Predicted values of propofol EC50 and sevoflurane concentration for insertion of laryngeal mask Classic™ and ProSeal™

被引:37
作者
Kodaka, M [1 ]
Okamoto, Y [1 ]
Koyama, K [1 ]
Miyao, H [1 ]
机构
[1] Saitama Med Sch, Saitama Med Ctr, Dept Anesthesiol, Kawagoe, Saitama 3508550, Japan
关键词
anaesthetics i.v; propofol; anaesthetics volatile; sevoflurane; equipment; ProSeal; (TM);
D O I
10.1093/bja/aeh032
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
Background. A new laryngeal mask airway, the ProSeal(TM) (PLMA), is said to be more difficult to insert than the laryngeal mask airway Classic(TM) (CLMA) using propofol anaesthesia. Therefore, we expected a greater dose of propofol and sevoflurane to be required to insert the PLMA compared with the CLMA. We determined the effective concentration 50% (EC50) of propofol and end-tidal sevoflurane to allow insertion of the PLMA and the CLMA. Methods. Seventy-six elective female patients (aged 20-60 yr and ASA I-II) were randomly assigned to one of four groups. Either a PLMA or a CLMA was inserted using either propofol target controlled infusion or sevoflurane. Both propofol and sevoflurane targets were determined with a modified Dixon's up-and-down method. After equilibration between the predetermined blood and effect site concentrations, which had been held steady for more than 10 min, LMA insertion was attempted without neuromuscular block. Results. The predicted EC50CLMA and EC50PLMA for propofol were 3.14 (0.33) and 4.32 (0.67) mug ml(-1). E'(CLMA) and E'(PLMA) of sevoflurane (mean (SD)) were 2.36 (0.22) and 2.82 (0.45)% (P<0.01 and 0.05, respectively). Conclusions. The estimated concentration of propofol and the sevoflurane concentration needed to allow insertion of the ProSeal(TM) are respectively 38 and 20% greater than those needed for insertion of the Classic LMA.
引用
收藏
页码:242 / 245
页数:4
相关论文
共 21 条
[1]   Laryngeal mask insertion during target-controlled infusion of propofol [J].
Baik, HJ ;
Kim, JH ;
Lee, CH .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ANESTHESIA, 2001, 13 (03) :175-181
[2]   The LMA 'ProSeal' - a laryngeal mask with an oesophageal vent [J].
Brain, AIJ ;
Verghese, C ;
Strube, PJ .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2000, 84 (05) :650-654
[3]   A multicenter study comparing the ProSeal™ and Classic™ laryngeal mask airway in anesthetized, nonparalyzed patients [J].
Brimacombe, J ;
Keller, C ;
Fullekrug, B ;
Agrò, F ;
Rosenblatt, W ;
Dierdorf, SF ;
de Lucas, EG ;
Capdevilla, X ;
Brimacombe, N .
ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2002, 96 (02) :289-295
[4]   Positive pressure ventilation with the ProSeal versus classic laryngeal mask airway:: A randomized, crossover study of healthy female patients [J].
Brimacombe, J ;
Keller, C ;
Boehler, M ;
Pühringer, F .
ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2001, 93 (05) :1351-1353
[5]   The target plasma concentration of propofol required to place laryngeal mask versus cuffed oropharyngeal airway [J].
Casati, A ;
Fanelli, G ;
Casaletti, E ;
Cedrati, V ;
Veglia, F ;
Torri, G .
ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 1999, 88 (04) :917-920
[6]   Randomized crossover comparison of the ProSeal with the classic laryngeal mask airway in unparalysed anaesthetized patients [J].
Cook, TM ;
Nolan, JP ;
Verghese, C ;
Strube, PJ ;
Lees, M ;
Millar, JM ;
Baskett, PJF .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2002, 88 (04) :527-533
[7]   STAIRCASE BIOASSAY - THE UP-AND-DOWN METHOD [J].
DIXON, WJ .
NEUROSCIENCE AND BIOBEHAVIORAL REVIEWS, 1991, 15 (01) :47-50
[8]  
DIXON WJ, 1967, STAT ENDOCRINOLOGY, P251
[9]  
EAGER EI, 2000, ANESTHESIA, V1, P74
[10]  
GEPTS E, 1987, ANESTH ANALG, V66, P1256