{"title":"自动闭环异丙酚麻醉与地氟醚吸入麻醉在肥胖患者接受减肥手术:恢复概况的比较随机分析。","authors":"Amitabh Dutta, Nitin Sethi, Goverdhan D Puri, Jayashree Sood, Prabhat Kumar Choudhary, Anil Kumar Jain, Bhuwan Chand Panday, Manish Gupta","doi":"10.6859/aja.202306_61(2).0003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Precision general anesthesia (GA) techniques that minimize the presence of residual anesthetic and facilitate recovery, are desirable in patients with morbid obesity. Automated administration of propofol total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA), which facilitates precision propofol delivery by factoring in continuous patient input variable (bispectral index) to establish a closed feedback loop system, may help mitigate concerns related to propofol's lipid solubility and adverse accumulation kinetics in patients with morbid obesity. This randomized study evaluated the recovery of patients with morbid obesity undergoing bariatric surgery under propofol TIVA automated by a closed-loop anesthesia delivery system (CLADS) versus desflurane GA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Forty patients, randomly allocated to receive propofol TIVA (CLADS group) or desflurane GA (desflurane group), were evaluated for postoperative recovery (early and intermediate) (primary objective); they were evaluated for intraoperative hemodynamics, anesthesia depth consistency, anesthesia delivery performance characteristics, patient satisfaction, and incidence of adverse events (sedation, pain, postoperative nausea, and vomiting) (secondary objective).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No difference was found for the time-to-eye-opening (CLADS group: 4.7 [3.0, 6.7] min vs. desflurane group: 5.6 [4.0, 6.9] min, P = 0.576), time-to-tracheal-extubation (CLADS group: 6.7 [4.7, 9.3] min vs. desflurane group: 7.0 [5.8, 9.2] min, P = 0.528), ability-to-shift score from operating room table to the transport bed (CLADS group: 3 [3.0, 3.5] vs. desflurane group: 3 [3.0, 4.0], P = 0.703), and time to achieve a modified Aldrete score 9/10 (CLADS group: 15 [15.0, 37.5] min vs. desflurane group: 15 [15.0, 43.7] min, P = 0.867).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Automated propofol TIVA as administered by CLADS, which matched desflurane GA with respect to depth of anesthesia consistency and postanesthesia recovery profile, can be explored further as an alternative anesthesia technique in patients with morbid obesity.</p>","PeriodicalId":8482,"journal":{"name":"Asian journal of anesthesiology","volume":"61 2","pages":"61-70"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Automated Closed-Loop Propofol Anesthesia Versus Desflurane Inhalation Anesthesia in Obese Patients Undergoing Bariatric Surgery: A Comparative Randomized Analysis of Recovery Profile.\",\"authors\":\"Amitabh Dutta, Nitin Sethi, Goverdhan D Puri, Jayashree Sood, Prabhat Kumar Choudhary, Anil Kumar Jain, Bhuwan Chand Panday, Manish Gupta\",\"doi\":\"10.6859/aja.202306_61(2).0003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Precision general anesthesia (GA) techniques that minimize the presence of residual anesthetic and facilitate recovery, are desirable in patients with morbid obesity. Automated administration of propofol total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA), which facilitates precision propofol delivery by factoring in continuous patient input variable (bispectral index) to establish a closed feedback loop system, may help mitigate concerns related to propofol's lipid solubility and adverse accumulation kinetics in patients with morbid obesity. This randomized study evaluated the recovery of patients with morbid obesity undergoing bariatric surgery under propofol TIVA automated by a closed-loop anesthesia delivery system (CLADS) versus desflurane GA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Forty patients, randomly allocated to receive propofol TIVA (CLADS group) or desflurane GA (desflurane group), were evaluated for postoperative recovery (early and intermediate) (primary objective); they were evaluated for intraoperative hemodynamics, anesthesia depth consistency, anesthesia delivery performance characteristics, patient satisfaction, and incidence of adverse events (sedation, pain, postoperative nausea, and vomiting) (secondary objective).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No difference was found for the time-to-eye-opening (CLADS group: 4.7 [3.0, 6.7] min vs. desflurane group: 5.6 [4.0, 6.9] min, P = 0.576), time-to-tracheal-extubation (CLADS group: 6.7 [4.7, 9.3] min vs. desflurane group: 7.0 [5.8, 9.2] min, P = 0.528), ability-to-shift score from operating room table to the transport bed (CLADS group: 3 [3.0, 3.5] vs. desflurane group: 3 [3.0, 4.0], P = 0.703), and time to achieve a modified Aldrete score 9/10 (CLADS group: 15 [15.0, 37.5] min vs. desflurane group: 15 [15.0, 43.7] min, P = 0.867).