Comparison of Propofol-Based Total Intravenous Anesthesia versus Volatile Anesthesia with Sevoflurane for Postoperative Delirium in Adult Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Surgery: A Prospective Randomized Single-Blinded Study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the incidence of delirium and early (at 1 week) postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) between propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) and volatile anesthesia with sevoflurane in adult patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). DESIGN: This was a prospective randomized single-blinded study. SETTING: The study was conducted at a single institution, the Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical Sciences and Technology, a tertiary care institution and university-level teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Seventy-two patients undergoing elective CABG under CPB participated in this study. INTERVENTIONS: This study was conducted on 72 adult patients (>18 years) undergoing elective CABG under CPB who were randomized to receive propofol or sevoflurane. Anesthetic depth was monitored to maintain the bispectral index between 40 and 60. Delirium was assessed using the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit. Early POCD was diagnosed when there was a reduction of >2 points in the Montreal Cognitive Assessment score compared to baseline. Cerebral oximetry changes using near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS), atheroma grades, and intraoperative variables were compared between the 2 groups. MEASUREMENTS & MAIN RESULTS: Seventy-two patients were randomized to receive propofol (n = 36) or sevoflurane (n = 36). The mean patient age was 59.4 ± 8.6 years. The baseline and intraoperative variables, including atheroma grades, NIRS values, hemoglobin, glycemic control, and oxygenation, were comparable in the 2 groups. Fifteen patients (21.7%) patients developed delirium, and 31 patients (44.9%) had early POCD. The incidence of delirium was higher with sevoflurane (n = 12; 34.2%) compared to propofol (n = 3; 8.8%) (odds ratio [OR], 1.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13-2.62; p = 0.027)*. POCD was higher with sevoflurane (n = 20; 57.1%) compared to propofol (n = 11; 32.3%) (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.01-2.62; p = 0.038)*. In patients aged >65 years, delirium was higher with sevoflurane (7/11; 63.6%) compared to propofol (1/7; 14.2%) (p = 0.03)*. CONCLUSIONS: Propofol-based TIVA was associated with a lower incidence of delirium and POCD compared to sevoflurane in this cohort of patients undergoing CABG under CPB. Large-scale, multicenter randomized trials with longer follow-up are needed to substantiate the clinical relevance of this observation.

Comparison of remimazolam tosilate and propofol during induction and maintenance of general anesthesia in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective, single center, randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Remimazolam tosilate (RT) is a new, ultrashort-acting benzodiazepine. Here, we investigated the efficacy and safety of RT for general anesthesia in patients undergoing Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy (LC). METHODS: In this study, 122 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomly allocated to receive either remimazolam tosilate (Group RT) or propofol group (Group P). RT was administered as a slow bolus of 0.3 mg kg- 1 for induction, followed by 1.0-2.0 mg kg- 1 h- 1 for maintenance of general anesthesia. Propofol was started at 2 mg kg- 1 and followed by 4-10 mg kg- 1 h- 1 until the end of surgery. The primary outcome was the time to bispectral index (BIS) ≤ 60. The secondary outcome included the time to loss of consciousness (LoC), and the time to extubation. Adverse events were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 112 patients were recruited for study participation. Among them, the time to BIS ≤ 60 in Group RT was longer than that in Group P (Group RT: 89.3 ± 10.7 s; Group P: 85.9 ± 9.7 s, P > 0.05). While the time to LoC comparing remimazolam and propofol showed no statistical significance (Group RT: 74.4 ± 10.3 s; Group P: 74.7 ± 9.3 s, P > 0.05). The time to extubation in Group RT was significantly longer than that in Group P (Group RT: 16.0 ± 2.6 min; Group P: 8.8 ± 4.3 min, P < 0.001). Remimazolam tosilate had more stable hemodynamics and a lower incidence of hypotension during general anesthesia. CONCLUSIONS: Remimazolam tosilate can be safely and effectively used for general anesthesia in patients undergoing Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy. It maintains stable hemodynamics during induction and maintenance of general anesthesia compared with propofol. Further studies are needed to validate the findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chictr.org.cn ChiCTR2300071256 (date of registration: 09/05/2023).

Total Intravenous Anesthesia Is Preferred Over Volatile Agents in Cardiac Surgery.

