Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Propofol”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 1,027 records · Page 57Linked to original sources
PubMed1987

[Comparative trial of propofol and ketamine in anesthesia for the baths of severely burnt patients].

Ketamine was the normal anaesthetic drug for carrying out the baths of severely burnt patients. It was compared with propofol in a study of 50 patients (greater than 50 UBS) randomly assigned to two groups: 2.5 mg . kg-1 propofol and 2 mg . kg-1 ketamine. The speed of induction was the same for both groups, surgery beginning within the same time intervals. In the propofol group, however, apnoea was seen more often and lasted longer (p less than 0.05) than in the ketamine group. The times between repeat injections were short (about 5 min) and constant with propofol, whereas they were larger and irregular with ketamine; this was due to the shorter distribution half-life and lack of accumulation of propofol. During anaesthesia with propofol, haemodynamic parameters remained steady after an initial period of cardiovascular depression. Respiratory rate increased, because of the lack of analgesia. Recovery was very quick, complete and with no bothersome adverse effects in the propofol group. These hypercatabolic patients could therefore be fed early postoperatively; also, there was no deleterious psychological interference in these deeply disturbed patients.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2002

The effect of fentanyl on hemodynamic and bispectral index changes during anesthesia induction with propofol.

STUDY OBJECT: To investigate the changes in hemodynamics and hypnotic levels during propofol infusion and tracheal intubation with and without fentanyl. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blinded study. SETTING: Teaching hospital. PATIENTS: 40 ASA physical status I adult patients scheduled for elective surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were anesthetized with either propofol (Group P; n = 20) or 2 microg/kg of fentanyl IV followed by propofol (Group PF; n = 20). Propofol was infused at 20 mg/kg/hr throughout the study, and tracheal intubation was performed 10 minutes after the start of propofol infusion. MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS: Bispectral index monitoring (BIS) progressively decreased to about 50 in both groups during infusion of propofol, but no difference was found between the two groups. After tracheal intubation, BIS significantly increased but remained below 60 in both groups. Hypertensive responses to intubation were fewer in Group PF than Group P. CONCLUSIONS: Propofol administration 20 mg/kg/hr for 10 minutes is suitable in suppressing arousal reactions to tracheal intubation, but the addition of fentanyl is required to blunt the hemodynamic responses.

Analgesics, Opioid↗
PubMed1996

A comparison: the efficacy of sevoflurane-nitrous oxide or propofol-nitrous oxide for the induction and maintenance of general anesthesia.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare sevoflurane-nitrous oxide with propofol-nitrous oxide for the induction and maintenance of anesthesia, and to determine the rates of recovery following each anesthetic. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled study. SETTING: Teaching hospital. PATIENTS: 50 ASA physical status I and II patients, ranging in age from 18 to 70 years. INTERVENTIONS: General anesthesia was induced with either sevoflurane or propofol and maintained with 60% to 70% nitrous oxide and either sevoflurane or a propofol infusion and supplemental fentanyl. At the conclusion of surgery, the oxygen flow was increased to 6 L/min and all anesthetics were discontinued simultaneously. Patients were monitored for the nature and speed of induction and emergency from anesthesia. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Induction of anesthesia was significantly slower in the sevoflurane group than in the propofol group (2.0 +/- 1.1 vs. 0.8 +/- 0.5 min, respectively). The ease of induction and the time required for emergence from anesthesia were the same in both study groups (eye opening: 9.0 +/- 4.4 min vs. 8.0 +/- 5.0 min; following commands: 11.2 +/- 5.0 min vs. 9.8 +/- 6.9 min; extubation: 9.1 +/- 4.5 min vs. 8.6 vs. 5.1 min in the sevoflurane and propofol groups, respectively). Patients in the sevoflurane group experienced nausea and vomiting more frequently than patients in the propofol group (13 and 5 patients vs. 3 and 0 patients in the sevoflurane and propofol groups, respectively), which were not related to the administration of neostigmine or intraoperative opioids. CONCLUSION: Sevoflurane allows for rapid inhalation induction of, and emergence from, general anesthesia.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1997

