; Peng Zhang; KeHu Yang; Jin Hui Tian; Bin Ma; Yali Liu; Run H Jia; Xiao F Luo; Akira Kuriyama
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-11-06

9.  Comparing the Effects of Isoflurane-Sufentanil Anesthesia and Propofol-Sufentanil Anesthesia on Serum Cortisol Levels in Open Heart Surgery with Cardiopulmonary Bypass.

Authors:  Abbas Sedighinejad; Vali Imantalab; Ali Mirmansouri; Bahram Naderi Nabi; Masoud Tarbiat; Ali Mohammad Sadeghi; Nassir Nassiri Sheikhani; Mohammad Haghighi; Zahra Sayahe Varag
Journal:  Anesth Pain Med       Date:  2016-11-21

10.  Effects of propofol and sevoflurane on perioperative immune response in patients undergoing laparoscopic radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer.

Authors:  Songtao Liu; Xinyu Gu; Lijiao Zhu; Guannan Wu; Hai Zhou; Yan Song; Congyou Wu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 1.817

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.