The choice of maintenance anesthetic during cardiopulmonary bypass has been a subject of ongoing debate. Systematic reviews on the topic have so far failed to demonstrate a difference between volatile agents and total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) in terms of mortality, myocardial injury, and neurological outcomes. Studies using animal models and noncardiac surgical populations suggest numerous mechanisms whereby TIVA has been associated with more favorable outcomes. However, even if the different anesthetic methods are assumed to equivalent in terms of patient outcomes in the context of cardiac surgery, additional factors, namely variables of occupational exposure and environmental impact, strongly support the preferred use of TIVA.

Cardiopulmonary function, anesthetic effects, quality of arousal, hematology, and blood biochemistry during continuous intravenous infusion of a combination solution of xylazine, butorphanol, and propofol in calves.

General anesthesia in calves is easier to perform under field conditions, total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) than using inhalation anesthesia. In the present study, cardiopulmonary function, anesthetic effects, quality of arousal, hematology, and blood biochemistry were assessed during continuous infusion of a combination solution of 0.01% xylazine, 0.001% butorphanol, and 0.2% propofol (XBP) at doses of 6 (G6; 10 µg/kg/min xylazine, 1 µg/kg/min butorphanol, 200 µg/kg/min propofol) and 9 mL/kg/h (G9; 15 µg/kg/min xylazine, 1.5 µg/kg/min butorphanol 300 µg/kg/min propofol). For both groups, five castrated Holstein calves received intravenous injections of xylazine (0.2 mg/kg) and propofol (2 mg/kg), followed by a continuous infusion of XBP for 60 min to maintain anesthesia. Respiratory management consisted of tracheal intubation followed by spontaneous inhalation of pure oxygen. Cardiopulmonary, anesthesia, hematology, and blood biochemistry variables were assessed at rest (baseline) and every 5 or 15 min after the start of the XBP infusion. Quality of arousal was assessed based on the swallowing reflex recovery time from the stop of XBP infusion, and the sternal position time and standing time after atipamezole administration. XBP produced adequate sedation, analgesia, and muscle relaxation in all calves and maintained stable anesthesia for 60 min. As XBP infusion time passed, rectal temperature and heart rate became lower, and mean arterial blood pressure increased. In both groups, hematologic and blood biochemical effects were mild. The quality of arousal was not different, and all calves were standing. The results of the present study suggested that XBP is useful for TIVA in calves.

Relationship between preinduction electroencephalogram patterns and propofol sensitivity in adult patients.

PURPOSE: To determine the precise induction dose, an objective assessment of individual propofol sensitivity is necessary. This study aimed to investigate whether preinduction electroencephalogram (EEG) data are useful in determining the optimal propofol dose for the induction of general anesthesia in healthy adult patients. METHODS: Seventy healthy adult patients underwent total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA), and the effect-site target concentration of propofol was observed to measure each individual's propofol requirements for loss of responsiveness. We analyzed preinduction EEG data to assess its relationship with propofol requirements and conducted multiple regression analyses considering various patient-related factors. RESULTS: Patients with higher relative delta power (ρ = 0.47, p < 0.01) and higher absolute delta power (ρ = 0.34, p = 0.01) required a greater amount of propofol for anesthesia induction. In contrast, patients with higher relative beta power (ρ = -0.33, p < 0.01) required less propofol to achieve unresponsiveness. Multiple regression analysis revealed an independent association between relative delta power and propofol requirements. CONCLUSION: Preinduction EEG, particularly relative delta power, is associated with propofol requirements during the induction of general anesthesia. The utilization of preinduction EEG data may improve the precision of induction dose selection for individuals.

PRESS (Propofol, Remifentanil, Electricity/EEG, Setup and Setting) to Start: Introducing a Total Intravenous Anaesthesia Checklist at a Large Teaching Hospital.