A comparison of propofol and remifentanil during monitored anesthesia care.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare remifentanil, an esterase-metabolized opioid, to a standard propofol-based sedation technique for monitored anesthesia care (MAC). DESIGN: Non-randomized, open label. SETTING: University hospital. PATIENTS: 44 healthy female outpatients undergoing breast biopsy procedures under local anesthesia. INTERVENTIONS: All patients received intravenous (IV) midazolam 2 mg, followed by a continuous infusion of either propofol 75 micrograms/kg/min, or remifentanil 0.1 microgram/kg/min, which was subsequently titrated to maintain optimal patient comfort without respiratory depression. Surgical-related pain was treated by injecting additional local anesthetic solution and "rescue" boluses of fentanyl 25 micrograms IV. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Sedation, pain, and discomfort were monitored using standardized rating scales at 1 to 5 minute intervals. Recovery times were measured from the end of the study drug infusions. Propofol resulted in significantly higher median sedation scores compared with remifentanil, with 73% of patients requiring a decrease in the propofol infusion rate because of "excessive" sedation. Local anesthetic requirements, pain, and discomfort scores during surgery were similar in both groups. Remifentanil resulted in greater respiratory depression compared with propofol, with decreases in the remifentanil infusion rate required by 41% of patients because of a slow respiratory rate (< 8 bpm) and/or oxygen desaturation measured by pulse oximetry (SpO2 < 90%). Median times to ambulation and to being judged "fit for discharge" were significantly shorter following propofol (40 and 47 minutes, respectively) compared with remifentanil (52 and 58 minutes, respectively). CONCLUSION: Remifentanil provided comparable intraoperative conditions and patient comfort at a lower sedation level compared with propofol. However, remifentanil was associated with greater respiratory depression and a longer time to home readiness.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1997

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions between opioids and propofol.

The pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions between opioids and propofol increasingly have been described and used in clinical practice. It is now known that propofol inhibits both alfentanil and sufentanil metabolism, thereby increasing the plasma concentrations of these opioids, while alfentanil also elevates propofol concentrations. Pharmacodynamically the interaction between propofol and the opioids is generally found to be synergistic. From the interaction data, the optimal propofol concentrations have been extracted that assure adequate anesthesia and the most rapid recovery possible. In the presence of fentanyl, sufentanil, and alfentanil, the optimal propofol concentration is approximately 3.5 microgram/ml, whereas in the presence of remifentanil, lower propofol concentrations of 2.5 to 3 microgram/ml are required.

Analgesics, Opioid↗
PubMed1998

The effects of preanesthetic oral clonidine on total requirement of propofol for general anesthesia.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of preanesthetic oral clonidine on total propofol requirement for uniform minor surgery (breast conservative surgery: breast cancer removal with axillary lymph node dissection), and to compare the action of clonidine with that of preanesthetic oral diazepam, a commonly used benzodiazepine. DESIGN: Randomized double-blinded study. SETTING: Operating room ASA physical status I and II room and recovery room of the cancer center. PATIENTS: 80 breast cancer patients scheduled for surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to one of four treatment groups (placebo, clonidine 75 micrograms, or 150 micrograms of clonidine, or 10 mg of diazepam were orally administered 60 min before induction of anesthesia); n = 20 per group. After evaluating the sedation and anxiety levels of patients using a visual analog scale, anesthesia was induced with propofol (1.5 mg/kg), and maintained with oxygen (O2): nitrous oxide (N2O) (30:70) with a continuous infusion of propofol. The propofol infusion was started at 10 mg/kg/h for 10 minutes, then decreased to 8 mg/kg/h, and 6 mg/kg/h thereafter, and the rate of infusion was adjusted to obtain adequate anesthesia (maintaining hemodynamic parameters within 20% of that prior to premedication). Fentanyl 0.2 mg (each 0.1 mg was given for intubation and axillary lymph node dissection, respectively) was administered. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Preanesthetic oral clonidine (150 micrograms) and diazepam (10 mg) induced anxiolysis without sedation. The total requirement (the mean infusion rates) of propofol in placebo, clonidine 75 micrograms, clonidine 150 micrograms, and 10 mg of diazepam groups were 841 +/- 70 (9.0 +/- 0.3), 720 +/- 63 (7.1 +/- 0.4), 491 +/- 39 (5.6 +/- 0.2), and 829 +/- 77 mg (7.9 +/- 0.4 mg/kg/h), respectively. The cost of propofol in these groups was $51.0 +/- 3.8, $45.5 +/- 3.2, $33.5 +/- 2.3, and $50.5 +/- 4.4, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Preanesthetic oral clonidine (150 micrograms) but not diazepam (10 mg) reduced the total requirement of propofol while stabilizing hemodynamic parameters. In addition, 150 micrograms of oral clonidine attenuates the hemodynamic responses associated with tracheal intubation.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed1999

