Effect of ulinastatin on perioperative organ function and systemic inflammatory reaction during cardiac surgery: a randomized double-blinded study / 대한마취과학회지

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the efficacy of ulinastatin for attenuating organ injury and the release of proinflammatory cytokines due to cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) during cardiac surgery. METHODS: Patients undergoing valvular heart surgery employing CPB were assigned to receive either ulinastatin (group U, n = 13) or a placebo (group C, n = 11) before the commencement of CPB. Hemodynamic data, parameters of major organ injury and function, and proinflammatory cytokines were measured after the induction of anesthesia (T1), after CPB (T2), at the end of anesthesia (T3), and at 24 hours after surgery (POD). RESULTS: The demographic data, CPB duration, and perioperative transfusions were not different between the groups. PaO2/FiO2 in group U was significantly higher than that in group C at T3 (3.8 +/- 0.8 vs. 2.8 +/- 0.7, P = 0.005) and at POD (4.0 +/- 0.7 vs. 2.8 +/- 0.7, P < 0.001). Creatine kinase-MB at POD in group U was significantly lower than that in group C (17.7 +/- 8.3 vs. 33.7 +/- 22.1, P = 0.03), whereas troponin I at POD was not different between the groups. Creatinine clearance and the extubation time were not different between the groups at POD. The dopamine infusion rate during the post-CPB period in group U was significantly lower than that in group C (1.6 +/- 1.6 vs. 5.5 +/- 3.3 microg/kg/min, P = 0.003). The interleukin-6 and tumor necrosis factor-alpha concentrations at T1, T2, and T3 as well as the incidences of postoperative cardiac, pulmonary and kidney injuries were not different between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Ulinastatin pretreatment resulted in an improved oxygenation profile and reduced inotropic support, probably by attenuating the degree of cardiopulmonary injury; however, it did not reduce the levels of proinflammatory cytokines.

The effect of dexmedetomidine on the adjuvant propofol requirement and intraoperative hemodynamics during remifentanil-based anesthesia / 대한마취과학회지

BACKGROUND: The effects of dexmedetomidine on the propofol-sparing effect and intraoperative hemodynamics during remifentanil-based propofol-supplemented anesthesia have not been well investigated. METHODS: Twenty patients undergoing breast surgery were randomly allocated to receive dexmedetomidine (group DEX) or placebo (group C). In the DEX group, dexmedetomidine was loaded (1 microg/kg) before anesthesia induction and was infused (0.6 microg/kg/h) during surgery. Anesthesia was induced with a target-controlled infusion (TCI) of propofol (effect site concentration, Ce; 3 microg/ml) and remifentanil (plasma concentration, Cp, 10 ng/ml). The Ce of TCI-propofol was adjusted to a bispectral index of 45-55, and Cp of TCI-remifentanil was fixed at 10 ng/ml in both groups. Mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) were recorded at baseline (T-control), after the loading of study drugs (T-loading), 3 min after anesthesia induction (T-induction), tracheal intubation (T-trachea), incision (T-incision), 30 min after incision (T-incision30), and at tracheal extubation (T-extubation). MAP% and HR% (MAP and HR vs. T-control) were determined and the propofol infusion rate was calculated. RESULTS: The propofol infusion rate was significantly lower in the DEX group than in group C (63.9 +/- 16.2 vs. 96.4 +/- 10.0 microg/kg/min, respectively; P < 0.001). The changes in MAP% at T-induction, T-trachea and T-incision in group DEX (-10.0 +/- 3.9%, -9.4 +/- 4.6% and -11.2 +/- 6.3%, respectively) were significantly less than those in group C (-27.6 +/- 13.9%, -21.7 +/- 17.1%, and -25.1 +/- 14.1%; P < 0.05, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Dexmedetomidine reduced the propofol requirement for remifentanil-based anesthesia while producing more stable intraoperative hemodynamics.