Recovery from day-case anaesthesia

Sixty unpremedicated patients undergoing dilatation and curettage were allocated randomly to receive one of three inhalational agents (halothane, enflurane or isoflurane) to supplement 67% nitrous oxide in oxygen after induction of anaesthesia with methohexitone. Recovery was assessed by the time patients took to open their eyes, to give their correct date of birth, to regain their pre-operative level of manipulative skill with a children's postbox toy, and by comparing pre-operative and postoperative performance of a paper and pencil test (the p-deletion test). There was no difference in the time to open eyes or to regain their pre-operative score with the postbox whether the patients received halothane, enflurane or isoflurane. Patients in the isoflurane group took longer than patients in the enflurane group to give their correct date of birth, but they performed better in the p-deletion test postoperatively, completing more lines with the same number of errors. Patients receiving enflurane committed more errors postoperatively in the p-deletion test. The incidence of complications was low and was not influenced by the choice of inhalational agent.     

Effect of xenon anaesthesia on accuracy of cardiac output measurement using partial CO2 rebreathing

Cardiac output (CO) determination based on partial CO(2) rebreathing has recently been introduced into clinical practice. The determination of flow is crucial for exact CO readings and the physical properties of xenon, i.e. high density and viscosity, may influence flow readings. This study compared echocardiography-derived CO measurements with the partial rebreathing method during total intravenous (TIVA) vs. xenon-based anaesthesia. Thirty-nine patients ASA physical status III undergoing aortic reconstruction were randomly assigned to receive either xenon (Xe, n = 20) or TIVA (T, n = 19) based general anaesthetic. Paired measurements were taken before xenon administration, after xenon administration, before and after clamping of the abdominal aorta and after declamping and at corresponding time points in the TIVA group. Data were analysed with a Bland-Altmann plot. Bias and precision were acceptable and comparable before xenon administration (T 0.54 +/- 0.92 l.min(-1) vs. Xe 0.11 +/- 1.1 l.min(-1)), but after xenon administration CO was largely overestimated by partial CO(2) rebreathing (T 0.04 +/- 0.91 l.min(-1) vs. Xe -4.0 +/- 2.1 l.min(-1)). In the TIVA group, bias and precision after declamping increased significantly (P < 0.01) compared to all time points except baseline. In its current application, the NICO cardiac output monitor appears to be inappropriate for determination of CO during xenon based anaesthesia.     

The influence of esmolol on the dose of propofol required for induction of anaesthesia

Cardiac output may be an important determinant of the induction dose of intravenous anaesthetic. Esmolol is known to reduce cardiac output, and we examined its effect on the propofol dose required for induction of anaesthesia. The size of the effect seen with esmolol was compared with midazolam co-induction. Sixty patients were randomly allocated to placebo (saline), esmolol (1mg x kg(-1) bolus, followed by an infusion at 250 microg x kg(-1)min(-1)) or midazolam (0.04 mg x kg(-1)) groups. Induction of anaesthesia commenced 3 min following the administration of the study drug, using a Diprifusor set to achieve plasma propofol concentrations of 10 microg x ml(-1) at 5 min. The primary end point used was the propofol dose per kg at loss of response to command. The mean (SD) propofol dose for each group was 2.38 (0.48) mg x kg(-1) for placebo, 1.79 (0.36) mg x kg(-1) for esmolol and 1.34 (0.35) mg x kg(-1) for midazolam (all means significantly different; p < 0.0005). We found that predosing with esmolol reduces the propofol requirements for induction of anaesthesia by 25%.     

Assessment of tracheal intubation in children after induction with propofol and different doses of remifentanil

Tracheal intubating conditions were assessed in 112 children after induction of anaesthesia with propofol and remifentanil 1.0, 2.0 or 3.0 micro g.kg-1. Subjects in a control group were given propofol and mivacurium 0.2 mg.kg-1. Haemodynamic and respiratory parameters were recorded. Plasma catecholamine levels were measured in a subgroup of 40 children. Intubating conditions were acceptable in 14/28 (50%), 18/26 (69%) and 22/27 (82%) in those subjects given remifentanil 1.0, 2.0 or 3.0 micro g.kg-1, respectively, and in 27/28 (96%) of the control group. Intubating conditions in subjects given remifentanil 3.0 micro g.kg-1 were better than in those given remifentanil 1.0 micro g.kg-1 (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in intubating conditions between those given remifentanil 3.0 micro g.kg-1 and the control group. Systolic blood pressure and heart rate increased in response to tracheal intubation in subjects given remifentanil 1.0 micro g.kg-1 and in the control group (p < 0.05). Time to resumption of spontaneous respiration was prolonged in subjects given remifentanil 3.0 micro g.kg-1 (p < 0.001). In conclusion, remifentanil 2 micro g.kg-1 provides acceptable intubating conditions and haemodynamic stability without prolonging the return of spontaneous respiration.     