Changes in respiratory pattern and arterial blood gases during sedation with propofol or midazolam in spinal anesthesia.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To investigate changes in respiratory pattern and arterial blood gases during sedation with propofol or midazolam in spinal anesthesia. DESIGN: Randomized, placebo-controlled study. SETTING: Operating room of a university-affiliated hospital. PATIENTS: 40 ASA physical status I and II patients who required spinal anesthesia. INTERVENTIONS: Spinal anesthesia with tetracaine and subsequent sedation with propofol (n = 15), midazolam (n = 15), or placebo (n = 10) was performed. MEASUREMENTS: Respiratory pattern [rib cage contribution to the tidal volume (%RC) and phase shift between rib cage and abdominal movements (PSrc-ab)] with a respiratory inductive plethysmograph (Respigraph) and arterial blood gas analysis (pH, pO2, and pCO2) were recorded. MAIN RESULTS: Spinal anesthesia per se increased %RC by 35% without changing PSrc-ab values (1.00). Sedation with propofol and midazolam decreased %RC by 60% and by 40%, respectively. PSrc-ab increased in both groups following sedation, and the increase in this parameter was higher in the propofol group (1.12) than in the midazolam group (1.04). In the placebo group, %RC decreased by 20% without any change in PSrc-ab. The decrease in pO2 was more significant in the propofol group (65.1 mmHg) than in the midazolam (74.2 mmHg) and placebo (83.1 mmHg) groups. CONCLUSION: Significant decreases in %RC and pO2 during propofol sedation seem to depend on paradoxical respiration due, in part, to upper airway obstruction; therefore, attention should be directed to the respiratory pattern during sedation, especially with propofol.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

ICU sedation after coronary artery bypass graft surgery: dexmedetomidine-based versus propofol-based sedation regimens.

OBJECTIVE: To compare dexmedetomidine-based to propofol-based sedation after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery in the intensive care unit (ICU). DESIGN: Randomized, open label. SETTING: Twenty-five centers in the United States and Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred ninety-five adults undergoing CABG surgery. INTERVENTIONS: At sternal closure, patients in group A received 1.0 microg/kg of dexmedetomidine over 20 minutes and then 0.2 to 0.7 microg/kg/h to maintain a Ramsay sedation score > or =3 during assisted ventilation and > or =2 after extubation. Patients could be given propofol for additional sedation if necessary; group B patients received propofol-based care according to each investigator's standard practice. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Mean sedation levels were within target ranges in both groups. Mean times to weaning and extubation were similar, although fewer dexmedetomidine patients remained on the ventilator beyond 8 hours. Morphine use was significantly reduced in the dexmedetomidine group. Only 28% of the dexmedetomidine patients required morphine for pain relief while ventilated versus 69% of propofol-based patients (p < 0.001). Propofol patients required 4 times the mean dose of morphine while in the ICU. Mean blood pressure increased initially in both groups, then decreased to 3 mmHg below baseline in dexmedetomidine patients; mean arterial pressure remained at 9 mmHg above baseline in propofol patients. No ventricular tachycardia occurred in the dexmedetomidine-sedated patients compared with 5% of the propofol patients (p = 0.007). Respiratory rates and blood gases were similar. Fewer dexmedetomidine patients received beta-blockers (p = 0.014), antiemetics (p = 0.015), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (p < 0.001), epinephrine (p = 0.030), or high-dose diuretics (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Dexmedetomidine provided safe and effective sedation for post-CABG surgical patients and significantly reduced the use of analgesics, beta-blockers, antiemetics, epinephrine, and diuretics.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗
PubMed1996

Administration of propofol by target-controlled infusion in patients undergoing coronary artery surgery.

