Hyperbaric bupivacaine versus prilocaine for spinal anesthesia combined with total intravenous anesthesia during oncological colon surgery in a 23-hour stay enhanced recovery protocol: A non-randomized study.

After the success of the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol, perioperative care has been further optimized in accelerated enhanced recovery pathways (ERPs), where optimal pain management is crucial. Spinal anesthesia was introduced as adjunct to general anesthesia to reduce postoperative pain and facilitate mobility. This study aimed to determine which spinal anesthetic agent provides best pain relief in accelerated ERP for colon carcinoma. This single center study was a secondary analysis conducted among patients included in the aCcelerated 23-Hour erAS care for colon surgEry study who underwent elective laparoscopic colon surgery. The first 30 patients included received total intravenous anesthesia combined with spinal anesthesia with prilocaine, the 30 patients subsequently included received spinal anesthesia with hyperbaric bupivacaine. Primary endpoint of this study was the total amount of morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) administered during hospital stay. Secondary outcomes were amounts of MMEs administered in the recovery room and surgical ward, pain score using the numeric rating scale, complication rates and length of hospital stay. Compared to prilocaine, the total amount of MMEs administered was significantly lower in the bupivacaine group (n = 60, 16.3 vs 6.3, P = .049). Also, the amount of MMEs administered and median pain scores were significantly lower after intrathecal bupivacaine in the recovery room (MMEs 11.0 vs 0.0, P = .012 and numeric rating scale 2.0 vs 1.5, P = .004). On the surgical ward, median MMEs administered, and pain scores were comparable. Postoperative outcomes were similar in both groups. Spinal anesthesia with hyperbaric bupivacaine was associated with less opioid use and better pain reduction immediately after surgery compared to prilocaine within an accelerated ERP for elective, oncological colon surgery.

Effect of intravenous anesthetic drugs on fertilization rate in oocyte retrieval.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of intravenous anesthetic drugs on fertilization rate in subjects receiving oocyte retrieval by assisted reproduction technology (ART). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was designed. The clinical information of subjects who received oocyte retrieval procedure was collected. The subjects were divided into two groups based on the type of anesthesia used: the no-anesthesia group and the intravenous anesthesia group. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed and multiple linear regression analyses were conducted. Fertilization rate was compared between the two groups before and after PSM. RESULTS: A total of 765 subjects were divided into two groups: the no-anesthesia group (n = 482) and the intravenous anesthesia group (n = 283). According to propensity scores, 258 pairs of subjects were well matched, and the baseline data between the two groups were not significantly different (P > 0.05). Fertilization rate was 77% in the intravenous anesthesia group, and 76% in the no-anesthesia group, without significant between-group difference (P = 0.685). Before matching, Poisson regression analysis showed no effect of intravenous anesthetic drugs on fertilization rate (RR = 0.859, 95%CI: 0.59 to 1.25, P = 0.422). After matching, no difference was found either (RR = 0.935, 95%CI: 0.67 to 1.29, P = 0.618). CONCLUSION: Intravenous anesthetic drugs may exert no effects on fertilization rate in subjects receiving ART.

Application of propofol-remifentanil intravenous general anesthesia combined with regional block in pediatric ophthalmic surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to observe the anesthetic effect and safety of intravenous anesthesia without muscle relaxant with propofol-remifentanil combined with regional block under laryngeal mask airway in pediatric ophthalmologic surgery. METHODS: A total of 90 undergoing ophthalmic surgery were anesthetized with general anesthesia using the laryngeal mask airway without muscle relaxant. They were randomly divided into two groups: 45 children who received propofol-remifentanil intravenous anesthesia combined with regional block (LG group), and 45 children who received total intravenous anesthesia (G group). The peri-operative circulatory indicators, awakening time after general anesthesia, postoperative analgesic effect and the incidence of anesthesia-related adverse events were respectively compared between the two groups. RESULTS: All the children successfully underwent the surgical procedure. The awakening time after general anesthesia and removal time of laryngeal mask were significantly shorter in the LG group than in the G group (P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the heart rates in the perioperative period between the two groups (P > 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of intraoperative physical response, respiratory depression, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and emergence agitation (EA) between the two groups (P > 0.05). The pain score at the postoperative hour 2 was lower in the LG group than in the G group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Propofol-remifentanil intravenous anesthesia combined with long-acting local anesthetic regional block anesthesia, combined with laryngeal mask ventilation technology without muscle relaxants, can be safely used in pediatric eye surgery to achieve rapid and smooth recovery from general anesthesia and better postoperative analgesia. This anesthesia scheme can improve the comfort and safety of children in perioperative period, and has a certain clinical popularization value.

