Clinical assessment of propofol-induced yawning with heart rate variability: a pilot study

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To investigate the proportion of propofol-induced yawning and sympathovagal balance during propofol-induced yawning. DESIGN: Prospective, observational, clinical study. SETTING: University hospital and 2400-bed tertiary medical center. PATIENTS: 546 ASA physical status I and II patients undergoing elective surgery with general anesthesia. INTERVENTIONS: Standard induction of anesthesia was performed with intravenous (IV) propofol two to four mg/kg (group P), or pretreatment with atropine 0.1 mg/kg (group AP) or with fentanyl 1 to 3 microg/kg (group FP) before propofol. Continuous standard electrocardiogram for heart rate variability (HRV) was performed in another 20 patients to investigate sympathovagal balance during propofol-induced yawning. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The proportions of yawning were 53.5% (207/386), 61.1% (55/90), and 0% (0/50) in the P, AP, and FP groups, respectively. Propofol-induced yawning could be dramatically decreased by pretreatment with IV fentanyl (P < 0.001, chi2 test). Significant increased ratio of low-frequency/high-frequency power was detected during HRV monitoring in 9 patients with yawning in comparison with 11 patients without yawning (P < 0.05, Wilcoxon signed-rank test). CONCLUSIONS: Pretreatment with fentanyl may inhibit propofol-induced yawning. Fluctuations in autonomic function have been noted during propofol-induced yawning.     

Reduction of emetic symptoms during cesarean delivery with antiemetics: propofol at subhypnotic dose versus traditional antiemetics

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of propofol (at a subhypnotic dose), droperidol, and metoclopramide in reducing emetic symptoms during cesarean delivery. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study. SETTING: University hospital. PATIENTS: 100 ASA physical status I and II parturients undergoing cesarean delivery with spinal anesthesia. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received placebo (saline) followed by placebo (Intralipid(R)), placebo (saline) followed by propofol at a subhypnotic dose (1.0 mg/kg/hr), droperidol 1.25 mg followed by placebo (Intralipid(R)), or metoclopramide 10 mg followed by placebo (Intralipid(R)) intravenously (IV) immediately after clamping of the umbilical cord. MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS: The percentage of patients who were emesis-free, which was defined as experiencing no nausea, retching, or vomiting, in the intraoperative, postdelivery period was 80% with propofol, 80% with droperidol, and 78% with metoclopramide (p < 0.05), compared with placebo (40%). Severity of nausea was less inpatients who received propofol than in those who received placebo (p < 0.05), and there were no differences seen among the droperidol, metoclopramide, and placebo groups. No clinically serious adverse events as a result of the study drugs were observed in any of the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic antiemetic efficacy of propofol at a subhypnotic dose (1.0 mg/kg/hr), droperidol 1.25 mg, and metoclopramide 10 mg is comparable in parturients undergoing cesarean delivery. Moreover, propofol at a subhypnotic dose is effective in the prevention of severe nausea.     

麻醉诱导时芬太尼不同给药方法对其诱发患者咳嗽的影响

目的 评价麻醉诱导时芬太尼不同给药方法对其诱发患者咳嗽的影响.方法 择期全麻手术患者420例,年龄18～60岁,性别不限,ASA分级Ⅰ或Ⅱ级,采用随机数字表法,将患者随机分为4组(n=105):常规组(Ⅰ组)、预注射组(Ⅱ组)、稀释组(Ⅲ组)和后注射组(Ⅳ组).麻醉诱导:Ⅰ组依次静脉注射咪达唑仑0.05 mg/kg、芬太尼(50 μg/ml)2 μg/kg、异丙酚2 mg/kg、罗库溴铵1mg/kg;Ⅱ组依次静脉注射咪达唑仑0.05 mg/kg、芬太尼(50 μg/ml)0.5 μg/kg、异丙酚2 mg/kg、罗库溴铵1mg/kg、芬太尼(50 μg/ml)1.5 μg/kg;Ⅲ组依次静脉注射咪达唑仑0.05 mg/kg、芬太尼(20 μg/ml)2μg/kg、异丙酚2mg/kg、罗库溴铵1 mg/kg;Ⅳ组依次静脉注射咪达唑仑0.05 mg/kg、异丙酚2 mg/kg、罗库溴铵1 mg/kg、芬太尼(50 μg/ml)2 μg/kg.注药完毕后2 min行气管插管.气管插管前观察咳嗽、异丙酚注射痛的发 生情况,于麻醉诱导前、诱导后、咳嗽时、气管插管时记录HR和有创动脉压.结果 与Ⅰ组比较,其余组患者咳嗽发生率和咳嗽程度降低(P＜0.05);与Ⅱ组和Ⅲ组比较,Ⅳ组患者咳嗽发生率和咳嗽程度降低(P＜0.05).四组其余指标组间比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 麻醉诱导时芬太尼稀释给药、给予预注剂量或后注射均可明显降低其诱发咳嗽的发生,其中后注射效果最佳.     