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Automated propofol TIVA as administered by CLADS, which matched desflurane GA with respect to depth of anesthesia consistency and postanesthesia recovery profile, can be explored further as an alternative anesthesia technique in patients with morbid obesity.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8482,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian journal of anesthesiology\",\"volume\":\"61 2\",\"pages\":\"61-70\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian journal of anesthesiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.6859/aja.202306_61(2).0003\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian journal of anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6859/aja.202306_61(2).0003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
导论:精确全身麻醉(GA)技术,最大限度地减少残留麻醉和促进恢复,是病态肥胖患者的理想选择。异丙酚全静脉麻醉(TIVA)的自动给药,通过考虑连续的患者输入变量(双谱指数)来建立一个闭环系统,促进了异丙酚的精确给药,可能有助于减轻对病态肥胖患者异丙酚脂溶性和不良积累动力学的担忧。这项随机研究评估了在闭环麻醉输送系统(CLADS)自动的异丙酚TIVA和地氟醚GA下接受减肥手术的病状肥胖患者的恢复情况。方法:40例患者,随机分配接受异丙酚TIVA (CLADS组)或地氟醚GA(地氟醚组),评估术后恢复(早期和中期)(主要目的);对他们进行术中血流动力学、麻醉深度一致性、麻醉输送性能特征、患者满意度和不良事件(镇静、疼痛、术后恶心和呕吐)发生率(次要目标)的评估。time-to-eye-opening结果:没有发现差异(巨浪组:4.7(3.0,6.7)分钟和地氟醚组:5.6(4.0,6.9)分钟,P = 0.576), time-to-tracheal-extubation(巨浪组:6.7(4.7,9.3)分钟和地氟醚组:7.0(5.8,9.2)分钟,P = 0.528), ability-to-shift分数从手术室表传输床(巨浪组:3(3.0,3.5)和地氟醚组:3 [3.0,4.0],P = 0.703),和时间来实现修改Aldrete分数9/10(巨浪组:15 [15.0, 37.5] min vs地氟醚组:15 [15.0,43.7]min, P = 0.867)。结论:CLADS给药的自动异丙酚TIVA在麻醉深度一致性和麻醉后恢复方面与地氟醚GA相匹配,可以进一步探索作为病态肥胖患者的替代麻醉技术。
Automated Closed-Loop Propofol Anesthesia Versus Desflurane Inhalation Anesthesia in Obese Patients Undergoing Bariatric Surgery: A Comparative Randomized Analysis of Recovery Profile.
Introduction: Precision general anesthesia (GA) techniques that minimize the presence of residual anesthetic and facilitate recovery, are desirable in patients with morbid obesity. Automated administration of propofol total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA), which facilitates precision propofol delivery by factoring in continuous patient input variable (bispectral index) to establish a closed feedback loop system, may help mitigate concerns related to propofol's lipid solubility and adverse accumulation kinetics in patients with morbid obesity. This randomized study evaluated the recovery of patients with morbid obesity undergoing bariatric surgery under propofol TIVA automated by a closed-loop anesthesia delivery system (CLADS) versus desflurane GA.
Methods: Forty patients, randomly allocated to receive propofol TIVA (CLADS group) or desflurane GA (desflurane group), were evaluated for postoperative recovery (early and intermediate) (primary objective); they were evaluated for intraoperative hemodynamics, anesthesia depth consistency, anesthesia delivery performance characteristics, patient satisfaction, and incidence of adverse events (sedation, pain, postoperative nausea, and vomiting) (secondary objective).
Results: No difference was found for the time-to-eye-opening (CLADS group: 4.7 [3.0, 6.7] min vs. desflurane group: 5.6 [4.0, 6.9] min, P = 0.576), time-to-tracheal-extubation (CLADS group: 6.7 [4.7, 9.3] min vs. desflurane group: 7.0 [5.8, 9.2] min, P = 0.528), ability-to-shift score from operating room table to the transport bed (CLADS group: 3 [3.0, 3.5] vs. desflurane group: 3 [3.0, 4.0], P = 0.703), and time to achieve a modified Aldrete score 9/10 (CLADS group: 15 [15.0, 37.5] min vs. desflurane group: 15 [15.0, 43.7] min, P = 0.867).
Conclusion: Automated propofol TIVA as administered by CLADS, which matched desflurane GA with respect to depth of anesthesia consistency and postanesthesia recovery profile, can be explored further as an alternative anesthesia technique in patients with morbid obesity.
期刊介绍:
Asian Journal of Anesthesiology (AJA), launched in 1962, is the official and peer-reviewed publication of the Taiwan Society of Anaesthesiologists. It is published quarterly (March/June/September/December) by Airiti and indexed in EMBASE, Medline, Scopus, ScienceDirect, SIIC Data Bases. AJA accepts submissions from around the world. AJA is the premier open access journal in the field of anaesthesia and its related disciplines of critical care and pain in Asia. The number of Chinese anaesthesiologists has reached more than 60,000 and is still growing. The journal aims to disseminate anaesthesiology research and services for the Chinese community and is now the main anaesthesiology journal for Chinese societies located in Taiwan, Mainland China, Hong Kong and Singapore. AJAcaters to clinicians of all relevant specialties and biomedical scientists working in the areas of anesthesia, critical care medicine and pain management, as well as other related fields (pharmacology, pathology molecular biology, etc). AJA''s editorial team is composed of local and regional experts in the field as well as many leading international experts. Article types accepted include review articles, research papers, short communication, correspondence and images.