OBJECTIVES: To study the predictive performance of a target-controlled infusion (TCI) system of propofol in patients undergoing coronary bypass graft (CABG) surgery, using a referenced pharmacokinetic set derived from healthy patients. Also, to determine the propofol concentrations required for clinically acceptable induction and maintenance of anesthesia when combined with midazolam as premedication and a continuous alfentanil infusion and to study the hemodynamic stability of this technique. DESIGN: Prospective noncomparative study analysis. SETTING: Operating room at a university hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-on patients with good left ventricular function undergoing coronary artery surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were anesthetized using a continuous infusion of alfentanil (mean infusion rate: 1 microgram/kg/min) and propofol administered by TCI. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The predictive performance of the TCI system (212 arterial samples) was measured at specified time points before, during, and after bypass. The TCI system underestimated the measured blood propofol concentrations with a bias of +21.2% and +9.6% during the prebypass and the bypass periods, respectively. The predictive inaccuracy, expressed by the median absolute prediction error, was 23% and 18.5%, respectively. Mean target propofol concentrations required to induce and maintain anesthesia before bypass were 0.92 microgram/mL and 3.64 micrograms/mL, respectively. In the period during and after bypass, the mean target concentrations required to maintain anesthesia was 2.22 micrograms/mL. The administration of propofol by TCI was still associated with some short episodes of hemodynamic instability that were easily controlled by adjusting the target concentration in the majority of the patients. Therefore, the overall quality and ease of control of anesthesia were considered as being good or adequate. CONCLUSIONS: In this group of patients undergoing CABG surgery, the TCI system used underestimated the measured propofol concentrations. However, the predictive performance of the selected mean pharmacokinetic parameters derived from healthy patients was acceptable during the whole surgical procedure.

Adult↗
PubMed1997

The effects of cardiopulmonary bypass on total and unbound plasma concentrations of propofol and midazolam.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) on total and unbound plasma concentrations of propofol and midazolam when administered by continuous infusion during cardiac surgery. DESIGN: Prospective clinical study. SETTING: University hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-four adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received either propofol or midazolam to supplement fentanyl anesthesia. Twelve patients received a propofol bolus (1 mg/kg) followed by an infusion of 3 mg/kg/hr. A second group received midazolam, 0.2 mg/kg bolus, followed by an infusion of 0.07 mg/kg/hr. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Blood sample were collected from the radial artery cannula at 0, 2, 4, 8, 8, 10, 15, 20 minutes and then every 10 minutes before CPB, at 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 10, 15, 20 minutes and then each 10 minutes during CPB. On weaning from CPB samples were collected at 0, 5, 10 and 20 minutes. Plasma binding, total and unbound propofol and midazolam concentrations were determined by ultrafiltration and high-pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC). CPB resulted in a fall in total propofol and midazolam plasma concentrations, but the unbound concentrations remained stable. The propofol unbound fraction increased from 0.22 +/- 0.06% to 0.41 +/- 0.17%. The midazolam unbound fraction increased from 5.6 +/- 1.0% to 11.2 +/- 2.1%. CONCLUSIONS: Unbound concentrations of propofol and midazolam are not affected by cardiopulmonary bypass. Total intravenous anesthesia algorithms do not need to be changed to achieve stable unbound plasma concentrations when initiating CPB.

Adult↗
PubMed1999

Effect of low-dose propofol infusion on total-body oxygen consumption after coronary artery surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of low-dose propofol infusion on total-body oxygen consumption (VO2) after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery. DESIGN: A prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study. SETTING: Cardiovascular intensive care unit in a university hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty patients after elective, uncomplicated CABG surgery. INTERVENTION: Patients were administered a continuous infusion of propofol with a fixed rate of 1 mg/kg/h (n = 15) or placebo (n = 15) during the spontaneous rewarming period of approximately 5 hours after surgery. A light level of sedation (Ramsay sedation score > or =2) was maintained by administering small doses of diazepam, 0.1 mg/kg, as required. Morphine, 0.05 mg/kg, was administered for analgesia as required. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Total-body VO2 was measured by indirect calorimetry. In addition, shivering (on a five-grade scale), hemodynamics, and plasma catecholamine and serum cortisol concentrations were measured. Diazepam, 5.6+/-7.4 mg (mean +/- standard deviation), was administered to the patients receiving propofol, and 16.1+/-12.2 mg was administered to the patients receiving placebo (p < 0.05). There was no difference in the dose of morphine between the groups (3.2+/-3.9 v 4.2+/-5.5 mg in the propofol and placebo groups, respectively). At any time during the study, VO2 was not different between the groups. VO2 increased from 130+/-29 to 172+/-29 mL/min/m2 in the propofol group and from 118+/-24 to 167+/-27 mL/min/m2 in the placebo group. Mean arterial pressure and heart rate were lower in the propofol group (p < 0.05). Stress hormone levels did not differ between the groups. CONCLUSION: Low-dose propofol infusion and additional diazepam as required does not decrease total-body VO2 compared with a pure diazepam bolus-dose technique when administered for light sedation during the immediate recovery period after CABG surgery.