Lidocaine pretreatment for the prevention of propofol-induced transient motor disturbances in children during anesthesia induction: a randomized controlled trial in children undergoing invasive hematologic procedures

BACKGROUND: We examined the effect of lidocaine pretreatment before propofol administration on the incidence of transient motor disturbances and on propofol requirements for anesthesia induction in infants and children undergoing repeated painful diagnostic and therapeutic hematological procedures. METHODS: A series of 358 children subgrouped according to the presence of a peripheral-vein or central venous catheter were randomly assigned to receive an intravenous dose of 2% lidocaine (2.0 mg.kg(-1)) or an equivalent volume of saline, 1 min before propofol (1.5-3.5 mg.kg(-1)) injected for anesthesia induction. RESULTS: The incidence of spontaneous movements was significantly lower in patients pretreated with lidocaine than in those receiving placebo (2.5% vs 29%; P < 0.001, by chi-square test), as was the propofol induction dose (1.6 +/- 0.2 mg.kg(-1) vs 2.2 +/- 0.3 mg.kg(-1); P < 0.001) and pain at the injection site in patients peripheral-vein catheter (12% vs. 54%; P < 0.001). Lidocaine administration also improved children's acceptance as reported by parents on the Observational Scale of Behavioral Distress administered 2 h after the procedure (6.5 +/- 2.5 vs. 9.4 +/- 3.3; P < 0.001). Bouts of coughing developed significantly more frequently after lidocaine pretreatment than after placebo (62.5% vs. 17.5%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Because lidocaine pretreatment before the induction of propofol-based anesthesia decreases propofol-induced motor disturbances, lowers hypnotic requirements and reduces pain at the injection site, without inducing untoward events, thus improving children's and parental acceptance, it should become standard practice in infants and children undergoing repeated painful diagnostic and therapeutic hematological procedures.     

Premedication with metoclopramide decreases the frequency of methohexital induced hiccup

Metoclopramide is one of many drugs that have been recommended for the treatment of intractable hiccup. Methohexital may produce hiccup during induction of general anesthesia. 211 women received methohexital for induction and maintenance of general anesthesia for short gynaecological procedures. All the patients were premedicated with fentanyl, diazepam and atropine. 109 patients were randomly selected to receive metoclopramide before induction of anesthesia; the remaining 102 patients served as a control group, and were anesthetized without metoclopramide premedication. The frequency of hiccup was compared between the two groups. 7 patients had hiccup in the metoclopramide premedicated group, as compared to 17 patients in the control group. This difference was statistically significant. We conclude that metoclopramide reduces the frequency of methohexital induced hiccup, and recommend that metoclopramide be routinely used for the premedication of methohexital injection.(Stav A, Weksler N, Berman M: premedication with metcoclopramide decreases the frequency of methohexital induced hiccup. J Anesth 6: 17–20, 1992)     

