Y K Shin1, Y D Kim, J V Collea. 1. Department of Anesthesia, School of Medicine, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Propofol is an alternative to thiopental as an intravenous induction agent for cesarean section. Because it has relaxant effects on vascular and other smooth muscles, the authors set out to determine whether propofol has any effect on pregnant human uterine smooth muscle in an isolated preparation. METHODS: Myometrial specimens were excised from 10 parturients undergoing elective cesarean section. The muscle strips were suspended in tissue baths and isometric tension was recorded. After establishment of rhythmic contractions in the buffer solution as a control, propofol (0.5 to 10 microg/ml) in fat emulsion was applied cumulatively to the bath. The effect of the fat emulsion at equivalent concentrations was also examined. RESULTS: Propofol concentrations of 2.7 x 10(-6) M (0.5 microg/ml) and 1.1 x 10(-5) M (2 microg/ml) had no significant effect on the active tension developed by muscle contraction. However, propofol at concentration of 5.5 x 10(-5) M (10 microg/ml) reduced the active tension by 45% (P < 0.02) compared with the control value. The fat emulsion had no effects on the active tension. CONCLUSIONS: These results imply that the decline in the active tension of muscle contraction was most likely caused by propofol and not by the fat emulsion. However, the propofol concentrations needed to produce a significant reduction in the uterine muscle tension appear to be much greater than the free propofol concentrations reported by others during cesarean section.
BACKGROUND:Propofol is an alternative to thiopental as an intravenous induction agent for cesarean section. Because it has relaxant effects on vascular and other smooth muscles, the authors set out to determine whether propofol has any effect on pregnant human uterine smooth muscle in an isolated preparation. METHODS: Myometrial specimens were excised from 10 parturients undergoing elective cesarean section. The muscle strips were suspended in tissue baths and isometric tension was recorded. After establishment of rhythmic contractions in the buffer solution as a control, propofol (0.5 to 10 microg/ml) in fat emulsion was applied cumulatively to the bath. The effect of the fat emulsion at equivalent concentrations was also examined. RESULTS:Propofol concentrations of 2.7 x 10(-6) M (0.5 microg/ml) and 1.1 x 10(-5) M (2 microg/ml) had no significant effect on the active tension developed by muscle contraction. However, propofol at concentration of 5.5 x 10(-5) M (10 microg/ml) reduced the active tension by 45% (P < 0.02) compared with the control value. The fat emulsion had no effects on the active tension. CONCLUSIONS: These results imply that the decline in the active tension of muscle contraction was most likely caused by propofol and not by the fat emulsion. However, the propofol concentrations needed to produce a significant reduction in the uterine muscle tension appear to be much greater than the free propofol concentrations reported by others during cesarean section.
Authors: Benjamin J Marsh; Jina Sinskey; Elizabeth L Whitlock; Marla B Ferschl; Mark D Rollins Journal: Fetal Diagn Ther Date: 2020-09-10 Impact factor: 2.208