Adrenergic Agonists↗
PubMed1999

The influence of nitrous oxide to supplement fentanyl/low-dose propofol anesthesia on transcranial myogenic motor-evoked potentials during thoracic aortic surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Intraoperative monitoring of myogenic motor evoked potentials to transcranial electrical stimulation (tc MEPs) is a new method to assess the integrity of the motor pathways. The authors studied the effects of 50% nitrous oxide (N2O) and a low-dose propofol infusion on tc MEPs paired electrical stimulation during fentanyl anesthesia with partial neuromuscular blockade. DESIGN: Cross-over study. SETTING: St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: Ten patients scheduled to undergo surgery on the thoracoabdominal aorta were studied; 6 women aged 54 to 69 years and 4 men aged 68 to 77 years. INTERVENTIONS: After achieving a stable anesthetic state and before surgery, tc MEPs were recorded during four 15-minute periods: (I) air/oxygen (O2; F(I)O2 = 50%); propofol target blood concentration, 0.5 microg/mL; (II) N2O/O2 (F(I)O2 = 50%); propofol target blood concentration, 0.5 microg/mL; (III) N2O/O2 (F(I)O2 = 50%; propofol target blood concentration, 1.0 microg/mL; and (IV) air/O2 (F(I)O2 = 50%); propofol target blood concentration, 1.0 microg/mL. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Tc MEPs were recorded from the right extensor digitorum communis muscle and the right tibialis anterior muscle. The right thenar muscle was used for recording the level of relaxation; the T1 response was maintained at 40% to 70% of the control compound muscle action potential. There was no significant difference in onset latency among the four phases. The addition of N2O and doubling the target propofol infusion to 1.0 microg/mL resulted in a 40% to 50% reduction of tc MEP amplitude recorded in the extensor digitorum communis muscle and tibialis anterior muscle (p < 0.01). During each phase, tc MEPs could be elicited and interpreted, except in one patient, in whom no tc MEPs could be elicited in the leg because of technical problems. CONCLUSION: The data indicate that tc MEP monitoring is feasible during low-dose propofol, fentanyl/50% N2O in 02 anesthesia and partial neuromuscular blockade.