Total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) is becoming more widely used, and as of yet there are few safety checks for the use of TIVA when compared to inhaled anaesthesia. This study aims to assess the feasibility and utility of introducing a TIVA checklist at a large teaching hospital. Methods A survey was sent out to all consultant and trainee anaesthetists at our hospital regarding their use of TIVA and errors in practice related to its use. A checklist was created based on common errors reported in the survey, errors described in NAP5 and our hospital's standard operating procedure. The checklist was introduced, and another survey was distributed a month later to assess compliance and utility and to gain feedback. Results In the first survey, there were 39 responses. A total of 64% had seen an error with the use of TIVA. For those using TIVA 70% of the time or more, 31% had seen an error in the last three months. Twelve per cent of those who had seen errors found that the errors led to patient harm. Only 33% used a method to double-check for errors prior to commencing TIVA. In the follow-up survey, 80% of those who used the checklist had found it useful, and 30% had corrected an error while using the checklist. Eighty-seven per cent felt the checklist would prevent errors from being made. Eighty per cent of respondents said they would use the checklist in their future practice. The checklist was found to be more useful for trainees, and for those who use TIVA less often. Discussion The 'PRESS to start TIVA" checklist has been shown to be a useful tool to prevent errors and a majority of anaesthetists at our hospital plan to use it going forward. Our data suggests that anaesthetists who are less experienced with TIVA benefit more from having a checklist. There was a marked increase in the number of anaesthetists who would use a checklist in the future, compared to those who used one in the initial survey. This shows that introducing a checklist is feasible and is likely to reduce errors going forward.

Quality of Postoperative Recovery in Total Intravenous Anesthesia between Remimazolam and Propofol for Intraoperative Neurophysiological Monitoring: A Prospective Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial.

This study compared the overall postoperative recovery of patients who underwent total intravenous anesthesia with remimazolam or propofol, using the Quality of Recovery-15 questionnaire (QoR-15). Seventy-two patients who underwent spine surgery with intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) were randomly categorized into the remimazolam group (group R) or propofol group (group P). On the first postoperative day, the QoR-15 scores for groups P and R were 114 and 112, respectively, indicating no significant difference (p = 0.691). Similarly, group-time interaction effects on QoR-15 scores were not significantly different. In the post-anesthesia care unit, the pain intensity at rest was notably higher in group P than in group R (3.0 [0.0] vs. 2.8 [0.5], respectively, p = 0.009). Although the intraoperative consumption of remifentanil was higher in group R (1452.4 µg vs. 2066.8 µg, respectively, p < 0.001), the intraoperative use of vasopressors was lower in group R (1705.6 µg vs. 286.1 µg, respectively, p < 0.001) compared to group P. Group R exhibited significantly lower variability in mean blood pressure over time compared to group P. Remimazolam was viewed as a promising intravenous agent for general anesthesia, showing potential to replace propofol in spine surgery with IONM, considering both recovery quality and intraoperative hemodynamic stability.

Target-controlled infusion: A comparative, prospective, observational study of the conventional TCI pump and the novel smartphone-based application iTIVA.

Background and Aims: Empirically adjusted, standard drug doses fail to address interindividual pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamics variability. Target-controlled infusion (TCI) delivers drugs in calibrated boluses to achieve and maintain a selected target plateau drug level (plasma or effect site). Interactive total intravenous anesthesia (iTIVA™) smartphone software simulates TCI and employs 31 established pharmacokinetic models for 11 different intravenous agents and is coupled with standard volumetric infusion pumps for administering TCI. Material and Methods: This prospective, observational, study investigates the degree of agreement between iTIVA and a conventional TCI pump (CTP) for the volume of propofol infused using the Schnider pharmacokinetic model in adult patients of either sex undergoing oncosurgery lasting 1-3 h under total intravenous anesthesia. Bland-Altman analysis of 124 data pairs from 30 patients provided bias, precision, and limits of agreement between the volumes infused by CTP and iTIVA (V-CTP and V-iTIVA) during specific identical time periods. Spearman's rho and Kendall's tau rank correlation coefficients provided the degree of association between V-CTP and V-iTIVA. Results: Spearman's rho and Kendall's tau were 0.996 and 0.964, respectively. Bias or the mean of differences was -0.02, while the limits of agreement were 0.58 and -0.63, respectively (Bland-Altman plot). The maximum allowed difference of 2 ml was much larger than the 95% confidence intervals for the limits of agreement. The Mountain plot was short tailed (-1.28 to 1.55) and centred over zero (0.01). Conclusion: The volume of propofol infused using TCI pump was similar to that calculated by iTIVA in identical time periods, confirming the clinical applicability of iTIVA.

Comparing Perioperative Outcomes of Total Intravenous Anesthesia (TIVA) With Volatile Anesthesia in Patients With Obesity: A Systematic Review.