Optimizing nicardipine dosage for effective control of pituitrin-induced hypertension in laparoscopic myomectomy undergoing total intravenous anesthesia.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine the median effective dose (ED50) and 95% effective dose (ED95) of nicardipine for treating pituitrin-induced hypertension during laparoscopic myomectomy, providing guidance for the management of intraoperative blood pressure in such patients. METHODS: Among the initial 40 participants assessed, 24 underwent elective laparoscopic myomectomy. A sequential up-and-down method was employed to ascertain the ED50 of nicardipine based on its antihypertensive efficacy. Nicardipine was initially administered at 6 µg/kg following the diagnosis of pituitrin-induced hypertension in the first patient. Dosing adjustments were made to achieve the desired antihypertensive effect, restoring systolic blood pressure and heart rate to within ± 20% of baseline within 120 s. The dosing increment or reduction was set at 0.5 µg/kg for effective or ineffective responses, respectively. The ED50 and ED95 of nicardipine were calculated using Probit regression by Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE) to establish dose-response curves and confidence intervals. RESULTS: 24 patients were included for analysis finally. The ED50 and ED95 of nicardipine for blood pressure control after pituitrin injection were determined. The study found that the ED50 of nicardipine for treating pituitrin-induced hypertension was 4.839 µg/kg (95% CI: 4.569-5.099 µg/kg), and the ED95 was estimated at 5.308 µg/kg (95% CI: 5.065-6.496 µg/kg). Nicardipine effectively mitigated the hypertensive response caused by pituitrin without inducing significant tachycardia or hypotension. CONCLUSIONS: Nicardipine effectively controlled blood pressure after pituitrin injection during laparoscopic myomectomy, with ED50 and ED95 values established. This research highlights the potential utility of nicardipine in addressing hypertensive responses induced by pituitrin, particularly in clinical settings where pituitrin is routinely administered.

Carbon Footprint of Total Intravenous and Inhalation Anesthesia in the Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Procedure.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify and compare the emissions for deep sedation with total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) and general anesthesia with inhaled agents during the transcatheter aortic valve replacement procedure. DESIGN: A retrospective study. SETTING: A tertiary hospital in Boston, Massachusetts. PARTICIPANTS: The anesthesia records of 604 consecutive patients who underwent the transcatheter aortic valve replacement procedure between January 1, 2018, and March 31, 2022, were reviewed and analyzed. INTERVENTIONS: Data were examined and compared in the following 2 groups: general anesthesia with inhaled agents and deep sedation with TIVA. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The gases, drugs, airway management devices, and anesthesia machine electricity were collected and converted into carbon dioxide emissions (CO2e). The carbon emissions of intravenous medications were converted with the CO2e data for anesthetic pharmaceuticals from the Parvatker et al. study. For inhaled agents, inhaled anesthetics and oxygen/air flow rate were collected at 15-minute intervals and calculated using the anesthetic gases calculator provided by the Association of Anesthetists. The airway management devices were converted based on life-cycle assessments. The electricity consumed by the anesthesia machine during general anesthesia was estimated from the manufacturer's data (Dräger, GE) and local Energy Information Administration data. The data were analyzed in the chi-squared test or Wilcoxon rank-sum test. There were no significant differences in the patients' demographic characteristics, such as age, sex, weight, height, and body mass index. The patients who received general anesthesia with inhaled agents had statistically higher total CO2e per case than deep sedation with TIVA (16.188 v 1.518 kg CO2e; p < 0.001), primarily due to the inhaled agents and secondarily to airway management devices. For deep sedation with TIVA, the major contributors were intravenous medications (71.02%) and airway management devices (16.58%). A subgroup study of patients who received sevoflurane only showed the same trend with less variation. CONCLUSIONS: The patients who received volatile anesthesia were found to have a higher CO2e per case. This difference remained after a subgroup analysis evaluating those patients only receiving sevoflurane and after accounting for the differences in the duration of anesthesia. Data from this study and others should be collectively considered as the healthcare profession aims to provide the best care possible for their patients while limiting the harm caused to the environment.

