Comparison of two different anesthesia regimens in patients undergoing aortocoronary bypass grafting surgery: Sufentanil-midazolam versus remifentanil-propofol

Abstract

Objective: To compare intraoperative hemodynamics and depth of anesthesia using sufentanil-midazolam (SM) versus remifentanil-propofol (RP) anesthesia. Design: Prospective, randomized study. Setting: Clinical investigation in an urban, university-affiliated hospital. Participants: Forty patients undergoing elective first-time coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Interventions: Twenty patients were anesthetized using SM and 20 patients using RP. Measurements and Main Results: Hemodynamic monitoring included a 5-lead electrocardiogram, a radial artery catheter, and a pulmonary artery catheter. Depth of anesthesia was assessed using bispectral index (BIS). Data were obtained after induction of anesthesia (T1), after sternotomy (T2), after pericardiotomy (T3), 5 minutes after cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) (T4), after closure of thorax (T5), and at the end of surgery (T6). The 2 groups were comparable with regard to demographic and perioperative data. There were no significant differences of any hemodynamic parameter at any time between the 2 groups. In both groups, systemic vascular resistance increased at T2 and decreased at T4 from baseline value (p < 0.05). Cardiac index increased at T4 in both groups from baseline value (p < 0.05); 55% of the patients of both groups needed low-dose dobutamine after CPB. During CPB, 40% of the RP patients needed norepinephrine versus 35% of the SM patients. BIS was lower in the RP than in the SM group at T2 and T3 (p < 0.05). BIS values indicating intraoperative awareness were not noted. Conclusion: Both anesthesia regimens provided stable hemodynamics and adequate anesthesia in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Copyright © 2000 by W.B. Saunders Company