End-tidal concentrations of sevoflurane and desflurane for ProSeal laryngeal mask airway removal in anaesthetised adults A randomised double-blind study

被引:7
作者
Ghai, Babita [1 ]
Jain, Kajal [1 ]
Bansal, Dipika [2 ]
Wig, Jyotsna [1 ]
机构
[1] Postgrad Inst Med Educ & Res, Dept Anaesthesia & Intens Care, Chandigarh 160012, India
[2] Natl Inst Pharmaceut Educ & Res, Clin Res Unit, Mohali, Punjab, India
关键词
CLASSIC(TM); ASPIRATION; INSERTION;
D O I
10.1097/EJA.0b013e328365cad7
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND The optimal end-tidal sevoflurane and desflurane concentration for successful ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) removal in unpremedicated anaesthetised adults has not been determined. OBJECTIVES We determined end-tidal sevoflurane and desflurane concentration in 50% of anaesthetised adults (EC50: concentration at which there is 50% chance of patients showing 'no movement' response) for smooth PLMA removal. DESIGN Randomised controlled double blind study. SETTING Operating theatre of a government tertiary care institute. The study period was December 2011 to January 2013. PATIENTS Thirty nine unpremedicated American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I and II women with cervical carcinoma (aged 30 to 60 years) scheduled for implantation of intracavity caesium under general anaesthesia with PLMA as an airway device were included in the study. INTERVENTIONS The participants were randomised to one of the two groups receiving either desflurane or sevoflurane for anaesthesia maintenance. Anaesthesia induction was performed with intravenous propofol. Predetermined end-tidal sevoflurane concentration (initiating at 2%) or desflurane (initiating at 4%) was sustained for 10 min before PLMA removal was attempted. End-tidal concentrations were increased/decreased (step-size 0.2% for sevoflurane and 0.5% for desflurane) using Dixon and Massey up and down method in the next patient depending upon previous patient's response. Patient responses to PLMA removal were classified as 'movement' or 'no movement'. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES EC50 was calculated as the mean of the crossover pairs' midpoints in each group and further confirmed by probit regression analysis. RESULTS EC50 (95% confidence interval) of sevoflurane and desflurane for PLMA removal were 1.58% (0.669 to 2.060) and 2.79% (2.733 to 2.841), respectively. CONCLUSION Predicted EC50 and EC95 of sevoflurane and desflurane for smooth removal for the PLMA were 1.58 (0.669 to 2.060), 2.27 (1.859 to 21.16), 2.79 (2.733.2.841) and 3.27% (3.173 to 3.395), respectively. TRIAL REGISTRATION Registered with Clinical Trial Registry of India (URL: http://www.ctri.in), Registry ref no: CTRI/2012/12/004285.
引用
收藏
页码:274 / 279
页数:6
相关论文
共 21 条
[1]   Removal of the laryngeal mask airway: factors affecting the incidence of post-operative adverse respiratory events in 300 patients [J].
Baird, MB ;
Mayor, AH ;
Goodwin, APL .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIOLOGY, 1999, 16 (04) :251-256
[2]   THE LARYNGEAL MASK - A NEW CONCEPT IN AIRWAY MANAGEMENT [J].
BRAIN, AIJ .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 1983, 55 (08) :801-805
[3]   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
[4]   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
[5]  
Cameron AJD, 2001, ANAESTH INTENS CARE, V29, P80
[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, 1983, INTRO STAT ANAL, V4th, P426
[9]  
Evans NR, 2002, CAN J ANAESTH, V49, P413, DOI 10.1007/BF03017332
[10]   COMPLICATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH REMOVAL OF THE LARYNGEAL MASK AIRWAY - A COMPARISON OF REMOVAL IN DEEPLY ANESTHETIZED VERSUS AWAKE PATIENTS [J].
GATAURE, PS ;
LATTO, IP ;
RUST, S .
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA-JOURNAL CANADIEN D ANESTHESIE, 1995, 42 (12) :1113-1116