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.

Comparison of remimazolam-based and propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia on hemodynamics during anesthesia induction in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the hemodynamic effects of remimazolam- and propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia in patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement. METHODS: This was a single-center, single-blind, randomized controlled trial set at Nara Medical University, Kashihara, Japan. We included 36 patients aged ≥ 20 years scheduled to undergo elective transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) under general anesthesia. The participants were randomly assigned to the remimazolam and propofol groups (n = 18 each). Remimazolam- or propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia was initiated at 12 mg/kg/min or 2.5 mcg/mL via target-controlled infusion, respectively, along with remifentanil. After confirming the loss of consciousness, the administration rate was adjusted using electroencephalographic monitoring. The primary outcome was the rate of arterial hypotension, defined as a mean arterial pressure < 60 mmHg, from anesthesia induction until the beginning of the surgical incision. The total doses of ephedrine and phenylephrine were also assessed. RESULTS: During anesthesia induction, the arterial hypotension rates were 11.9% and 21.6% in the remimazolam and propofol groups, respectively (P = 0.01). The total dose of ephedrine was higher in the propofol group (14.4 mg) than in the remimazolam group (1.6 mg) (P < 0.001); however, the total dose of phenylephrine was not significantly different between the two groups (propofol 0.31 mg vs. remimazolam: 0.17 mg, P = 0.10). CONCLUSION: Remimazolam-based total intravenous anesthesia resulted in a lower hypotension rate than propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia during induction in patients undergoing TAVR. Remimazolam-based total intravenous anesthesia can be used safely during anesthetic induction in patients with severe aortic stenosis.

Total intravenous anaesthesia with propofol and remifentanil is associated with reduction in operative time in surgery for glioblastoma when compared with inhalational anaesthesia with sevoflurane.

BACKGROUND: Total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) is emerging as a preferred neuroanaesthetic agent compared with inhalational anaesthetic (IA) agents. We asked if TIVA with propofol and remifentanil was associated with shorter operative times compared to IA using sevoflurane in brain tumour surgery under GA. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients undergoing surgery for glioblastoma (GBM). We assessed choice of GA agent (TIVA or IA) with total time patient was under GA (anaesthetic time), operative time and time taken to recover fully from GA (recovery time). RESULTS: Over a two year period 263 patients underwent surgery under GA for their GBM including 188 craniotomy operations, 63 burr hole biopsy procedures and 12 open biopsy procedures. Of these, 79 operations took place under TIVA and 184 operations under IA. TIVA was associated with significantly reduced mean operative time including time taken to wake up in theatre (104 min with TIVA, 129 min with IA; p = 0.02). TIVA was also associated with trends toward shorter mean recovery time (118 min, versus 135 min with IA; p = 0.08) and shorter mean anaesthetic time (163 min, versus 181 min with IA; p = 0.07). There was no difference between TIVA and IA groups as regards duration of inpatient stay, readmission rates, complications or survival. CONCLUSIONS: TIVA with propofol and remifentanil may reduce anaesthetic, operative and recovery times in patients undergoing surgery for their GBM. These findings may be attributable to favourable effects on intracranial pressure and cerebral perfusion, as well as rapid recovery from GA. In addition to clinical advantages, there may be financial and logistical benefits.

Reducing the carbon footprint of general anaesthesia: a comparison of total intravenous anaesthesia vs. a mixed anaesthetic strategy in 47,157 adult patients.