Inhaling nitrous oxide reduces the induction dose requirements of propofol

Inhaling nitrous oxide (N(2)O) before propofol induction appears to decrease propofol usage. To investigate the efficacy of N(2)O as a component of the drugs used to induce anesthesia, the effect of inhaling a N(2)O:oxygen (O(2)) mixture on the dose of propofol required to induce anesthesia was determined in a double-blinded manner. We randomized 117 unpremedicated patients scheduled for elective surgery into three groups. Group FN received 1 microg/kg fentanyl and breathed 4 L/min N(2)O + 2 L/min O(2). Group PN received placebo and breathed 4 L/min N(2)O + 2 L/min O(2). Group FO received 1 microg/kg fentanyl and breathed 6 L/min O(2). Propofol was infused at 20 mg/min after 1 min of gas mixture inhalation, and the infusion stopped when there was loss of response to verbal command. The mean (SD) propofol dose was 0.75 (0.30), 0.84 (0.26), and 1.33 (0.51) mg/kg, and the induction time 133 (57), 142 (47), and 226 (78) s for Groups FN, PN, and FO, respectively. We conclude that inhalation of 66% N(2)O in O(2) 1 min before the IV induction of anesthesia with propofol at 20 mg/min, reduces the induction dose of propofol by 44% and decreases the time required for the induction of anesthesia (P < 0.001).     

丙泊酚复合不同浓度利多卡因预防注射痛的临床研究

目的研究丙泊酚注射液内添加不同浓度利多卡因对丙泊酚注射痛的预防作用。方法择期手术患者250例,ASAⅠ～Ⅲ级,随机均分为五组,A组为单纯丙泊酚组,B组为丙泊酚注射液中含利多卡因0.5mg/ml,C组丙泊酚内含利多卡因1mg/ml,D组丙泊酚内含利多卡因2mg/ml,E组为利多卡因预处理组,在注射丙泊酚前给予利多卡因40mg。记录患者静注丙泊酚过程中的疼痛情况。结果 A组注射痛发生率显著高于其它四组(P<0.01)。D组未发生丙泊酚注射痛。结论在丙泊酚注射液内添加利多卡因能有效地抑制或减轻丙泊酚注射痛,内含利多卡因2mg/ml能够完全抑制注射痛,利多卡因对丙泊酚的麻醉作用没有影响。     

Comparing the efficacy of prophylactic metoclopramide, ondansetron, and placebo in cesarean section patients given epidural anesthesia

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the relative efficacy of prophylactic metoclopramide, ondansetron, and placebo in nonemergent cesarean section patients given epidural anesthesia intraoperatively and for the first 24-hour period after delivery. DESIGN: Randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled study. SETTING: Inpatient obstetric unit at a university hospital center. PATIENTS: 164 nonemergent cesarean section patients given epidural anesthesia. INTERVENTION: At time of umbilical cord clamp, patients received intravenously (IV) either 4 mg ondansetron (Group O) or 10 mg metoclopramide (Group M) or 10 mL normal saline (Group P). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Episodes and severity of nausea and vomiting, rescue antiemetic requirement, patient satisfaction, and side effects were recorded. The frequency of intraoperative nausea were 24%, 43%, and 57% for Group O, Group M, and Group P, respectively (p < 0.03). The frequency of nausea for the 24-hour study period were 26%, 51% and 71% for Groups O, M, and P respectively (p < 0.03). The frequency of intraoperative and postoperative vomiting were similar between Group O and Group M, but significantly higher in Group P (p < 0.05). Overall patient satisfaction was highest in Group O compared with Groups P and M (p < 0.05). Maximum analog sedation score was higher in Group M compared to Groups O and P (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In cesarean section patients given epidural anesthesia, prophylactic ondansetron, 4 mg IV, is more efficacious and has a higher patient satisfaction than that with metoclopramide, 10 mg IV, or placebo in preventing nausea and achieving complete responses during intraoperative period and the first 24-hour postdelivery period. However, there is no difference between ondansetron and metoclopramide in reducing frequency of vomiting. Prophylactic ondansetron 4 mg IV is more effective in preventing nausea than vomiting.     

Dimenhydrinate and metoclopramide alone or in combination for prophylaxis of PONV

