Cargando…

Endotracheal intubation without muscle relaxants in children using remifentanil and propofol: Comparative study

INTRODUCTION: Endotracheal intubation is essential during general anesthesia and muscle relaxant drugs provide ideal conditions for this purpose. The objective of this study was to evaluate the intubating condition of remifentanil combined with propofol without muscle relaxant. MATERIALS AND METHODS...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Naziri, Freshteh, Amiri, Hakimeh Alereza, Rabiee, Mozaffar, Banihashem, Nadia, Nejad, Farhad Mohammad, Shirkhani, Ziba, Solimanian, Sedigheh
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4610085/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26543458
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1658-354X.159465
_version_ 1782395898522763264
author Naziri, Freshteh
Amiri, Hakimeh Alereza
Rabiee, Mozaffar
Banihashem, Nadia
Nejad, Farhad Mohammad
Shirkhani, Ziba
Solimanian, Sedigheh
author_facet Naziri, Freshteh
Amiri, Hakimeh Alereza
Rabiee, Mozaffar
Banihashem, Nadia
Nejad, Farhad Mohammad
Shirkhani, Ziba
Solimanian, Sedigheh
author_sort Naziri, Freshteh
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Endotracheal intubation is essential during general anesthesia and muscle relaxant drugs provide ideal conditions for this purpose. The objective of this study was to evaluate the intubating condition of remifentanil combined with propofol without muscle relaxant. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this prospective randomized study, 60 children aged 3-12 years, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I and II were included. All the children were premedicated with 0.05 mg/kg midazolam and 1.5 mg/kg lidocaine 5 min before the induction of anesthesia with 3 mg/kg propofol. Then, they were allocated randomly to receive either 2 μg/kg remifentanil (group R) or 1.5 mg/kg succinylcholine (group S). Tracheal intubation was attempted 90 s after the administration of propofol. The quality of intubation was assessed by using Copenhagen score based on jaw relaxation, ease of laryngoscopy, position of vocal cord, coughing and limb movement. Heart rate and blood pressure were recorded before and after induction, and 1, 3, 5 min after intubation. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in intubating condition between the two groups (P = 0.11). Intubation condition was excellent in 26 of 30 (86.7%) patients in the group R compared with 30 (100%) patients in the group S. We observed significant difference in heart rate and systolic blood pressure over time between two groups (P = 0.02, P = 0.03 respectively). After intubation, we had higher heart rate and systolic blood pressure with a significant difference in group S compared with group R (P = 0.006, P = 0.018). None of the children had a chest rigidity, laryngospasm, and hypoxia. CONCLUSIONS: In premedicated children, propofol-remifentanil combination provides adequate conditions for tracheal intubation that is comparable with succinylcholine. Hemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation was controlled better in group R.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4610085
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46100852015-11-05 Endotracheal intubation without muscle relaxants in children using remifentanil and propofol: Comparative study Naziri, Freshteh Amiri, Hakimeh Alereza Rabiee, Mozaffar Banihashem, Nadia Nejad, Farhad Mohammad Shirkhani, Ziba Solimanian, Sedigheh Saudi J Anaesth Original Article INTRODUCTION: Endotracheal intubation is essential during general anesthesia and muscle relaxant drugs provide ideal conditions for this purpose. The objective of this study was to evaluate the intubating condition of remifentanil combined with propofol without muscle relaxant. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this prospective randomized study, 60 children aged 3-12 years, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I and II were included. All the children were premedicated with 0.05 mg/kg midazolam and 1.5 mg/kg lidocaine 5 min before the induction of anesthesia with 3 mg/kg propofol. Then, they were allocated randomly to receive either 2 μg/kg remifentanil (group R) or 1.5 mg/kg succinylcholine (group S). Tracheal intubation was attempted 90 s after the administration of propofol. The quality of intubation was assessed by using Copenhagen score based on jaw relaxation, ease of laryngoscopy, position of vocal cord, coughing and limb movement. Heart rate and blood pressure were recorded before and after induction, and 1, 3, 5 min after intubation. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in intubating condition between the two groups (P = 0.11). Intubation condition was excellent in 26 of 30 (86.7%) patients in the group R compared with 30 (100%) patients in the group S. We observed significant difference in heart rate and systolic blood pressure over time between two groups (P = 0.02, P = 0.03 respectively). After intubation, we had higher heart rate and systolic blood pressure with a significant difference in group S compared with group R (P = 0.006, P = 0.018). None of the children had a chest rigidity, laryngospasm, and hypoxia. CONCLUSIONS: In premedicated children, propofol-remifentanil combination provides adequate conditions for tracheal intubation that is comparable with succinylcholine. Hemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation was controlled better in group R. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2015 /pmc/articles/PMC4610085/ /pubmed/26543458 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1658-354X.159465 Text en Copyright: © Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Naziri, Freshteh
Amiri, Hakimeh Alereza
Rabiee, Mozaffar
Banihashem, Nadia
Nejad, Farhad Mohammad
Shirkhani, Ziba
Solimanian, Sedigheh
Endotracheal intubation without muscle relaxants in children using remifentanil and propofol: Comparative study
title Endotracheal intubation without muscle relaxants in children using remifentanil and propofol: Comparative study
title_full Endotracheal intubation without muscle relaxants in children using remifentanil and propofol: Comparative study
title_fullStr Endotracheal intubation without muscle relaxants in children using remifentanil and propofol: Comparative study
title_full_unstemmed Endotracheal intubation without muscle relaxants in children using remifentanil and propofol: Comparative study
title_short Endotracheal intubation without muscle relaxants in children using remifentanil and propofol: Comparative study
title_sort endotracheal intubation without muscle relaxants in children using remifentanil and propofol: comparative study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4610085/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26543458
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1658-354X.159465
work_keys_str_mv AT nazirifreshteh endotrachealintubationwithoutmusclerelaxantsinchildrenusingremifentanilandpropofolcomparativestudy
AT amirihakimehalereza endotrachealintubationwithoutmusclerelaxantsinchildrenusingremifentanilandpropofolcomparativestudy
AT rabieemozaffar endotrachealintubationwithoutmusclerelaxantsinchildrenusingremifentanilandpropofolcomparativestudy
AT banihashemnadia endotrachealintubationwithoutmusclerelaxantsinchildrenusingremifentanilandpropofolcomparativestudy
AT nejadfarhadmohammad endotrachealintubationwithoutmusclerelaxantsinchildrenusingremifentanilandpropofolcomparativestudy
AT shirkhaniziba endotrachealintubationwithoutmusclerelaxantsinchildrenusingremifentanilandpropofolcomparativestudy
AT solimaniansedigheh endotrachealintubationwithoutmusclerelaxantsinchildrenusingremifentanilandpropofolcomparativestudy