Global warming is a major public health concern. Volatile anaesthetics are greenhouse gases that increase the carbon footprint of healthcare. Modelling studies indicate that total intravenous anaesthesia is less carbon intensive than volatile anaesthesia, with equivalent quality of care. In this observational study, we aimed to apply the findings of previous modelling studies to compare the carbon footprint per general anaesthetic of an exclusive TIVA strategy vs. a mixed TIVA-volatile strategy. This comparative retrospective study was conducted over 2 years in two French hospitals, one using total intravenous anaesthesia only and one using a mixed strategy including both intravenous and inhalation anaesthetic techniques. Based on pharmacy procurement records, the quantity of anaesthetic sedative drugs was converted to carbon dioxide equivalents. The primary outcome was the difference in carbon footprint of hypnotic drugs per intervention between the two strategies. From 1 January 2021 to 31 December 2022, 25,137 patients received general anaesthesia in the hospital using the total intravenous anaesthesia strategy and 22,020 in the hospital using the mixed strategy. The carbon dioxide equivalent footprint of hypnotic drugs per intervention in the hospital using the total intravenous anaesthesia strategy was 20 times lower than in the hospital using the mixed strategy (emissions of 2.42 kg vs. 48.85 kg carbon dioxide equivalent per intervention, respectively). The total intravenous anaesthesia strategy significantly reduces the carbon footprint of hypnotic drugs in general anaesthesia in adult patients compared with a mixed strategy. Further research is warranted to assess the risk-benefit ratio of the widespread adoption of total intravenous anaesthesia.

Implementation of an electroencephalogram-guided propofol anesthesia practice in a large academic pediatric hospital: A quality improvement project.

BACKGROUND: Propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia is gaining popularity in pediatric anesthesia. Electroencephalogram can be used to guide propofol dosing to the individual patient to mitigate against overdosing and adverse events. However, electroencephalogram interpretation and propofol pharmacokinetics are not sufficiently taught in training programs to confidently deploy electroencephalogram-guided total intravenous anesthesia. AIMS: We conducted a quality improvement project with the smart aim of increasing the percentage of electroencephalogram-guided total intravenous anesthesia cases in our main operating room from 0% to 80% over 18 months. Balancing measures were number of total intravenous anesthesia cases, emergence times, and perioperative emergency activations. METHODS: The project key drivers were education, equipment, and electronic health record modifications. Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles included: (1) providing journal articles, didactic lectures, intraoperative training, and teaching documents; (2) scheduling electroencephalogram-guided total intravenous anesthesia teachers to train faculty, staff, and fellows for specific cases and to assess case-based knowledge; (3) adding age-based propofol dosing tables and electroencephalogram parameters to the electronic health record (EPIC co, Verona, WI); (4) procuring electroencephalogram monitors (Sedline, Masimo Inc). Electroencephalogram-guided total intravenous anesthesia cases and balancing measures were identified from the electronic health record. The smart aim was evaluated by statistical process control chart. RESULTS: After the four Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles, electroencephalogram-guided total intravenous anesthesia increased from 5% to 75% and was sustained at 72% 9 months after project completion. Total intravenous anesthesia cases/mo and number of perioperative emergency activations did not change significantly from start to end of the project, while emergence time for electroencephalogram-guided total intravenous anesthesia was greater statistically but not clinically (total intravenous anesthesia without electroencephalogram [16 ± 10 min], total intravenous anesthesia with electroencephalogram [18 ± 9 min], sevoflurane [17 ± 9 min] p < .001). CONCLUSION: Quality improvement methods may be deployed to adopt electroencephalogram-guided total intravenous anesthesia in a large academic pediatric anesthesia practice. Keys to success include education, in operating room case training, scheduling teachers with learners, electronic health record modifications, and electroencephalogram devices and supplies.