Action Potentials↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Comparison of remifentanil and propofol infusions for sedation during regional anesthesia.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Patients treated with regional anesthesia often require concomitant medication for comfort and sedation. Propofol is widely used for this purpose. Remifentanil, a new ultra-short-acting opioid, exhibits at low doses distinct sedative properties that may be useful for supplementation of regional anesthesia. This study compared the effectiveness of remifentanil and propofol infusions for providing sedation during regional block placement and surgery. METHODS: In an open, prospective trial, 28 patients were randomly allocated to receive continuous infusions of remifentanil (6 microg/kg/h) or propofol (3 mg/kg/h) for sedation during spinal or axillary regional anesthesia. Infusion rates were titrated to maintain a sedation level > or = 2 as assessed with the Observer's Assessment of Alertness Scale. Vital signs were measured continuously, during and for 2 hours after ending study drug infusion. RESULTS: Similar scores for comfort and sedation were obtained in both groups during placement of the regional block and during surgery. Degree of sedation correlated with drug infusion rate of remifentanil (P < .002) but not for propofol. Respiratory rate decreased in the remifentanil group in absence of surgery (P < .05). Mean arterial pressure and heart rate were 20% lower in the propofol group (P < .05). Return to alertness occurred after 10 +/- 6 minutes in the remifentanil group and after 16 +/- 15 minutes in the propofol group. Similar incidences of hypotension, bradycardia, and nausea and vomiting were found in both groups, but intraoperative respiratory depression and nausea were more prominent in the remifentanil group. CONCLUSIONS: When titrated to the same sedation level, remifentanil provided a smoother hemodynamic profile than propofol during regional anesthesia. The frequent occurrence of remifentanil-induced respiratory depression requires cautious administration of this agent. The incidence of adverse reactions seen with both agents during and after their administration makes the management of such sedative infusion techniques difficult.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Comparison of the effects of remifentanil or fentanyl on anaesthetic induction characteristics of propofol, thiopental or etomidate.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: This prospective, randomized, double-blinded study was designed to compare the effects of remifentanil or fentanyl on anaesthetic induction characteristics of propofol, thiopental or etomidate. METHODS: Seventy-two patients were enrolled in six groups of 12 individuals each. In three groups, fentanyl was given as a bolus dose of 1.5 microg kg(-1), whereas the others received a remifentanil infusion at 0.5 microg kg(-1) min(-1). Five minutes later, propofol, thiopental or etomidate were titrated to a state of unresponsiveness. Assessment included the amounts of drug necessary for induction, haemodynamics and the times to apnoea, loss of eyelash reflex, and the release of a water-filled syringe held in the patient's hand. RESULTS: Induction times to loss of the eyelash reflex were significantly shorter in the remifentanil than in the fentanyl groups: with propofol 50.7 +/- 13.6s (mean +/- SD) versus 74.9 +/- 27.0s (P < 0.01), with thiopental 42.9 +/- 16.8s versus 77.2 +/- 27.8s (P < 0.01) and with etomidate 54.7 +/- 17.6s versus 72.3 +/- 24.0s (P < 0.05). The times to respiratory arrest or for the syringe to fall were significantly shorter with remifentanil than with fentanyl for propofol and for thiopental, but not for etomidate. In terms of dosages per kg body weight necessary to achieve unresponsiveness, less propofol (-29%, P < 0.05), thiopental (-25%, P < 0.05) or etomidate (-32%, P < 0.01) was necessary with remifentanil than with fentanyl. Haemodynamic responses to tracheal intubation were controlled more effectively with remifentanil. However, within the remifentanil groups, mean arterial pressure significantly decreased during induction: -26% with propofol, -181% with thiopental and -14% with etomidate (all P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: During anaesthetic induction, a remifentanil infusion of 0.5 microg kg(-1) min(-1) over 5 min is a suitable alternative to a 1.5 microg kg(-1) bolus dose of fentanyl: induction times are shorter with reduced amounts of propofol, thiopental or etomidate.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Bacterial contamination of propofol: the effects of temperature and lidocaine.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The intravenous anaesthetic propofol may become contaminated once the ampoules have been opened. The effect of lidocaine and cooling was tested on the bacterial contamination of propofol. METHODS: The study was performed in two parts. In Part 1,1920 aliquots of propofol alone, and of a propofollidocaine mixture, were drawn into sterile syringes and stored at room temperature (24-26 degrees C) or in the refrigerator (12-14 degrees C). In Part 2, 1200 aliquots from opened ampoules of propofol alone, or as a propofol-lidocaine mixture, were stored at room temperature or in the refrigerator. Samples were aerobically cultured at 0, 1, 2, 4, 8 and 12 h. RESULTS: In Part 1, diphtheroid bacillus was isolated from one aliquot (0.06%). In Part 2, there was bacterial growth in both groups; the number of contaminated ampoules increased with time and it was 20-26% at 12 h. Diphtheroid bacilli and coagulase-negative staphylococci were the most frequent micro-organisms. CONCLUSIONS: When propofol is stored in opened ampoules, the bacterial contamination rate is high. Adding lidocaine, or storing opened ampoules at 12-14 degrees C, does not affect the contamination rate, except during the first few hours. It is advisable to draw propofol aseptically into a syringe in an amount that can be used during one procedure.