In this systematic review, the perioperative outcomes of total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) and volatile anesthesia were compared in obese adults (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m²) undergoing elective surgery. The review analyzed data from 12 randomized-controlled trials involving 935 patients, sourced from PubMed/MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online), Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. The focus was on intraoperative vital signs, emergence time, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), duration of post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) stay, and ICU admission rates. Findings showed that TIVA (using propofol) might reduce PONV, but there were no significant differences in other outcomes compared to volatile anesthesia (with desflurane as the most common agent). The review highlights the need for more research, especially comparing sevoflurane with TIVA, to establish clear clinical guidelines for anesthesia in obese patients.

Are there beneficial effects to hybrid anesthesia*?

As the COVID-19 pandemic increased the use of propofol in the intensive care unit for the management of respiratory sequelae and supply had become a major issue. Indeed, most hospitals in Japan were forced to use propofol only for induction of anesthesia with inhalational maintenance. Large amounts of propofol remain in the syringe which exacerbates the problems by increased waste. I propose that use of low dose propofol in combination with a low concentration inhaled anesthetic as an alternative and call this hybrid anesthesia. Several advantages of hybrid anesthesia are evident in the literature. Volatile anesthesia has several disadvantages such as cancer progression, emergence agitation, marked reduction in motor evoked potentials (MEP), laryngospasm with desflurane and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Volatile anesthesia exerts some beneficial actions such as myocardial protection and fast emergence with desflurane. In contrast, total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) provides better survival in patients undergoing radical cancer surgery, reduction in emergence agitation, laryngospasm, PONV and better MEP trace Intraoperative awareness occurs more often during TIVA. When intravenous and volatile anesthesia are combined (hybrid anesthesia), the disadvantages of both methods may be offset by clear advantages. Thus, hybrid anesthesia may, therefore, be a viable anesthetic choice.

Preliminary Experience With Remimazolam for Procedural Sedation and as an Adjunct to General Anesthesia During Diagnostic and Interventional Cardiac Procedures.

Background: Remimazolam is a benzodiazepine which, like midazolam, has sedative, anxiolytic, and amnestic properties. Ester metabolism results in a half-life of 5 - 10 min, a limited context sensitive half-life, and rapid recovery when the infusion is discontinued. Methods: Following the Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, we performed a retrospective chart review of patients who received remimazolam in the cardiac catheterization, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and electrophysiology suites. The primary objective was to assess efficacy and safety. The secondary objective was to describe bolus and infusion dosing of remimazolam and the need for adjunctive agents to optimize procedural sedation conditions. Results: The study cohort included 26 patients with a median age of 18 years and a total of 33 anesthetic encounters. The most common procedures were endomyocardial biopsy or isolated hemodynamic assessment (right or left heart catheterization). Remimazolam was the primary agent for sedation in 82% of the procedures. The majority of cases (25 encounters, 76%) included a bolus dose of remimazolam prior to the start of an infusion. For those patients who received a starting bolus dose, dosing typically ranged between 30 and 110 µg/kg. Continuous infusion rates of remimazolam varied from 5 to 20 µg/kg/min. No adverse hemodynamic or respiratory effects were noted. Midazolam, fentanyl, and dexmedetomidine were the most frequently used adjunctive agents. One patient required transition to general anesthesia due to the need for a surgical intervention based on the findings of the cardiac catheterization. All other patients were effectively sedated. Conclusions: Our preliminary experience demonstrates that remimazolam effectively provided sedation for diagnostic and therapeutic cardiovascular procedures. Future studies are needed to further define dosing parameters for both bolus dosing and continuous infusion as well as to compare remimazolam to other commonly used for procedural sedation in patients with congenital and acquired heart disease.

Anesthetic Management of a Patient With Central Core Disease Undergoing Thoracoscopic Lung Resection: The Importance of Neuromuscular Monitoring at the Masseter Muscle.

Central core disease is a rare muscular disorder in which anesthetic considerations for the prevention of malignant hyperthermia and for avoidance of residual neuromuscular block are required. A 63-year-old woman with central core disease underwent thoracoscopic sublobar lung resection under total IV anesthesia with a prepared anesthetic workstation. The rocuronium-induced neuromuscular block was monitored by using acceleromyography at the left adductor pollicis muscle and the right masseter muscle. The recovery of neuromuscular block at the masseter was slower than that at the adductor pollicis. The patient showed no symptoms of malignant hyperthermia and residual neuromuscular block and had an uneventful postoperative course. In the present case, malignant hyperthermia was successfully prevented with general anesthesia that is free of triggering agents using a prepared anesthetic machine. The authors speculate that the masseter may be an auxiliary site for neuromuscular monitoring to ensure recovery from neuromuscular block in patients with central core disease.