Accuracy of closed-loop and open-loop propofol delivery systems by bispectral index monitoring in breast surgery patients: a prospective randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: This randomized and controlled prospective study tested the hypothesis that closed-loop Target-Controlled Infusion (TCI) of propofol would be associated with better system performance when compared with open-loop controlled delivery of propofol. METHODS: Patients scheduled for elective breast surgery were randomly assigned to two groups: a closed-loop group, in which propofol infusion was performed by a closed-loop TCI system that used the Bispectral Index (BIS) as a feedback parameter to titrate the rate of propofol infusion, and an open-loop group, in which propofol infusion was performed manually and guided by the bispectral index. RESULTS: A total of 156 patients were recruited for this study (closed-loop group n = 79; open-loop group n = 77). The Global Score (GS) of the closed-loop group was lower than that of the open-loop group (34.3 and 42.2) (p = 0.044). The proportions of time with a BIS value between 40 and 60 were almost identical in the closed-loop group and the open-loop group (68.7 ± 10.6% and 66.7 ± 13.3%) (p = 0.318). The individuals in the closed-loop group consumed more propofol compared with those in the open-loop group (7.20 ± 1.65 mg.kg-1.h-1 vs. 6.03 ± 1.31 mg.kg-1.h-1, p < 0.001). No intraoperative recall, somatic events or adverse events occurred. No significant difference in heart rate was observed between the two groups (p = 0.169). CONCLUSION: The closed-loop protocol was associated with lower BIS variability and lower out-of-range BIS values, at the cost of a greater consumption of propofol when compared to the open loop group. REGISTER NUMBER: ChiCTR-INR-17010399.

A randomized controlled trial of propofol-remifentanil total intravenous anesthesia and sevoflurane-fentanyl anesthesia on early postoperative fatigue in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

PURPOSE: Even after uncomplicated surgery, postoperative fatigue prevalence has been reported to be 30-80% for various surgeries. We evaluated postoperative fatigue according to anesthetic technique in patients who underwent colorectal surgery. METHODS: One hundred thirty patients who underwent colorectal surgery were randomly assigned to either propofol-remifentanil total intravenous anesthesia (propofol-remifentanil group, n = 65) or sevoflurane-fentanyl anesthesia (sevoflurane-fentanyl group, n = 65). The primary outcome was the prevalence of postoperative fatigue, as defined by the Chalder Fatigue Questionnaire (total score ≥ 16), at 24 h postoperatively. Secondary outcomes were early postoperative complications during hospitalization and laboratory examination. RESULTS: The final analyses included 127 patients. The prevalence of postoperative fatigue on the 1st postoperative day was lower in the propofol-remifentanil group than the sevoflurane-fentanyl group: 56.3% (36/64) in the propofol-remifentanil group and 73.0% (46/63) in the sevoflurane-fentanyl group (relative risk [RR] = 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59-1.00; P = 0.048). However, there was no difference between the two groups in postoperative fatigue at postoperative day 3. Other postoperative outcomes including the severity of pain and the incidence of nausea/vomiting were not different between the two groups, but postoperative atelectasis on chest X-ray was higher in the sevoflurane-fentanyl group (2/64 [3.1%] vs. 9/63 [14.3%], P = 0.025). C-reactive protein change from preoperative to postoperative day 1 and 5 was significantly lower in the propofol-remifentanil group (P = 0.044). CONCLUSION: Propofol-remifentanil total intravenous anesthesia was associated with reduced postoperative fatigue at the 1st postoperative day compared with sevoflurane-fentanyl anesthesia. Clinical trial The Korean Clinical Research Registry (study identifier: KCT0006917, principal investigator's name: MiHye Park, date of registration: January 12, 2022).

On the horns of a dilemma: choosing total intravenous anaesthesia or volatile anaesthesia for cancer surgery, an enduring controversy.

Two methods for administering general anaesthesia are widely used: propofol-based total intravenous anaesthesia (propofol-TIVA) and inhalation volatile agent-based anaesthesia. Both modalities, which have been standards of care for several decades, boast a robust safety profile. Nevertheless, the potential differential effects of these anaesthetic techniques on immediate, intermediate, and extended postoperative outcomes remain a subject of inquiry. We discuss a recently published longitudinal analysis stemming from a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing sevoflurane-based inhalation anaesthesia with propofol-TIVA in older patients with cancer, which showed a reduced incidence of emergence and postoperative delirium, comparable postoperative complication rates within 30 days after surgery, and comparable long-term survival rates. We undertake an assessment of the trial's methodological strengths and limitations, contextualise its results within the broader scientific evidence, and explore avenues for resolving the extant controversies in anaesthetic choice for cancer surgery. We aim to pave the way for the incorporation of precision medicine paradigms into the evolving landscape of perioperative care for patients with cancer.

