Remifentanil added to sufentanil-sevoflurane anesthesia suppresses hemodynamic and metabolic stress responses to intense surgical stimuli more effectively than high-dose sufentanil-sevoflurane alone.

BACKGROUND: Even extremely high-doses of the potent opioid, sufentanil, cannot reliably suppress stress responses to intense surgical stimuli such as sternotomy. The chemically related opioid remifentanil with its different pharmacokinetics and binding affinities for delta- and kappa-opioid receptors might be more effective in attenuating these responses. METHODS: ASA I-III patients scheduled for a surgical procedure with sternotomy under balanced anesthesia (sevoflurane and sufentanil 3 µg.kg(-1) bolus, 0.017 µg.kg(-1).min(-1) infusion) were randomized into two groups. Patients in the study group were supplemented with remifentanil (2 µg.kg(-1) bolus, 2-7 µg.kg(-1).min(-1) infusion) starting ten minutes before sternotomy. Heart rate, arterial blood pressures, cardiac index, ejection fraction, systemic vascular resistance index (SVRI), total body oxygen uptake (VO2) and electric dermal response were measured and compared between the groups. RESULTS: 62 patients were studied (study group 32, control group 30). Systolic and mean arterial blood pressures, SVRI, VO2 and skin conductance increased during sternotomy and sternal spread in the control group but not in the study group. Systolic blood pressure increase: 7.5 ± 19 mmHg vs. -3.4 ± 8.9 (p = 0.005); VO2 increase: 31 ± 46% vs. -0.4 ± 32%; incidence of systolic blood pressure increase greater than 15 percent: 20% vs. 3% (p = 0.035) (control vs. study group). CONCLUSION: High-dose remifentanil added to sevoflurane-sufentanil anesthesia suppresses the sympathoadrenergic response to sternotomy and sternal spread better than high-dose sufentanil alone. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: DRKS00004327, August 31, 2012.

Ketamine in outpatient arthroscopic shoulder surgery: Effects on postoperative pain, hemodynamic stability and process times.

BACKGROUND: Pain after arthroscopic shoulder surgery is often severe, and establishing a pain treatment regimen that does not delay discharge can be challenging. The reported ability of ketamine to prevent opioid-induced hyperalgesia has not been investigated in this particular setting. METHODS: 300 adult patients scheduled for shoulder arthroscopy under general anesthesia were recruited for this observational clinical trial and were allotted to either receive 1mg/kg IV bolus of ketamine before surgery (ketamine group, KG) or to a control group (CG) without ketamine. NRS pain scores were obtained on the operative day and on postoperative days 1 and 2 and compared between groups. Secondary variables were blood pressure, heart rate, process times, satisfaction with the anesthetic and unwanted effects. RESULTS: Pain severity did not differ significantly between the groups at any time. Propofol injection rate and cumulative dose were higher in the KG. Heart rates and blood pressures were similar. Time to emergence and time in PACU were longer and vomiting was more frequent in patients given ketamine. CONCLUSION: Preoperative low-dose ketamine added to a general anesthetic does not reduce perioperative pain after outpatient shoulder arthroscopy. It increases procedural times and the incidence of PONV.

Blood pressure response to combined general anaesthesia/interscalene brachial plexus block for outpatient shoulder arthroscopy.

BACKGROUND: Shoulder surgery is often performed in the beach-chair position, a position associated with arterial hypotension and subsequent risk of cerebral ischaemia. It can be performed under general anaesthesia or with an interscalene brachial plexus block, each of which has specific advantages but also specific negative effects on blood pressure control. It would be worthwhile to combine the advantages of the two, but the effects of the combination on the circulation are not well investigated. We studied blood pressure, heart rate, and incidence of adverse circulatory events in patients undergoing shoulder surgery in general anaesthesia with or without an interscalene block. METHODS: Prospective, randomised, blinded study in outpatients (age 18 to 80 years) undergoing shoulder arthroscopy. General anaesthesia was with propofol/opioid, interscalene block with 40 ml 1% mepivacaine. Hypotension requiring treatment was defined as a mean arterial pressure <60 mmHg or a systolic pressure <80% of baseline; relevant bradycardia was a heart rate <50 bpm with a decrease in blood pressure. RESULTS: Forty-two patients had general anaesthesia alone, 41 had general anaesthesia plus interscalene block. The average systolic blood pressure under anaesthesia in the beach-chair position was 114 ± 7.3 vs. 116 ± 8.3 mmHg (p = 0.09; all comparisons General vs. General-Regional). The incidence of a mean arterial pressure under 60 mmHg or a decrease in systolic pressure of more than 20% from baseline was 64% vs. 76% (p = 0.45). The number of patients with a heart rate lower than 50 and a concomitant blood pressure decrease was 8 vs. 5 (p = 0.30). CONCLUSION: One can safely combine interscalene block with general anaesthesia for surgery in the beach-chair position in ASA I and II patients. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: DRKS00005295.

The effect of changing the sequence of cuff inflation and device fixation with the LMA-Supreme® on device position, ventilatory complications, and airway morbidity: a clinical and fiberscopic study.

BACKGROUND: The conventional sequence when using supraglottic airway devices is insertion, cuff inflation and fixation. Our hypothesis was that a tighter fit of the cuff and tip could be achieved with a consequently lower incidence of air leak, better separation of gastrointestinal and respiratory tracts and less airway morbidity if the device were first affixed and the cuff then inflated. METHODS: Our clinical review board approved the study (public registry number DRKS00003174). An LMA Supreme® was inserted into 184 patients undergoing lower limb arthroscopy in propofol-remifentanil anaesthesia who were randomly assigned to either the control (inflation then fixation; n = 92) or study group (fixation then inflation; n = 92). The cuff was inflated to 60 cmH2O. The patients' lungs were ventilated in pressure-controlled mode with 5 cmH2O PEEP, Pmax to give 6 ml kg-1 tidal volume, and respiratory rate adjusted to end-tidal CO2 of 4.8 and 5.6 kPa. Correct cuff and tip position were determined by leak detection, capnometry trace, oropharyngeal leak pressure, suprasternal notch test, and lube-tube test. Bowl and cuff position and the presence of glottic narrowing were assessed by fiberscopic examination. Postoperative dysphagia, hoarseness and sore throat were assessed with a questionnaire. Ventilatory impairment was defined as a tidal volume < 6 ml kg-1 with Pmax at oropharyngeal leak pressure, glottic narrowing was defined as an angle between the vocal cords under 16 degrees. RESULTS: The incidence of incorrect device position (18% vs. 21%), failed ventilation (10% vs. 9%), leak pressure (24.8 vs. 25.2 cmH2O, p = 0.63), failed lube-tube test (16.3% vs. 17.6%) and glottic narrowing (19.3% vs. 14.1%, p = 0.35) was similar in both groups (control vs. study, resp.). When glottic narrowing occurred, it was more frequently associated with ventilatory impairment in the control group (77% vs. 39%; p = 0.04). Airway morbidity was more common in the control group (33% vs. 19%; p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Altering the sequence of cuff inflation and device fixation does not affect device position, oropharyngeal leak pressures or separation of gastrointestinal and respiratory tracts. It reduces the incidence of glottic narrowing with impaired ventilation and also perioperative airway morbidity.