A Comparison of the Effects of Prolonged Infusion of Propofol 2% and 1% During Total Intravenous Anaesthesia Using Target-Controlled Infusion Technique for Elective Neurosurgery.

Kar Yee Loo, Sanihah Che Omar, Rhendra Hardy Mohamad Zaini, Wan Mohd Nazaruddin Wan Hassan, Praveena Seevaunnamtum
{"title":"A Comparison of the Effects of Prolonged Infusion of Propofol 2% and 1% During Total Intravenous Anaesthesia Using Target-Controlled Infusion Technique for Elective Neurosurgery.","authors":"Kar Yee Loo,&nbsp;Sanihah Che Omar,&nbsp;Rhendra Hardy Mohamad Zaini,&nbsp;Wan Mohd Nazaruddin Wan Hassan,&nbsp;Praveena Seevaunnamtum","doi":"10.21315/mjms2022.29.4.8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) with a combination of target-controlled infusions (TCIs) of propofol and remifentanil has been advocated for a favourable neurosurgical outcome. Neurosurgical procedures often involve a prolonged duration and large cumulative infusion of propofol. This study compares the serial serum lipid profile, acid-base balance and lactate level of neurosurgical patients anaesthetised with TCIs of propofol at 2% versus 1%.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 74 patients who underwent an elective craniotomy under general anaesthesia were randomised into two groups: i) propofol 1% (<i>n</i> = 37) and ii) propofol 2% (<i>n</i> = 37). All patients were anaesthetised using TCIs of propofol and remifentanil. Serial lipid profiles (serum triglyceride [TG] and cholesterol levels) were taken at the baseline, upon cessation of propofol and at 2 h post-operation. The total dosage, volume used and syringe changes of both groups were also documented.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The total volume of propofol used was significantly lower in the 2% group than the 1% group (157.19 mL [SD = 77.14] versus 335.17 mL [SD = 174.27]; <i>P</i> = 0.005) and the frequency of syringe changes was also less in the 2% than the 1% group (2 [3] versus 6 [3]; <i>P</i> < 0.001). However, there were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of serial serum TG, cholesterol, the acid-base balance or the lactate level. There was also no significant correlation of lipid profile with cumulative dose or volume of propofol infused between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both concentrations of propofol, 1% and 2%, were comparable in terms of the serial lipid profile, acid-base balance and lactate level during TIVA using TCIs for elective neurosurgery. The benefits of propofol at 2% were that a lower volume was used and there were fewer syringe changes, which could minimise anaesthesia interruption throughout surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":520812,"journal":{"name":"The Malaysian journal of medical sciences : MJMS","volume":" ","pages":"75-87"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9438856/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Malaysian journal of medical sciences : MJMS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21315/mjms2022.29.4.8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/8/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) with a combination of target-controlled infusions (TCIs) of propofol and remifentanil has been advocated for a favourable neurosurgical outcome. Neurosurgical procedures often involve a prolonged duration and large cumulative infusion of propofol. This study compares the serial serum lipid profile, acid-base balance and lactate level of neurosurgical patients anaesthetised with TCIs of propofol at 2% versus 1%.

Methods: A total of 74 patients who underwent an elective craniotomy under general anaesthesia were randomised into two groups: i) propofol 1% (n = 37) and ii) propofol 2% (n = 37). All patients were anaesthetised using TCIs of propofol and remifentanil. Serial lipid profiles (serum triglyceride [TG] and cholesterol levels) were taken at the baseline, upon cessation of propofol and at 2 h post-operation. The total dosage, volume used and syringe changes of both groups were also documented.

Results: The total volume of propofol used was significantly lower in the 2% group than the 1% group (157.19 mL [SD = 77.14] versus 335.17 mL [SD = 174.27]; P = 0.005) and the frequency of syringe changes was also less in the 2% than the 1% group (2 [3] versus 6 [3]; P < 0.001). However, there were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of serial serum TG, cholesterol, the acid-base balance or the lactate level. There was also no significant correlation of lipid profile with cumulative dose or volume of propofol infused between the two groups.

Conclusion: Both concentrations of propofol, 1% and 2%, were comparable in terms of the serial lipid profile, acid-base balance and lactate level during TIVA using TCIs for elective neurosurgery. The benefits of propofol at 2% were that a lower volume was used and there were fewer syringe changes, which could minimise anaesthesia interruption throughout surgery.

Abstract Image

目标控制输注技术在选择性神经外科全静脉麻醉中2%和1%异丙酚长时间输注的效果比较。
背景:全静脉麻醉(TIVA)结合靶控输注丙泊酚和瑞芬太尼(tci)已被提倡为良好的神经外科结果。神经外科手术通常需要长时间和大量累积输注异丙酚。本研究比较了2%异丙酚tci麻醉与1%异丙酚tci麻醉神经外科患者的系列血脂、酸碱平衡和乳酸水平。方法:74例全麻择期开颅患者随机分为两组:1%异丙酚组(n = 37)和2%异丙酚组(n = 37)。所有患者均采用异丙酚和瑞芬太尼的tci麻醉。在基线、停止使用异丙酚和术后2小时分别测量一系列脂质谱(血清甘油三酯[TG]和胆固醇水平)。记录两组总剂量、使用体积及注射器变化情况。结果:2%组丙泊酚总用量显著低于1%组(157.19 mL [SD = 77.14] vs . 335.17 mL [SD = 174.27];P = 0.005), 2%组更换注射器的频率也低于1%组(2[3]比6 [3];P < 0.001)。然而,两组在系列血清TG、胆固醇、酸碱平衡和乳酸水平方面没有显著差异。两组之间的脂质分布与注射异丙酚的累积剂量或体积也没有显著的相关性。结论:1%和2%的异丙酚浓度在选择性神经外科手术中使用tci进行TIVA时的连续脂质谱、酸碱平衡和乳酸水平方面具有可比性。2%异丙酚的好处是使用的体积更小,注射器更换次数更少,这可以最大限度地减少整个手术过程中的麻醉中断。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书