Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Anesth Analg ; 118(5): 946-55, 2014 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24722260

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The α2-adrenergic agonist dexmedetomidine is a sedative and can be used as an adjunct to anesthetics. Our primary goal was thus to determine the extent to which dexmedetomidine reduces the requirement for propofol and remifentanil. METHODS: This double-blinded, randomized study (NCT00921284) used an automated dual closed-loop administration to maintain the Bispectral Index between 40 and 60. Sixty-6 ASA physical status I and II patients were given either dexmedetomidine (1 µg/kg over 10 minutes followed by a continuous infusion of 0.5 µg/kg/h throughout surgery) or comparable volumes of saline as a placebo. Propofol and remifentanil requirements were compared using nonparametric tests and expressed as medians (interquartile ranges). RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients in each group completed the study. Patients given dexmedetomidine required less propofol (1.0 [0.7-1.3] vs 1.3 [1.0-1.7] mg/kg, P = 0.002) and remifentanil (1.2 [1.0-1.4] vs 1.6 [1.1-2.8] µg/kg, P = 0.02) for anesthetic induction. The propofol dosage required for anesthetic maintenance was 29% (with a 95% confidence interval, 18-40) lower in patients given dexmedetomidine (2.2 [1.5-3.0] vs 3.1 [2.4-4.5] mg/kg/h, P = 0.005), whereas the remifentanil dosage was not significantly different (0.16 [0.09-0.17] vs 0.14 [0.13-0.21] µg/kg/h with P = 0.3). The incidence of adverse events, including hemodynamic instability and delayed recovery, was comparable with and without dexmedetomidine. The first postoperative request for morphine analgesia was delayed in patients given dexmedetomidine (median fourth hour vs first hour, P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Dexmedetomidine administration significantly reduced the requirement for both propofol and remifentanil during anesthetic induction and reduced propofol use during maintenance of anesthesia. Dexmedetomidine also delayed postoperative analgesic use. Dexmedetomidine is a useful adjuvant that reduces anesthetic requirement and provides postoperative analgesia.


Assuntos
Anestesia Geral/métodos , Anestesia Intravenosa/métodos , Anestésicos Intravenosos/administração & dosagem , Dexmedetomidina/farmacologia , Hipnóticos e Sedativos/farmacologia , Piperidinas/administração & dosagem , Propofol/administração & dosagem , Adulto , Idoso , Algoritmos , Período de Recuperação da Anestesia , Atracúrio , Monitores de Consciência , Método Duplo-Cego , Efedrina/uso terapêutico , Feminino , Hemodinâmica/efeitos dos fármacos , Hemodinâmica/fisiologia , Humanos , Período Intraoperatório , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Fármacos Neuromusculares não Despolarizantes , Remifentanil , Vasoconstritores/uso terapêutico
2.
Anesthesiology ; 120(2): 355-64, 2014 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24051391

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Several commercial formulations of propofol are available. The primary outcome of this study was the required dose of propofol alone or combined with lidocaine to achieve induction of general anesthesia. METHODS: This multicenter, double-blinded trial randomized patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I-III) just before elective surgery with the use of a computer-generated list. Three different propofol 1% formulations-Diprivan (Astra-Zeneca, Cheshire, United Kingdom), Propoven (Fresenius-Kabi AG, Bad Homburg, Germany), and Lipuro (B-Braun, Melshungen AG, Germany)-were compared with either placebo (saline solution) or lidocaine 1% mixed to the propofol solution. Depth of anesthesia was automatically guided by bispectral index and by a computerized closed-loop system for induction, thus avoiding dosing bias. The authors recorded the total dose of propofol and duration of induction and the patient's discomfort through a behavioral scale (facial expression, verbal response, and arm withdrawal) ranging from 0 to 6. The authors further evaluated postoperative recall of pain using a Visual Analog Scale. RESULTS: Of the 227 patients enrolled, 217 were available for analysis. Demographic characteristics were similar in each group. Propoven required a higher dose for induction (2.2 ± 0.1 mg/kg) than Diprivan (1.8 ± 0.1 mg/kg) or Lipuro (1.7 ± 0.1 mg/kg; P = 0.02). However, induction doses were similar when propofol formulations were mixed with lidocaine. Patient discomfort during injection was significantly reduced with lidocaine for every formulation: Diprivan (0.5 ± 0.3 vs. 2.3 ± 0.3), Propoven (0.4 ± 0.3 vs. 2.4 ± 0.3), and Lipuro (1.1 ± 0.3 vs. 1.4 ± 0.3), all differences significant, with P < 0.0001. No adverse effect was reported. CONCLUSION: Plain propofol formulations are not equipotent, but comparable doses were required when lidocaine was concomitantly administered.


Assuntos
Anestesia Intravenosa , Anestésicos Intravenosos , Propofol , Adulto , Idoso , Análise de Variância , Anestesia Geral , Anestésicos Intravenosos/administração & dosagem , Anestésicos Intravenosos/efeitos adversos , Gasometria , Química Farmacêutica , Interpretação Estatística de Dados , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Medição da Dor/efeitos dos fármacos , Soluções Farmacêuticas , Propofol/administração & dosagem , Propofol/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...