Cargando…
The Influence of Differences in Solvents and Concentration on the Efficacy of Propofol at Induction of Anesthesia
Background. Propofol is a popular intravenous anesthetic and varieties of formulations were produced from different laboratories. The present study compared efficacy of propofol of different laboratories and different concentrations (1 and 2%) during induction of anesthesia. Methods. Seventy-five sc...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4745982/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26904114 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/9178523 |
_version_ | 1782414753820311552 |
---|---|
author | Obata, Yukako Adachi, Yushi U. Suzuki, Katsumi Itagaki, Taiga Kato, Hiromi Satomoto, Maiko Nakajima, Yoshiki |
author_facet | Obata, Yukako Adachi, Yushi U. Suzuki, Katsumi Itagaki, Taiga Kato, Hiromi Satomoto, Maiko Nakajima, Yoshiki |
author_sort | Obata, Yukako |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background. Propofol is a popular intravenous anesthetic and varieties of formulations were produced from different laboratories. The present study compared efficacy of propofol of different laboratories and different concentrations (1 and 2%) during induction of anesthesia. Methods. Seventy-five scheduled surgical patients were randomly allocated into three groups. The patients of group D1 received AstraZeneca Diprivan 1% (Osaka, Japan) at a rate of 40 mg kg(−1) h(−1). Group M1 was given 1% Maruishi (Maruishi Pharmaceutical, Osaka, Japan) and group M2 was given 2% formulation at the same rate of propofol. Achieving hypnosis was defined as failure to open their eyes in response to a verbal command and the venous blood sample was withdrawn. Results. The hypnotic doses of M2 were significantly larger (D1: 91.4 ± 30.9, M1: 90.7 ± 26.7, and M2: 118.4 ± 40.2 mg, resp. (mean ± SD). p < 0.005). Age and gender were selected as statistically significant covariates using general linear model-ANOVA. The blood concentration showed no significant difference among the groups (3.73 ± 2.34, 4.10 ± 3.04, and 4.70 ± 2.12 μg mL(−1), resp.). Conclusion. The required dose of propofol was different among the formulations; however, the serum concentration showed no significant difference. This trial is registered with UMIN Clinical Trial Registry: UMIN000019925. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4745982 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Hindawi Publishing Corporation |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-47459822016-02-22 The Influence of Differences in Solvents and Concentration on the Efficacy of Propofol at Induction of Anesthesia Obata, Yukako Adachi, Yushi U. Suzuki, Katsumi Itagaki, Taiga Kato, Hiromi Satomoto, Maiko Nakajima, Yoshiki Anesthesiol Res Pract Clinical Study Background. Propofol is a popular intravenous anesthetic and varieties of formulations were produced from different laboratories. The present study compared efficacy of propofol of different laboratories and different concentrations (1 and 2%) during induction of anesthesia. Methods. Seventy-five scheduled surgical patients were randomly allocated into three groups. The patients of group D1 received AstraZeneca Diprivan 1% (Osaka, Japan) at a rate of 40 mg kg(−1) h(−1). Group M1 was given 1% Maruishi (Maruishi Pharmaceutical, Osaka, Japan) and group M2 was given 2% formulation at the same rate of propofol. Achieving hypnosis was defined as failure to open their eyes in response to a verbal command and the venous blood sample was withdrawn. Results. The hypnotic doses of M2 were significantly larger (D1: 91.4 ± 30.9, M1: 90.7 ± 26.7, and M2: 118.4 ± 40.2 mg, resp. (mean ± SD). p < 0.005). Age and gender were selected as statistically significant covariates using general linear model-ANOVA. The blood concentration showed no significant difference among the groups (3.73 ± 2.34, 4.10 ± 3.04, and 4.70 ± 2.12 μg mL(−1), resp.). Conclusion. The required dose of propofol was different among the formulations; however, the serum concentration showed no significant difference. This trial is registered with UMIN Clinical Trial Registry: UMIN000019925. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2016 2016-01-21 /pmc/articles/PMC4745982/ /pubmed/26904114 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/9178523 Text en Copyright © 2016 Yukako Obata et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Clinical Study Obata, Yukako Adachi, Yushi U. Suzuki, Katsumi Itagaki, Taiga Kato, Hiromi Satomoto, Maiko Nakajima, Yoshiki The Influence of Differences in Solvents and Concentration on the Efficacy of Propofol at Induction of Anesthesia |
title | The Influence of Differences in Solvents and Concentration on the Efficacy of Propofol at Induction of Anesthesia |
title_full | The Influence of Differences in Solvents and Concentration on the Efficacy of Propofol at Induction of Anesthesia |
title_fullStr | The Influence of Differences in Solvents and Concentration on the Efficacy of Propofol at Induction of Anesthesia |
title_full_unstemmed | The Influence of Differences in Solvents and Concentration on the Efficacy of Propofol at Induction of Anesthesia |
title_short | The Influence of Differences in Solvents and Concentration on the Efficacy of Propofol at Induction of Anesthesia |
title_sort | influence of differences in solvents and concentration on the efficacy of propofol at induction of anesthesia |
topic | Clinical Study |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4745982/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26904114 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/9178523 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT obatayukako theinfluenceofdifferencesinsolventsandconcentrationontheefficacyofpropofolatinductionofanesthesia AT adachiyushiu theinfluenceofdifferencesinsolventsandconcentrationontheefficacyofpropofolatinductionofanesthesia AT suzukikatsumi theinfluenceofdifferencesinsolventsandconcentrationontheefficacyofpropofolatinductionofanesthesia AT itagakitaiga theinfluenceofdifferencesinsolventsandconcentrationontheefficacyofpropofolatinductionofanesthesia AT katohiromi theinfluenceofdifferencesinsolventsandconcentrationontheefficacyofpropofolatinductionofanesthesia AT satomotomaiko theinfluenceofdifferencesinsolventsandconcentrationontheefficacyofpropofolatinductionofanesthesia AT nakajimayoshiki theinfluenceofdifferencesinsolventsandconcentrationontheefficacyofpropofolatinductionofanesthesia AT obatayukako influenceofdifferencesinsolventsandconcentrationontheefficacyofpropofolatinductionofanesthesia AT adachiyushiu influenceofdifferencesinsolventsandconcentrationontheefficacyofpropofolatinductionofanesthesia AT suzukikatsumi influenceofdifferencesinsolventsandconcentrationontheefficacyofpropofolatinductionofanesthesia AT itagakitaiga influenceofdifferencesinsolventsandconcentrationontheefficacyofpropofolatinductionofanesthesia AT katohiromi influenceofdifferencesinsolventsandconcentrationontheefficacyofpropofolatinductionofanesthesia AT satomotomaiko influenceofdifferencesinsolventsandconcentrationontheefficacyofpropofolatinductionofanesthesia AT nakajimayoshiki influenceofdifferencesinsolventsandconcentrationontheefficacyofpropofolatinductionofanesthesia |