PURPOSE: Dimenhydrinate and metoclopramide are inexpensive antiemetic drugs. Metoclopramide, especially, has been studied extensively in the past, but there are no studies on the combination of both drugs for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). METHODS: One hundred and sixty male inpatients undergoing endonasal surgery were randomized to receive one of four antiemetic regimens in a double-blind manner: placebo, 1 mg x kg(-1) dimenhydrinate, 0.3 mg x kg(-1) metoclopramide, or the combination of both drugs was administered after induction of anesthesia. Patients received a second dose of these drugs six hours after the first administration to mitigate their short half-life. Standardized general anesthesia included benzodiazepine premedication, propofol, desflurane in N2O/O2 vecuronium, and a continuous infusion of remifentanil. Postoperative analgesia and antiemetic rescue medication were standardized. Episodes of vomiting, retching, nausea, and the need for additional antiemetics were recorded for 24 hr. The incidences of PONV were analyzed with Fisher's Exact test and the severity of PONV (rated by a standardized scoring algorithm) with the Jonckheere-Terpestra-test. RESULTS: The incidence of patients free from PONV was 62.5% in the placebo-group and increased to 72.5% in the metoclopramide-group (P = 0.54), 75.0% in the dimenhydrinate-group (P = 0.34), and 85.0% in the combination- group (P = 0.025). In the latter group, the severity of PONV was reduced compared with placebo treatment (P = 0.017; Jonckheere-Terpestra-test). CONCLUSION: Dimenhydrinate and metoclopramide were ineffective in reducing the incidence and the severity of PONV. Their combination reduced the incidence of PONV compared with placebo.     

Efficacy of simultaneous bolus injection of lidocaine with propofol on pain caused by propofol injection]

To investigate the effect of simultaneous bolus injection of 2% lidocaine 2 ml on preventing the pain on propofol injection, 80 patients were randomly assigned to one of four study groups; Group I received simultaneous bolus injection of 2% lidocaine 2 ml with infusion of propofol; Group II received bolus injection of saline 2 ml, 10 s before the start of infusion of propofol-lidocaine mixture; Groups III and IV received bolus injections of lidocaine and saline, separately 10 s before starting propofol infusion. Incidence of propofol-induced pain was significantly more frequent (P < 0.001) in Group IV (70%) than in the other groups (20% each). Number of patients who were satisfied with this anesthetic induction and requested for the same induction method in the next anesthesia was significantly larger in the groups receiving lidocaine (P < 0.05). Simultaneous bolus injection of lidocaine with propofol showed a similar clinical efficacy compared with both preadministration and premixing of lidocaine in preventing the propofol-induced pain.     

Comparison of total intravenous anesthesia and sevoflurane-fentanyl anesthesia for outpatient otorhinolaryngeal surgery

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the recovery characteristics of two widely used anesthetic techniques: remifentanyl-propofol and sevoflurane-fentanyl in a standardized ambulatory population.DESIGN: Randomized, single-blinded study. SETTING: University-affiliated medical center. PATIENTS: 50 ASA physical status I and II patients undergoing elective ambulatory otorhinolaryngeal surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized two groups to receive total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA group) with remifentanil and propofol or sevoflurane-fentanyl (SF group). TIVA patients received induction with propofol 1.5 mg/kg intravenously (IV) and remifentanil 0.5 microg/kg IV. The anesthesia was continued with a continuous infusion of propofol 100 microg/kg/min and remifentanil 0.0625-0.25 microg/kg/min. The SF group received, at induction, fentanyl 2 microg/kg followed by propofol 1.5 mg/kg IV. Maintenance was obtained with 1 to 1.5 minimum alveolar concentration of sevoflurane and bolus of fentanyl 1 microg/kg IV as needed. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Early recovery times (eye opening, response to commands, extubation, orientation, operating room stay after surgery, and Aldrete score > or =9) and patient satisfaction were similar between the two groups. Postanesthetic discharge scoring system (PADSS) > or = 9 was significantly shorter for the TIVA group (135.9 +/- 51 vs. 103 +/- 32 min) (p < 0.01) but this difference was not associated with a shorter postanesthesia care unit (PACU) length of stay. CONCLUSION: Early recovery times are comparable between total intravenous anesthesia and sevoflurane-based anesthesia. Even though patients in the TIVA group achieved home readiness criteria in a significantly shorter time, this technique does not shorten PACU length of stay, which depends instead on multiple nonmedical and administrative issues.     