Effect of fentanyl constant-rate infusions with or without medetomidine on the minimum infusion rate of propofol required to prevent motor movement in dogs.

Propofol is a potential injectable anesthetic agent used in total intravenous anesthesia. However, the sparing effect of fentanyl and medetomidine on the required propofol dose in dogs remains unclear. We aimed to investigate the effect of fentanyl constant-rate infusion (CRI) with or without medetomidine on the minimum infusion rate of propofol required to prevent motor movement (MIRNM) in dogs. Six healthy purpose-bred dogs were anesthetized on three occasions with propofol alone (loading dose [LD], 8 mg/kg to effect; initial infusion rate [IR], 0.70 mg/kg/min); propofol (LD, 6 mg/kg to effect; IR, 0.35 mg/kg/min) and fentanyl (LD, 2 µg/kg; IR, 0.10 µg/kg/min); or propofol (LD, 4 mg/kg to effect; IR, 0.25 mg/kg/min), fentanyl (LD, 2 µg/kg; IR, 0.10 µg/kg/min), and medetomidine (LD, 2 µg/kg; IR, 0.5 µg/kg/hr) under controlled ventilation. The MIRNM was determined by observing the response to a noxious electrical stimulus. Heart rate, blood pressure, and blood gas analyses were performed at 1, 2, 3, and 4 hr after initiating CRI. The MIRNM (mean [range]) was significantly lower in the propofol-fentanyl-medetomidine group (0.16 [0.10-0.27] mg/kg/min) than that in the propofol-alone group (0.63 [0.47-0.82] mg/kg/min) (P=0.0004). Fentanyl combined with medetomidine did not significantly decrease the mean arterial pressure in dogs receiving propofol CRI 1-3 hr after initiating CRI compared with propofol CRI alone (P>0.9999, P=0.1536, and P=0.0596, respectively), despite inducing a significantly lower heart rate.

Comparison of Remimazolam versus Sevoflurane on the Postoperative Quality of Recovery in Cervical Spine Surgery: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Double-Blind Trial.

Purpose: Remimazolam is a newly developed ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine. We compared overall functional recovery, including the postoperative Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) questionnaire scores, between balanced inhalational anesthesia using sevoflurane and total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with remimazolam in patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Patients and Methods: Seventy-two patients were randomized to the remimazolam (group R) or sevoflurane (group S) group. The primary outcome was the total QoR-15 score on postoperative day (POD) 1. We also assessed the total QoR-15 score on POD2, sub-scores of the QoR-15, perioperative parameters, and postoperative recovery profiles. Group-time interaction effects on the QoR-15 and its sub-scores were analyzed using a linear mixed model. Results: The total QoR-15 score on POD1 (120.2 in group R vs 114.3 in group S, P=0.189) was not statistically different between the groups. There were no significant group-time interaction effects on total QoR-15 scores. Instead, patients in group R showed significantly better sub-scores in psychological and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) items on POD1, as well as a lower degree of PONV, than those in group S. Among the five dimensions of the QoR-15, a significant group-time interaction effect was observed for psychological support. Group R showed significantly less changeability in blood pressure and heart rate with a lower dose of intraoperatively administered vasopressor than group S. Conclusion: Considering QoR-15, including PONV reduction, and intraoperative hemodynamic stability, remimazolam can be used as the novel and safe anesthetic agent for maintaining general anesthesia instead of sevoflurane in patients undergoing ACDF.

Risk Factors for Desaturation in Anesthetic Management During Airway Stenting.

