Individual effect-site concentrations of propofol are similar at loss of consciousness and at awakening.

Reported effect-site concentrations of propofol at loss of consciousness and recovery of consciousness vary widely. Thus, no single concentration based on a population average will prove optimal for individual patients. We therefore tested the hypothesis that individual propofol effect-site concentrations at loss and return of consciousness are similar. Propofol effect-site concentrations at loss and recovery of consciousness were estimated with a target-control infusion system in 20 adults. Propofol effect-site concentrations were gradually increased until the volunteers lost consciousness (no response to verbal stimuli); unconsciousness was maintained for 15 min, and the volunteers were then awakened. This protocol was repeated three times in each volunteer. Our major outcomes were the concentration producing unconsciousness and the relationship between the estimated effect-site concentrations at loss and recovery of consciousness. The target effect-site propofol concentration was 2.0 +/- 0.9 at loss of consciousness and 1.8 +/- 0.7 at return of consciousness (P <0.001). The average difference between individual effect-site concentrations at return and loss of consciousness was only 0.17 +/- 0.32 microg/mL (95% confidence interval for the difference 0.09-0.25 microg/mL). Our results thus suggest that individual titration to loss of consciousness is an alternative to dosing propofol on the basis of average population requirements.

[Diagnosis of the autonomic nervous function during sedation by peripheral blood flow and psychogenic perspiration].

BACKGROUND: Pain induces a variety of physiological responses, many of which are mediated by the sympathetic nervous system. Among these are a reduction in peripheral blood flow and evaporative cutaneous water loss (sweating). We therefore tested the hypothesis that adequate sedation obliterates the normal pain-induced reduction in peripheral blood flow and an increase in evaporative water loss. METHODS: We studied eight volunteers. Two different painful stimuli were randomly applied: 1) electrical pulp stimulation (200 microamperes) and 2) electrical pain stimulation on the right upper thigh (80 mA). Conscious sedating was controlled by propofol infusion titrated to a Bispectral Index near 80, or near 60. RESULTS: At each stimulation, peripheral blood flow detected by laser Doppler decreased without any relation to the level of consciousness (by Bispectral Index). On the other hand, although the psychogenic perspiration rate increased significantly at alert level, during BIS 80 or 60 level, the increase was not significant. CONCLUSION: Peripheral blood flow reacts most to pain stimulation during intravenous sedation.

[Combination chemotherapy with nedaplatin (CDGP) and 5-FU for oral cancer].

Chemotherapy using CDGP plus 5-FU was evaluated in patients with oral cancer. The subjects were patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity who had not received any therapy, comprising 7 patients with carcinoma of the tongue, 2 with buccal carcinoma, 2 with maxillary gingival carcinoma, and 1 with carcinoma of the oral floor. There were 4 patients in Stage II, 3 patients in Stage III and 5 patients in Stage IV. Patients with a PS < or = 1, WBC > or = 4,000/mm3, Hb > or = 10 g/dl, platelet count > or = 10 x 10/mm3, and normal liver, kidney, and heart function at baseline were selected for this study. In all patients, 5-FU was administered at a dose of 600 mg/m2/day for 5 days (day 1 to day 5) by continuous infusion, for a total dose of 3,000 mg/m2. CDGP was administered on day 1 at a dose of 80 mg/m2 in 8 patients and at 100 mg/m2 in 4 patients. This treatment was one course of therapy, and patients received 1 or 2 courses. Of 12 patients who were evaluable, there were 9 partial responses and 3 no changes, for a major response rate of 75%. Toxicities experienced by patients were mild (grade 2 or lower) gastrointestinal disorders (including nausea/vomiting) and renal impairment, while grade 3 leukopenia and thrombocytopenia developed in 1 patient each and grade 4 thrombocytopenia occurred in another patient. Thus, patients receiving CDGP + 5-FU therapy should be closely monitored for hematologic toxicity. Since CDGP + 5-FU therapy achieved a good response rate (75%) in the treatment of squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity, we plan to use this therapy in the future and assess its benefit in a larger number of patients.