Cardiovascular effects of xenon and nitrous oxide in patients during fentanyl-midazolam anaesthesia

Xenon anaesthesia appears to have minimal haemodynamic effects. The purpose of this randomised prospective study was to compare the cardiovascular effects of xenon and nitrous oxide in patients with known ischaemic heart disease. In 20 patients who were due to undergo coronary artery bypass graft surgery, 30 min following induction of anaesthesia with fentanyl 30 microg x kg(-1) and midazolam 0.1 mg x kg(-1) but prior to the start of surgery, xenon or nitrous oxide 60% was administered for 15 min. The results showed that xenon caused a minimal decrease in the mean arterial pressure (from 81 (7) to 75 (8) mmHg, mean (SD)), but did not affect the systolic function of the left ventricle, as demonstrated by unchanged left ventricular stroke work index (LVSWI) and the fractional area change of the left ventricle (FAC) derived from transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE). However, in contrast, nitrous oxide was found to decrease the mean arterial pressure (from 81 (8) to 69 (7) mmHg), the LVSWI, and the FAC. The cardiac index, central venous and pulmonary artery occlusion pressures, systemic and pulmonary vascular resistances, and the TOE-derived E/A ratio through the mitral valve were unchanged by xenon or nitrous oxide. We conclude that xenon provides improved haemodynamic stability compared with nitrous oxide, conserving the left ventricular systolic function.     

A partially blinded randomised controlled trial of patient-maintained propofol sedation and operator controlled midazolam sedation in third molar extractions

Patient-maintained sedation using propofol has recently been shown to be effective for dental surgery. We compared this new technique to the established technique of operator administered midazolam. The two groups were compared before, during and after sedation. The two primary outcomes were time until discharge and oxygen saturation. Vital signs, anxiety and psychomotor skills were also compared. State anxiety was reduced to a greater extent in the propofol group (mean difference 10 (SD 4) mm; p = 0.010. Propofol patients recovered quicker (mean difference 7 (SD 1.4) min; p = 0.001). Propofol patients had a smaller reduction in arterial oxygen saturation (mean difference 0.8 (SD 0.3)%; p = 0.030), and a reduced increase in heart rate (mean difference 9 (SD 2) beats.min(-1); p < 0.001). Both techniques were well tolerated and safe. Propofol sedation offered superior anxiolysis, quicker recovery, less amnesia and less depression of simple psychomotor function.     

Comparison of patient-controlled epidural bolus administration of 0.1% ropivacaine and 0.1% levobupivacaine, both with 0.0002% fentanyl, for analgesia during labour

The aim of the study was to compare the relative potencies and clinical characteristics of epidural ropivacaine and levobupivacaine in labour using patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA). In a randomised double-blinded study, 60 ASA I or II primigravidae requesting epidural analgesia in early labour were allocated to receive either 0.1% ropivacaine with fentanyl 0.0002% or 0.1% levobupivacaine with 0.0002% fentanyl via a patient-controlled analgesia pump. Analgesia was established with 15 ml of study solution and maintained using 5-ml boluses of study solution with a 5-min lockout interval. There were no significant differences in onset time, duration and quality of analgesia, motor and sensory blockade, local anaesthetic consumption, mode of delivery, neonatal outcome or maternal satisfaction between the groups. We conclude that 0.1% ropivacaine with 0.0002% fentanyl and 0.1% levobupivacaine with 0.0002% fentanyl are clinically indistinguishable for labour analgesia and appear pharmacologically equipotent when using PCEA.     

A 5-microm filter does not reduce propofol-induced pain

We assessed the effectiveness of a 5-microm filter in reducing propofol-induced pain and determined whether any reduction is due to removal of contaminants or an alteration in flow characteristics. A total of 120 unpremedicated women (ASA 1-3, aged 18-70 yr) were randomly allocated to one of three equal-sized groups. In group A, propofol was drawn up and injected through an unfiltered plastic cannula. In group B, propofol was drawn up through a 5-microm filter needle and injected through an unfiltered plastic cannula. In group C, propofol was drawn up and injected through a 5-microm filter needle. Unmodified propofol from a 20-ml rubber topped vial at room temperature was used. A 22-g cannula was inserted into the largest visible vein on the dorsum of the non-dominant hand. Propofol was administered at 0.5 ml.s-1 and patients were asked about pain every 10 s until unresponsive, by a blinded observer. The pain score for the patient was the taken as the most severe pain documented. The frequency and severity of pain were similar among groups. We conclude that a 5-microm filter does not reduce pain associated with injection of propofol drawn from a vial with a rubber bung.     

Re-use of equipment between patients receiving total intravenous anaesthesia: a postal survey of current practice

In order to establish current practice with regard to the reuse of infusion equipment between patients receiving total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA), a postal survey of 393 consultants was carried out. Additionally, consultants' awareness of relevant guidelines was assessed. Overall, 46% of consultants change all equipment between cases, 37% change one-way valves and 17% change distal lengths of the infusion tubing. Only 13% of consultants reported knowledge of any guidelines. In the absence of any data relevant to the current techniques of administering TIVA, the level of risk associated with the reuse of infusion components is impossible to quantify. Disposal of all equipment between cases incurs a 26% greater cost when compared to changing one-way valves alone. Variation in practice between consultants creates the potential for system errors. Practice should be standardised and, to comply with the published guidelines, should involve disposal of all equipment between cases.     

A comparison of target-controlled therapy with patient-controlled administration of propofol combined with midazolam for sedation during dental surgery

Forty anxious day case patients undergoing extraction of third molar teeth under local anaesthesia with sedation, were studied in a randomised double-blind controlled trial. A target-controlled infusion of propofol was compared with patient-controlled propofol for sedation, combined with a small dose of midazolam to improve amnesia. The objectives of the study were to measure the total dose of propofol used by the two groups and assess recovery and patient satisfaction. The mean dose of propofol used in the patient-controlled sedation group was significantly less than the target-controlled group (p < 0.00007). Five patients became over-sedated in the target-controlled group compared with none in the patient-controlled group. Only one of the three tests of performance showed that the target-controlled patients were more sedated. Patient satisfaction was high in both groups despite a greater recollection of events in the patient-controlled group.