Type of anesthesia for cancer resection surgery: No differential impact on cancer recurrence in mouse models of breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Surgery is essential for curative treatment of solid tumors. Evidence from recent retrospective clinical analyses suggests that use of propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia during cancer resection surgery is associated with improved overall survival compared to inhaled volatile anesthesia. Evaluating these findings in prospective clinical studies is required to inform definitive clinical guidelines but will take many years and requires biomarkers to monitor treatment effect. Therefore, we examined the effect of different anesthetic agents on cancer recurrence in mouse models of breast cancer with the overarching goal of evaluating plausible mechanisms that could be used as biomarkers of treatment response. METHODS: To test the hypothesis that volatile anesthesia accelerates breast cancer recurrence after surgical resection of the primary tumor, we used three mouse models of breast cancer. We compared volatile sevoflurane anesthesia with intravenous propofol anesthesia and used serial non-invasive bioluminescent imaging to track primary tumor recurrence and metastatic recurrence. To determine short-term perioperative effects, we evaluated the effect of anesthesia on vascular integrity and immune cell changes after surgery in animal models. RESULTS: Survival analyses found that the kinetics of cancer recurrence and impact on survival were similar regardless of the anesthetic agent used during cancer surgery. Vascular permeability, immune cell infiltration and cytokine profiles showed no statistical difference after resection with inhaled sevoflurane or intravenous propofol anesthesia. CONCLUSIONS: These preclinical studies found no evidence that choice of anesthetic agent used during cancer resection surgery affected either short-term perioperative events or long-term cancer outcomes in mouse models of breast cancer. These findings raise the possibility that mouse models do not recapitulate perioperative events in cancer patients. Nonetheless, the findings suggest that future evaluation of effects of anesthesia on cancer outcomes should focus on cancer types other than breast cancer.

Impact of total intravenous anesthesia and total inhalation anesthesia as the anesthesia maintenance approaches on blood glucose level and postoperative complications in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a double-blind, randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus is a prevalent metabolic disease in the world. Previous studies have shown that anesthetics can affect perioperative blood glucose levels which related to adverse clinical outcomes. Few studies have explored the choice of general anesthetic protocol on perioperative glucose metabolism in diabetes patients. We aimed to compare total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with total inhalation anesthesia (TIHA) on blood glucose level and complications in type 2 diabetic patients undergoing general surgery. METHODS: In this double-blind controlled trial, 116 type 2 diabetic patients scheduled for general surgery were randomly assigned to either the TIVA group or TIHA group (n = 56 and n = 60, respectively). The blood glucose level at different time points were measured and analyzed by the repeated-measures analysis of variance. The serum insulin and cortisol levels were measured and analyzed with t-test. The incidence of complications was followed up and analyzed with chi-square test or Fisher's exact test as appropriate. The risk factors for complications were analyzed using the logistic stepwise regression. RESULTS: The blood glucose levels were higher in TIHA group than that in TIVA group at the time points of extubation, 1 and 2 h after the operation, 1 and 2 days after the operation, and were significantly higher at 1 day after the operation (10.4 ± 2.8 vs. 8.1 ± 2.1 mmol/L; P < 0.01). The postoperative insulin level was higher in TIVA group than that in TIHA group (8.9 ± 2.9 vs. 7.6 ± 2.4 IU/mL; P = 0.011). The postoperative cortisol level was higher in TIHA group than that in TIVA group (15.3 ± 4.8 vs. 12.2 ± 8.9 ug/dL ; P = 0.031). No significant difference regarding the incidence of complications between the two groups was found based on the current samples. Blood glucose level on postoperative day 1 was a risk factor for postoperative complications (OR: 1.779, 95%CI: 1.009 ~ 3.138). CONCLUSIONS: TIVA has less impact on perioperative blood glucose level and a better inhibition of cortisol release in type 2 diabetic patients compared to TIHA. A future large trial may be conducted to find the difference of complications between the two groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol registered on the Chinese Clinical Trials Registry on 20/01/2020 (ChiCTR2000029247).

