Dexmedetomidine-remifentanil or propofol-remifentanil anesthesia in patients undergoing intracranial surgery

被引:3
|
作者
Günes, Y [1 ]
Gündüz, M [1 ]
Özcengiz, D [1 ]
Özbek, H [1 ]
Isik, G [1 ]
机构
[1] Cukurova Univ, Fac Med, Dept Anesthesiol, TR-01330 Adana, Turkey
关键词
dexmedetomidine; propofol; remifentanil; intracranial surgery;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
Q189 [神经科学];
学科分类号
071006 ;
摘要
Dexmedetomidine has been shown to provide good perioperative hemodynamic stability with decreased intraoperative opioid requirements. This study was conducted to compare the effect of dexmedetomidine-remifentanil (DR) anesthesia and propofol-remifentanil (PR) anesthesia on perioperative hemodynamics and postanesthesia. recovery profiles in patients undergoing intracranial surge After receiving Ethics Committee approval and informed patient consent, 78 American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I or II patients between the ages of 19 and 70 years with a Glasgow Coma Scale score 14 or 15 who were scheduled for elective intracranial surgery with general anesthesia were recruited. Anesthesia induction was provided by intravenous remifentanil (0.5 mu g/kg) and propofol (1.5-2 mg/kg) in both groups and maintained with infusion of DR (0.6-1.2 mg/kg/h and 0.25 mu g/kg/min)-nitrous oxide/oxygen (n(2)o/o(2)) in the DR group (n = 39) and infusion of PR (3-10 mg/kg/h and 0.25 mu g/kg/min)-n(2)o/o(2) in the PR group (n = 39). Hemodynamic variables were recorded before surgery, during the induction of anesthesia, after intubation, and during application of the headholder and skin incision; brain relaxation was also recorded. Times to extubation and awakening, eye opening, and response to commands as well as analgesic requirements were recorded after surgery. No significant difference was found in systolic blood pressure and mean arterial pressure throughout the study period except at the time of the dural incision (P < 0.05). These variables were significantly lower in the DR group (P < 0.05). Brain relaxation scores were similar between the 2 groups (P > 0.05). Time to extubation was significantly shorter in patients receiving PR anesthesia than in patients receiving DR anesthesia (3.6 minutes vs. 5.5 minutes). Analgesic requirements were significantly higher in the PR group than in the DR group (P = 0.013). No significant side effects were reported in the 2 groups (P > 0.05). In conclusion, dexmedetomidine (0.6-1.2 mu g/kg(-1)/h(-1)) Plus remifentanil (0.25 mu g/kg(-1) min(-1)) anesthesia offered lower analgesic requirements, a longer extubation time, and better hemodynamic stability compared with PR anesthesia for patients undergoing intracranial surgery.
引用
收藏
页码:122 / 126
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] A randomized controlled trial of propofol-remifentanil total intravenous anesthesia and sevoflurane-fentanyl anesthesia on early postoperative fatigue in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery
    Lee, Seungwon
    Woo, Seunghyeon
    Oh, Eun Jung
    Park, Mihye
    QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2024, 33 (01) : 241 - 252
  • [32] No difference in emergence time and early cognitive function between sevoflurane-fentanyl and propofol-remifentanil in patients undergoing craniotomy for supratentorial intracranial surgery
    Magni, G
    Baisi, E
    La Rosa, I
    Imperiale, C
    Fabbrini, V
    Pennacchiotti, ML
    Rosa, G
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGICAL ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2005, 17 (03) : 134 - 138
  • [33] A randomized controlled trial of propofol-remifentanil total intravenous anesthesia and sevoflurane-fentanyl anesthesia on early postoperative fatigue in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery
    Seungwon Lee
    Seunghyeon Woo
    Eun Jung Oh
    MiHye Park
    Quality of Life Research, 2024, 33 : 241 - 252
  • [34] The safety profile and effectiveness of propofol-remifentanil mixtures for total intravenous anesthesia in children
    Bagshaw, Oliver
    McCormack, Jon
    Brooks, Peter
    Marriott, David
    Baxter, Alistair
    PEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA, 2020, 30 (12) : 1331 - 1339
  • [35] Propofol-remifentanil and spontaneous breathing, a magnificent pair
    Sbaraglia, Fabio
    Sammartino, Maria
    MINERVA ANESTESIOLOGICA, 2016, 82 (11) : 1129 - 1131
  • [36] Evaluation of the Effect of Propofol-Remifentanil and Propofol-Hydralazine on the Bleeding Volume During Dacryocystorhinostomy Surgery Under General Anesthesia
    Shetabi, Hamidreza
    Hashemi, Seyed
    Ghaleshahi, Somaye
    ADVANCED BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH, 2023, 12 (01): : 207
  • [37] Evaluation of the aepEX™ TM monitor of hypnotic depth in pediatric patients receiving propofol-remifentanil anesthesia
    Cheung, Yuen M.
    Scoones, Gail P.
    Hoeks, Sanne E.
    Stolker, Robert J.
    Weber, Frank
    PEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA, 2013, 23 (10) : 891 - 897
  • [38] Propofol-remifentanil anesthesia for upper airway endoscopy in spontaneous breathing patients: the ENDOTANIL Randomized Trial
    Besch, Guillaume
    Chopard-Guillemin, Angeline
    Monnet, Elisabeth
    Causeret, Arnaud
    Jurine, Amelie
    Baudry, Gerald
    Lasry, Benjamin
    Tavernier, Laurent
    Samain, Emmanuel
    Pili-Floury, Sebastien
    MINERVA ANESTESIOLOGICA, 2016, 82 (11) : 1138 - 1148
  • [39] Influences of Propofol-Remifentanil and Propofol-Epidural Anesthesia Combination on Dynamic Respiratory Tests in Laparoscopic Morbid Obesity Surgery
    Tasdogan, Ali Muhittin
    Kilic, Ertugrul
    EURASIAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE AND ONCOLOGY, 2020, 4 (02): : 166 - 171
  • [40] Total intravenous anesthesia with alfaxalone, dexmedetomidine and remifentanil in healthy foals undergoing abdominal surgery
    Jones, Teela
    Bracamonte, Jose L.
    Ambros, Barbara
    Duke-Novakovski, Tanya
    VETERINARY ANAESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2019, 46 (03) : 315 - 324