Anesthetics, Intravenous↗
PubMed2003

Nitrous oxide/oxygen mixture and the prevention of pain during injection of propofol.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The incidence of pain associated with the injection of propofol still remains a problem. This study sought to examine the analgesic effects of inhaled nitrous oxide in oxygen on the prevention of propofol injection pain. METHODS: Nitrous oxide in oxygen was compared with a lidocaine (20 mg)-propofol mixture and with propofol alone (control) in a prospective, randomized, observer-blinded study. ASA I and II patients (n = 135) scheduled for elective surgical procedures were studied. A standard propofol injection technique and scoring system to measure the pain on injection was used. RESULTS: Demographic variables were similar between the study groups. Without analgesia (control) 26 of 45 patients (58%) reported pain on injection compared with 11 of 45 patients (24%) in both the nitrous oxide (95% CI: 14-52%, P = 0.001) and lidocaine groups (95% CI: 14-52%, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The inhalation of a nitrous oxide/oxygen mixture significantly reduces the incidence of pain during propofol injection. This therapeutic stratagem was as effective as a lidocaine-propofol mixture.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2003

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the new propofol prodrug GPI 15715 in rats.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: We studied the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of GPI 15715 (Aquavan injection), a new water-soluble prodrug metabolized to propofol by hydrolysis. METHODS: Nine adult male Sprague-Dawley rats (398 +/- 31 g) received a bolus dose of 40 mg GPI 15715. The plasma concentrations of GPI 15715 and propofol were determined from arterial blood samples, and the pharmacokinetics of both compounds were investigated using compartment models whereby the elimination from the central compartment of GPI 15715 was used as drug input for the central compartment of propofol. Pharmacodynamics were assessed using the median frequency of the EEG power spectrum. RESULTS: A maximum propofol concentration of 7.1 +/- 1.7 microg mL(-1) was reached 3.7 +/- 0.2 min after bolus administration. Pharmacokinetics were best described by two-compartment models. GPI 15715 showed a short half-life (2.9 +/- 0.2 and 23.9 +/- 9.9 min), an elimination rate constant of 0.18 +/- 0.01 min(-1) and a central volume of distribution of 0.25 +/- 0.02 L kg(-1). For propofol, the half-life was 1.9 +/- 0.1 and 45 +/- 7 min, the elimination rate constant was 0.15 +/- 0.02 min(-1) and the central volume of distribution was 2.3 +/- 0.6 L kg(-1). The maximum effect on the electroencephalogram (EEG)--EEG suppression for >4 s--occurred 6.5 +/- 1.2 min after bolus administration and baseline values of the EEG median frequency were regained 30 min later. The EEG effect could be described by a sigmoid Emax model including an effect compartment (E0 = 16.9 +/- 7.9 Hz, EC50 = 2.6 +/- 0.8 microg mL(-1), ke0 = 0.35 +/- 0.04 min(-1)). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with known propofol formulations, propofol from GPI 15715 showed a longer half-life, an increased volume of distribution, a delayed onset, a sustained duration of action and a greater potency with respect to concentration.

Anesthetics, Intravenous↗
PubMed2003

Cerebral vascular reactivity response to anaesthetic induction with propofol in patients with intracranial space-occupying lesions and vascular malformations.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In clinical trials, autoregulation and carbon dioxide reactivity are preserved during propofol anaesthesia. Paradoxical increases of blood flow velocity during induction of anaesthesia could be demonstrated in patients with brain tumours. This study evaluates the effects of propofol on cerebral blood flow velocity in patients undergoing surgery for brain tumours and vascular malformations. METHODS: Changes in cerebral blood flow velocity after the administration of propofol were assessed using bilateral 2 MHz transcranial Doppler probes in 47 patients undergoing surgery for brain tumours and in 22 patients undergoing surgery for aneurysms and angiomas. RESULTS: Flow reduction after propofol was slightly less pronounced on the side of the tumour; in patients with cerebrovascular lesions, no difference between the two sides was detectable. After the administration of propofol a flow increase was present on the side of the tumour in 2 patients. In 3 patients with angiomas, the flow decrease after the administration of propofol was less pronounced on the side of the angioma. Neither observation gave statistical proof of abnormality. CONCLUSIONS: The flow changes after propofol may give a hint of cerebrovascular reactivity. Further investigations should focus on combined measurements of cerebral autoregulation and carbon dioxide reactivity and should focus on patients with impaired consciousness to test for reliability.

Adolescent↗