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.

Total intravenous anesthesia versus inhalation anesthesia: how do outcomes compare?

RECENT FINDINGS: Surgical procedures that involve general anesthesia are performed with either volatile anesthetics or propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia. Both techniques are safe and provide appropriate conditions for surgery. Despite being a well established anesthetic, the use of propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) remains low. Possible explanations include the perceived increase risk of awareness, lack of target controlled infusion devices, increased turnover time for device set up and individual preference. SUMMARY: There are some scenarios where patients could potentially benefit from propofol-based TIVA rather than a volatile anesthetic (e.g. postoperative nausea and vomiting) and some other clinical scenarios where the use of propofol-based anesthesia remains controversial since the strength of the evidence remains low. PURPOSE: In this review we will summarize the clinical evidence comparing the effect of propofol-based TIVA and volatile anesthetic on postoperative outcomes such as postoperative nausea and vomiting, postoperative pain, quality of recovery, postoperative cognitive dysfunction and cancer outcomes.

The analgesic effect of total intravenous anaesthesia with propofol versus inhalational anaesthesia for acute postoperative pain after hepatectomy: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pain control can be challenging in patients undergoing hepatectomy. A previous retrospective study on hepatobiliary/ pancreatic surgeries showed better postoperative pain control in patients who received propofol TIVA. The aim of this study was to determine the analgesic effect of propofol TIVA for hepatectomy. This clinical study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03597997). METHODS: A prospective randomized controlled trial was performed to compare the analgesic effect of propofol TIVA versus inhalational anaesthesia. Patients aged between 18 and 80 years old with an American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) physical status of I-III scheduled for elective hepatectomy were recruited. Ninety patients were randomly allocated to receive either propofol TIVA (TIVA group) or inhalational anaesthesia with sevoflurane (SEVO group). Perioperative anaesthetic/analgesic management was the same for both groups. Numerical rating scale (NRS) pain scores, postoperative morphine consumption, quality of recovery, patient satisfaction and adverse effects were evaluated during the acute postoperative period and at 3 and 6 months after surgery. RESULTS: No significant differences were found for acute postoperative pain scores (both at rest and during coughing) and postoperative morphine consumption between TIVA and SEVO groups. Patients given TIVA had lower pain scores with coughing at 3 months after surgery (p = 0.014, and FDR < 0.1). TIVA group was associated with better quality of recovery on postoperative day (POD) 3 (p = 0.038, and FDR < 0.1), less nausea (p = 0.011, and FDR < 0.1 on POD 2; p = 0.013, and FDR < 0.1 on POD 3) and constipation (p = 0.013, and FDR < 0.1 on POD 3). CONCLUSION: Propofol TIVA did not improve acute postoperative pain control compared to inhalational anaesthesia in patients who underwent hepatectomy. Our results do not support the use of propofol TIVA for reducing acute postoperative pain after hepatectomy.

Deep reinforcement learning-based propofol infusion control for anesthesia: A feasibility study with a 3000-subject dataset.

In this work, we present a deep reinforcement learning-based approach as a baseline system for autonomous propofol infusion control. Specifically, design an environment for simulating the possible conditions of a target patient based on input demographic data and design our reinforcement learning model-based system so that it effectively makes predictions on the proper level of propofol infusion to maintain stable anesthesia even under dynamic conditions that can affect the decision-making process, such as the manual control of remifentanil by anesthesiologists and the varying patient conditions under anesthesia. Through an extensive set of evaluations using patient data from 3000 subjects, we show that the proposed method results in stabilization in the anesthesia state, by managing the bispectral index (BIS) and effect-site concentration for a patient showing varying conditions.