Cargando…
Optimal propofol dosage for i-gel® insertion in healthy paralyzed patients
BACKGROUND: Propofol is used for supraglottic airway device insertion, often with the i-gel. However, the propofol requirement for i-gel insertion has not been explored in paralyzed patients. This study was performed to explore hemodynamic changes and sedation level with different propofol doses in...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Korean Society of Anesthesiologists
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5809703/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29441171 http://dx.doi.org/10.4097/kjae.2018.71.1.22 |
_version_ | 1783299605287403520 |
---|---|
author | Cho, Sung-Ae Sung, Tae-Yun Cho, Choon-Kyu Jee, Young Seok Kang, Po-Soon |
author_facet | Cho, Sung-Ae Sung, Tae-Yun Cho, Choon-Kyu Jee, Young Seok Kang, Po-Soon |
author_sort | Cho, Sung-Ae |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Propofol is used for supraglottic airway device insertion, often with the i-gel. However, the propofol requirement for i-gel insertion has not been explored in paralyzed patients. This study was performed to explore hemodynamic changes and sedation level with different propofol doses in healthy paralyzed patients when the i-gel was inserted. METHODS: A total of 141 patients undergoing a urologic operation were randomly allocated to three groups depending on the propofol dose (1.5, 2, and 2.5 mg/kg; Groups P1.5, P2, and P2.5, respectively). After patients had been administered each propofol dose and rocuronium, the i-gel was inserted and changes in hemodynamic parameters and bispectral index were evaluated. RESULTS: Group P2 showed a lower incidence of complications (17%) such as hemodynamic instability and inadequate sedation than Group P1.5 (55.3%, P < 0.001) or Group P2.5 (40.4%, P = 0.012). The incidence and dose of additional propofol increased in Group P1.5 (51%, median [range]; 20 [0–50]) compared with those in the other groups (0%, 0 [0–0] in Group P2 and 8.5%, 0 [0–50] in Group P2.5, all P < 0.001), and the incidence and dose of additional ephedrine were significantly higher in Group P2.5 (31.9%; 0 [0–20]) than in Group P1.5 (10.6%, P = 0.012; 0 [0–5], P = 0.007, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: For the stable maintenance of hemodynamic parameters and proper sedation level during i-gel insertion, 2 mg/kg propofol has an advantage over 1.5 mg/kg or 2.5 mg/kg propofol in healthy paralyzed patients. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5809703 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | The Korean Society of Anesthesiologists |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-58097032018-02-13 Optimal propofol dosage for i-gel® insertion in healthy paralyzed patients Cho, Sung-Ae Sung, Tae-Yun Cho, Choon-Kyu Jee, Young Seok Kang, Po-Soon Korean J Anesthesiol Clinical Research Article BACKGROUND: Propofol is used for supraglottic airway device insertion, often with the i-gel. However, the propofol requirement for i-gel insertion has not been explored in paralyzed patients. This study was performed to explore hemodynamic changes and sedation level with different propofol doses in healthy paralyzed patients when the i-gel was inserted. METHODS: A total of 141 patients undergoing a urologic operation were randomly allocated to three groups depending on the propofol dose (1.5, 2, and 2.5 mg/kg; Groups P1.5, P2, and P2.5, respectively). After patients had been administered each propofol dose and rocuronium, the i-gel was inserted and changes in hemodynamic parameters and bispectral index were evaluated. RESULTS: Group P2 showed a lower incidence of complications (17%) such as hemodynamic instability and inadequate sedation than Group P1.5 (55.3%, P < 0.001) or Group P2.5 (40.4%, P = 0.012). The incidence and dose of additional propofol increased in Group P1.5 (51%, median [range]; 20 [0–50]) compared with those in the other groups (0%, 0 [0–0] in Group P2 and 8.5%, 0 [0–50] in Group P2.5, all P < 0.001), and the incidence and dose of additional ephedrine were significantly higher in Group P2.5 (31.9%; 0 [0–20]) than in Group P1.5 (10.6%, P = 0.012; 0 [0–5], P = 0.007, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: For the stable maintenance of hemodynamic parameters and proper sedation level during i-gel insertion, 2 mg/kg propofol has an advantage over 1.5 mg/kg or 2.5 mg/kg propofol in healthy paralyzed patients. The Korean Society of Anesthesiologists 2018-02 2017-07-04 /pmc/articles/PMC5809703/ /pubmed/29441171 http://dx.doi.org/10.4097/kjae.2018.71.1.22 Text en Copyright © The Korean Society of Anesthesiologists, 2018 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Clinical Research Article Cho, Sung-Ae Sung, Tae-Yun Cho, Choon-Kyu Jee, Young Seok Kang, Po-Soon Optimal propofol dosage for i-gel® insertion in healthy paralyzed patients |
title | Optimal propofol dosage for i-gel® insertion in healthy paralyzed patients |
title_full | Optimal propofol dosage for i-gel® insertion in healthy paralyzed patients |
title_fullStr | Optimal propofol dosage for i-gel® insertion in healthy paralyzed patients |
title_full_unstemmed | Optimal propofol dosage for i-gel® insertion in healthy paralyzed patients |
title_short | Optimal propofol dosage for i-gel® insertion in healthy paralyzed patients |
title_sort | optimal propofol dosage for i-gel® insertion in healthy paralyzed patients |
topic | Clinical Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5809703/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29441171 http://dx.doi.org/10.4097/kjae.2018.71.1.22 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chosungae optimalpropofoldosageforigelinsertioninhealthyparalyzedpatients AT sungtaeyun optimalpropofoldosageforigelinsertioninhealthyparalyzedpatients AT chochoonkyu optimalpropofoldosageforigelinsertioninhealthyparalyzedpatients AT jeeyoungseok optimalpropofoldosageforigelinsertioninhealthyparalyzedpatients AT kangposoon optimalpropofoldosageforigelinsertioninhealthyparalyzedpatients |