Effects of fentanyl administration before induction of anesthesia and placement of the Laryngeal Mask Airway: a randomized,placebo-controlled trial

Study ObjectiveTo assess the effects of fentanyl administered before induction of anesthesia on movement and airway responses during desflurane anesthesia via the Laryngeal Mask Airway (LMA).DesignRandomized, double-blinded, controlled trial.Study SettingTertiary-care academic center.Patients100 adult, ASA physical status 1, 2, and 3 patients undergoing ambulatory surgery.InterventionsPatients were administered fentanyl 1 μg/kg (n=51) or saline (n=49) 3 to 5 minutes before induction with propofol 2-2.5 mg/kg intravenously (IV), followed by LMA placement. Anesthesia was maintained with desflurane titrated to a bispectral index (BIS) of 50-60 and 50% nitrous oxide in oxygen, and fentanyl 25 μg boluses were titrated to respiratory rate.MeasurementsApnea occurrence and duration of manual ventilation, as well as frequency and severity of movement, coughing, breath holding, and laryngospasm were recorded.Main ResultsTwo patients in each group were excluded from analysis. The fentanyl pretreatment group had a higher frequency of apnea (94% vs 64%; P= 0.0003) and longer duration of manual ventilation (3 [interquartile range (IQR), 1.5-5] min vs 1 [0-1.5] min; P< 0.0001) at induction. In contrast, the fentanyl pretreatment group had a lower frequency of movements (16% vs 51%;P= 0.0001). The rates of intraoperative breath holding (6.1% vs 8.5%) and laryngospasm (2% vs 4.3%) in the two groups were similar. All subjects experiencing laryngospasm were smokers. Adjusting for smoking status did not affect the differences noted in apnea, duration of manual ventilation, or movement between groups; however, coughing occurrence was statistically higher in the placebo group (P= 0.043).ConclusionsPreinduction fentanyl increased the frequency of apnea at induction and duration of manual ventilation, but reduced the frequency of movements. In addition, it reduced intraoperative coughing in smokers.     

Premedication with intravenous low-dose ketamine suppresses fentanyl-induced cough

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of low-dose ketamine on fentanyl-induced cough. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. SETTING: Medical center hospital. PATIENTS: 360 ASA physical status I-II patients aged 18 to 65 years, weighing between 40 and 80 kg, and scheduled for elective surgery during general anesthesia. INTERVENTIONS AND MEASUREMENTS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either ketamine 0.15 mg/kg or placebo (equal volume of 0.9% saline) given intravenously over 10 seconds, one minute before administration of fentanyl (1.5 microg/kg IV, injected within 5 seconds), during induction of general anesthesia. Any episode of cough was classified as coughing and the onset time of cough (the time of the first episode of cough) was observed for one minute after fentanyl administration by a blinded observer. Severity of coughing was graded based on the number of episodes of coughing (mild, 1-2; moderate, 3-5; and severe, >5). Blood pressure, heart rate, and pulse oximetry oxygen saturation (Spo2) were recorded before giving ketamine or 0.9% saline and 1 minute after fentanyl injections. MAIN RESULTS: After the intravenous injection of fentanyl bolus, patients in the placebo group showed significantly higher frequency cough than those in the ketamine pretreatment group (21.6% vs 7.2%, P<0.05), and onset time of the ketamine group was significantly longer than that of the control group (20+/-8 vs 15+/-10 seconds, P<0.01). However, no difference in cough severity was observed between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Low-dose ketamine (0.15 mg/kg IV) effectively reduces fentanyl-induced cough and delays the onset time of cough.     

Comparison of dexamethasone,metoclopramide, and their combination in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Background Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are one of the most common complaints following anesthesia and surgery. This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of dexamethasone, metoclopramide, and their combination to prevent PONV in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methods A total of 160 ASA physical status I and II patients were included in this randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients were randomly assigned to 4 groups (n = 40 each): group 1 consisting of control patients administered 0.9% NaCl; group 2 patients received metoclopramide 10 mg just before the end of anesthesia; group 3 patients received dexamethasone 8 mg after the induction of anesthesia; and group 4 patients received dexamethasone 8 mg after the induction of anesthesia and metoclopramide 10 mg before the end of anesthesia. The incidence of PONV, mean visual analog pain scores at rest and on movement, time to the first request for analgesia, side effects, and well-being score were recorded during the first 24 h postoperatively. Results Data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the χ² test, with p < 0.05 considered statistically significant. The total incidence of PONV was 60% with placebo, 45% with metoclopramide, 23% with dexamethasone, and 13% with the combination of dexamethasone plus metoclopramide. None of the dexamethasone plus metoclopramide group patients (p < 0.05 versus groups 1 and 2) and one dexamethasone group patient (p < 0.05 versus group 1) required antiemetic rescue, as compared with four patients in the metoclopramide group and six patients in the placebo group. Pain scores, the time to the first request for analgesia, and side effects were similar across the study groups. Conclusions Dexamethasone and the combination of dexamethasone plus metoclopramide were more effective in preventing PONV than metoclopramide and placebo.     