Airway stenting involves a stent being inserted into a stenotic site in the airway. In patients with airway stenosis, the airway is the surgical field; therefore, anesthetic management is challenging, and avoiding hypoxia is important. Limited information is available on the anesthetic management of airway stenting. Risk factors for oxygen desaturation during airway stenting remain unknown. The present study was conducted to retrospectively examine patients who underwent airway stenting during a specific period and identify risk factors associated with oxygen desaturation. We performed univariate and multivariate analyses. The main evaluation items in a multivariate analysis were risk factors for desaturation (SpO2 ≤ 90%). Body mass index, preoperative orthopnea, the stenotic site of the airway, and severity of stenosis were selected for clinical usefulness. We analyzed 302 patients who underwent airway stenting at our hospital between July 2011 and June 2014 under general anesthesia with controlled ventilation. Total intravenous anesthesia with propofol target-controlled infusion and remifentanil was performed. Clinical data were extracted from electronic anesthetic records. The incidence of desaturation (SpO2 ≤ 90%) was 18.5% (56 out of 302 cases). Preoperative orthopnea (OR, 3.06)and stenosis distal to the bronchus (OR, 3.31) were identified as risk factors for desaturation in a multivariate analysis. We herein identified risk factors for desaturation during airway stenting. Anesthetic plans need to be carefully considered for patients with these risk factors.

The effects of dexmedetomidine on intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring modalities during corrective scoliosis surgery in pediatric patients: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: During scoliosis surgery, motor evoked potentials (MEP), and somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEP) have been reported to be affected by the use of higher doses of anesthetic agents. Dexmedetomidine, a sympatholytic agent, an alpha-2 receptor agonist, has been used as an adjunctive agent to lower anesthetic dose. However, there is conflicting evidence regarding the effects of dexmedetomidine on the intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring of MEP and SSEP during surgery, particularly among pediatric patients. OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aimed to determine whether, during spinal fusion surgery in pediatric patients with scoliosis, dexmedetomidine alters MEP amplitude or SSEP latency and amplitude and, if so, whether different doses of dexmedetomidine display different effects (PROSPERO registration number CRD42022300562). METHODS: We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library on January 1, 2022 and included randomized controlled trials, observational cohort and case-control studies and case series investigating dexmedetomidine in the population of interest and comparing against a standardized anesthesia regimen without dexmedetomidine or comparing multiple doses of dexmedetomidine. Animal and in vitro studies and conference abstracts were excluded. RESULTS: We found substantial heterogeneity in the risk of bias (per Cochrane-preferred tools) of the included articles (n = 5); results are summarized without meta-analysis. Articles with the lowest risk of bias indicated that dexmedetomidine was associated with MEP loss and that higher doses of dexmedetomidine increased risk. In contrast, articles reporting no association between dexmedetomidine and MEP loss suffered from higher risk of bias, including suspected or confirmed problems with confounding, outcome measurement, participant selection, results reporting, and lack of statistical transparency and power. CONCLUSION: Given the limitations of the studies available in the literature, it would be advisable to conduct rigorous randomized controlled trials with larger sample sizes to assess the effects of dexmedetomidine use of in scoliosis surgery in pediatric patients.

Effects of propofol alone or in combination with ketamine on intraocular pressure in unpremedicated dogs.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of propofol (P) alone and in combination with ketamine (KP) at ratios of 1:1, 1:2, and 1:3 on intraocular pressure (IOP) in unpremedicated dogs. ANIMALS STUDIED: A total of 28 cross-bred healthy dogs. PROCEDURES: Dogs were randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 7 per group) to receive intravenous P or KP at 1:1, 1:2, and 1:3 ratios, respectively. The infusion was administered at 0.6 mg/kg/min for 60 min. IOP, cardiorespiratory variables, rectal temperature (RT), and pedal reflex were recorded every 5 min for 60 min, starting from baseline (BL). RESULTS: There was a statistically significant increase in IOP in all groups: P (p = .011), KP 1:1 (p = .003), KP 1:2 (p = .023), and KP 1:3 (p = .008). The IOP increase was less pronounced in the KP 1:2 group and was only significant (p = .023) at T45 compared with BL. A significant correlation was observed between IOP and SpO2 in P (r = -.215, p = .02), KP 1:2 (r = -.579, p < .01), and KP 1:3 (r = -.402, p < .01) groups. IOP significantly increased due to decreased SpO2 below 86.5% (p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Propofol alone and in combination with ketamine may increase preexisting IOP in unpremedicated dogs. SpO2 levels below 86.5% may trigger an increase in IOP. Administering KP in a 1:2 ratio at an infusion rate of 0.6 mg/kg/min does not significantly alter IOP for under 45 min in unpremedicated dogs with sufficient oxygenation.