Effect of preoperative oral amantadine on intraoperative anesthetic and analgesic requirements in female patients during abdominoplasty

BackgroundWe hypothesized that NMDA antagonist, amantadine, may be beneficial in reducing the intraoperative anesthetic and analgesic requirements. The aim of this study to evaluate the effect of preoperative oral amantadine on induction doses of propofol, intraoperative anesthetic and analgesic requirements.MethodsIn a prospective, randomized, double-blinded controlled study 60 female patients ASA I or II aged 18–60 years old, planned for abdominoplasty surgery divided into two groups (30 patients each). Group A: received oral amantadine 200 mg on the evening before surgery and 200 mg 60 min prior to surgery. Group P (control group): the patients received placebo capsules. Propofol and isoflurane were titrated guided by BIS during induction and maintenance of anesthesia where the total dose of propofol and the time elapsed between injection of propofol to achieve BIS value 60 were recorded. Also, the inspired isoflurane concentrations required to maintain BIS between 40 and 60 and the total dose of fentanyl needed to maintain adequate analgesia were recorded.ResultsThe induction dose of propofol and the time from propofol injection till BIS value reached 60, the total intraoperative fentanyl requirements and the inspired isoflurane concentration required to maintain BIS reading between 40 and 60 were statistically significant lower in amantadine group compared to placebo treated group. The two groups were similar regarding the occurrence of side effects.ConclusionPreoperative oral amantadine reduced the induction time, induction dose of propofol, intraoperative anesthetic and analgesic requirements compared to placebo without serious side effects in female patients during abdominoplasty.     

Tracheal intubation without the use of muscle relaxants: a technique using propofol and varying doses of alfentanil.

We have noted that tracheal intubation can be accomplished in many patients after induction of anesthesia with propofol and alfentanil without the simultaneous use of muscle relaxants. This study was designed to evaluate airway and intubating conditions after administration of propofol and alfentanil in 75 ASA physical status I or II outpatients with Mallampati class I airways undergoing various surgical procedures. The patients were randomly assigned to one of five groups for induction of anesthesia. All patients received midazolam 1 mg IV before induction of anesthesia. Group I patients (n = 15) received d-tubocurarine 3 mg, thiamylal 4 mg/kg, and succinylcholine 1 mg/kg IV. Groups II-V patients (n = 15 each) received alfentanil 30, 40, 50, or 60 micrograms/kg followed by propofol 2 mg/kg IV. No muscle relaxants were given to patients in groups II-V. Airway management was performed by one of the authors who was blinded as to the dose of alfentanil administered. After loss of consciousness, patients' lungs were ventilated via face mask, and the ease of ventilation was recorded. Jaw mobility was also assessed. Ninety seconds after administration of the propofol or thiamylal, laryngoscopy was performed and exposure of the glottis and position of the vocal cords were noted. Intubation of the trachea was performed and patient response was noted. Heart rate and arterial blood pressure were also recorded before induction of anesthesia, after induction, and then again after intubation of the trachea. The lungs of all patients were easily ventilated via mask, and the jaw was judged to be relaxed in all patients.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Nicorandil reduces incidence and severity of pain on propofol injection

BACKGROUND: Propofol is commonly used for induction and maintenance of anesthesia, but the pain during injection of propofol remains a clinical problem. We studied whether nicorandil prevents the pain on propofol injection. METHODS: The study was conducted in 120 adult patients scheduled for elective surgery. The patients were assigned to two groups; Group C (n = 60) received bolus injection of propofol alone; Group N (n = 60) received bolus injection of 2 mg of nicrorandil 3 minutes before propofol injection, and followed by continuous nicorandil infusion at a rate of 6 mg.h-1. The pain on injection was assessed as, none, mild, moderate, or severe at 15-second intervals. RESULTS: The incidence of propofol-induced pain was significantly higher in Group C (77%) than in Group N (30%) (P < 0.05). The severity of pain was significantly higher in Group C than in Group N (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Nicorandil reduces the incidence and severity of pain on propofol injection.     

A comparison of spinal anesthesia with small-dose lidocaine and general anesthesia with fentanyl and propofol for ambulatory prostate biopsy procedures in elderly patients

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare operating conditions, intraoperative adverse events, recovery profiles, postoperative adverse effects, patient satisfaction, and costs of small-dose lidocaine spinal anesthesia with those of general anesthesia using fentanyl and propofol for elderly outpatient prostate biopsy. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, blind study. SETTING: Outpatient anesthesia unit at a municipal hospital. PATIENTS: 80 ASA physical status I and II patients, aged 65 to 80 years, scheduled for outpatient prostate biopsy. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were assigned to receive either spinal anesthesia with 10 mg of hyperbaric 1% lidocaine (L group, n=40) or anesthetic induction with fentanyl 1 microg.kg-1 IV and 1.0 mg.kg-1 propofol injected at 90 mg.kg-1.h-1, followed by continuous infusion at 6 mg.kg-1.h-1 (F/P group, n=40). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Both anesthetic techniques provided acceptable operating conditions for the surgeon. However, a significantly higher frequency of intraoperative hypotension was found in the F/P group than in the L group (P<0.05). Time to home readiness was shorter in the F/P group (P<0.05). Both techniques had no major postoperative adverse effects and resulted in a high rate of patient satisfaction. Total costs were significantly lower in the L group than in the F/P group (P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Spinal anesthesia with 10 mg of hyperbaric 1% lidocaine may be a more suitable alternative to general anesthesia with fentanyl and propofol for ambulatory elderly prostate biopsy in terms of safety and costs.     

Intravenous lidocaine and ephedrine, but not propofol, suppress fentanyl-induced cough

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of lidocaine, propofol and ephedrine in suppressing fentanyl-induced cough. METHODS: One hundred and eighteen patients were randomly assigned into four groups and the following medications were given intravenously: patients in Group I (n = 31) received normal saline 2 mL, Group II (n = 29) received lidocaine 2 mg.kg(-1), Group III (n = 30) received propofol 0.6 mg.kg(-1) and Group IV (n = 28) received ephedrine 5 mg. At one minute after the study medication, fentanyl 2.5 microg.kg(-1) was given intravenously within two seconds. The occurrence of cough and vital sign profiles were recorded within two minutes after fentanyl bolus by an anesthesiologist blinded to study design. RESULTS: Sixty-five percent of patients in the placebo group had cough, whereas the frequency was significantly decreased in Groups II (14%) and IV (21%). Although a numerically lower frequency of cough was noted in Group III (37%), it was not statistically different from that of the placebo group. SpO(2) decreased significantly in patients of Group III compared to placebo; one patient experienced hypoxemia necessitating mask ventilation. Patients in Group III showed a decrease in heart rate and systolic blood pressure (2 beats.min(-1) and 8 mmHg vs baseline). Patients in Group IV showed an increase in both measurements (5 beats.min(-1) and 8 mmHg vs baseline). No truncal rigidity was observed throughout the study. CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous lidocaine 2 mg.kg(-1) or ephedrine 5 mg, but not propofol 0.6 mg.kg(-1), was effective in preventing fentanyl-induced cough. The results provide a convenient method to decrease fentanyl-induced cough.     

Small doses of propofol, droperidol, and metoclopramide for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after thyroidectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of small doses of propofol, droperidol, and metoclopramide for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after thyroidectomy. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, double-blinded study. SETTING: University-affiliated teaching hospital. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blinded study, 90 patients (75 females) received propofol 0.5 mg/kg, droperidol 20 microg/kg, or metoclopramide 0.2 mg/kg intravenously (n = 30 in each group) at the end of surgery. A standardized general anesthetic technique was used. RESULTS: The incidence of PONV during the first 24 hours after anesthesia was recorded in 13%, 47%, and 50% of patients who had received propofol, droperidol, and metoclopramide, respectively (P < 0.05; overall Fisher exact probability test). No clinically important adverse events were observed in any of the groups. CONCLUSION: Small dose (0.5 mg/kg) of propofol is more effective than droperidol or metoclopramide for the prevention of PONV after thyroidectomy.