The Total Intra Venous Anesthesia Effect Versus Volatile Anesthesia, on Stress and Pain Levels, in Patients Undergoing Breast Reconstruction in Ambulatory Surgery Center Total Intra Venous Anesthesia Protocol and Stress Response.

AIM: To compare pain and stress response through cortisol and DHEA levels, implementing. Total intra venous anesthesia (TIVA) versus general anesthesia with volatile anesthetics (VOL). DESIGN: This is a prospective randomized correlation study with consecutive measurements. METHODS: In an ambulatory surgical center from October of 2019 to August of 2020, patients who underwent breast reconstruction with autologous fat grafting were randomized into 2 groups. Patients in the TIVA group (n = 23) received intravenous anesthesia and those in the VOL group (n = 23) received volatile anesthesia (desflurane). Demographic, anthropometric and clinical data were recorded. Arterial systolic (SP) and diastolic (DP) blood pressure, heart rate and oxygen saturation were recorded. Pain and stress levels were evaluated through salivary cortisol and DHEA levels at 4 different time points: T0) 1 hour before induction, T1) during the induction, T2) during anesthesia maintenance, and T3) in recovery phase. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS 25.0 at significant level α = .05. FINDINGS: There were no statistically significant differences between the 2 groups regarding demographic features. Interestingly that there was a statistically significant difference in the vital sign monitoring where patients in the TIVA group reported with higher levels of SP(T2) and DP (T2), whilst DHEA (T1) levels was correlated positively with patient's age and cortisol (T1) levels and negatively with DP (T3). CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the use of TIVA as a safe and effective option for anesthesia in patients undergoing breast reconstruction with autologous fat grafting.

Description of the Content and Quality of Publicly Available Information on the Internet About Inhaled Volatile Anesthesia and Total Intravenous Anesthesia: Descriptive Study.

BACKGROUND: More than 300 million patients undergo surgical procedures requiring anesthesia worldwide annually. There are 2 standard-of-care general anesthesia administration options: inhaled volatile anesthesia (INVA) and total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA). There is limited evidence comparing these methods and their impact on patient experiences and outcomes. Patients often seek this information from sources such as the internet. However, the majority of websites on anesthesia-related topics are not comprehensive, updated, and fully accurate. The quality and availability of web-based patient information about INVA and TIVA have not been sufficiently examined. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to (1) assess information on the internet about INVA and TIVA for availability, readability, accuracy, and quality and (2) identify high-quality websites that can be recommended to patients to assist in their anesthesia information-seeking and decision-making. METHODS: Web-based searches were conducted using Google from April 2022 to November 2022. Websites were coded using a coding instrument developed based on the International Patient Decision Aids Standards criteria and adapted to be appropriate for assessing websites describing INVA and TIVA. Readability was calculated with the Flesch-Kincaid (F-K) grade level and the simple measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) readability formula. RESULTS: A total of 67 websites containing 201 individual web pages were included for coding and analysis. Most of the websites provided a basic definition of general anesthesia (unconsciousness, n=57, 85%; analgesia, n=47, 70%). Around half of the websites described common side effects of general anesthesia, while fewer described the rare but serious adverse events, such as intraoperative awareness (n=31, 46%), allergic reactions or anaphylaxis (n=29, 43%), and malignant hyperthermia (n=18, 27%). Of the 67 websites, the median F-K grade level was 11.3 (IQR 9.5-12.8) and the median SMOG score was 13.5 (IQR 12.2-14.4), both far above the American Medical Association (AMA) recommended reading level of sixth grade. A total of 51 (76%) websites distinguished INVA versus TIVA as general anesthesia options. A total of 12 of the 51 (24%) websites explicitly stated that there is a decision to be considered about receiving INVA versus TIVA for general anesthesia. Only 10 (20%) websites made any direct comparisons between INVA and TIVA, discussing their positive and negative features. A total of 12 (24%) websites addressed the concept of shared decision-making in planning anesthesia care, but none specifically asked patients to think about which features of INVA and TIVA matter the most to them. CONCLUSIONS: While the majority of websites described INVA and TIVA, few provided comparisons. There is a need for high-quality patient education and decision support about the choice of INVA versus TIVA to provide accurate and more comprehensive information in a format conducive to patient understanding.