Total Propofol Research Articles

Propofol-alone sedative efficacy in observational biliopancreatic endoscopic ultrasound.

Appropriate sedative and analgesic selection is essential to reduce patient discomfort and body movement to safely conduct endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS). However, few cases have examined sedation with propofol in EUS, and few studies the need for combined analgesia. In this study, we retrospectively evaluated the usefulness and safety of propofol without analgesics for sedation in biliopancreatic observational EUS. This single-center retrospective study included 516 observational biliopancreatic EUS procedures using propofol alone performed between April 2021 and March 2023. The primary and secondary endpoints were the observational biliopancreatic EUS results obtained with propofol alone and adverse event occurrence, respectively. The median examination time and total propofol dose were 22 (range: 10-67) min and 186.5 (range: 50-501) mg, respectively. The median starting Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale and Visual Analog Scale scores were -5 (range: -5-1) and 0 (range: 0-10), respectively. The median recovery time was 22 (range: 5-80) min. Adverse events occurred in 60 (11.6%) patients. Trainee-performed examination (odds ratio [OR] 3.52, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.63-7.60, p = 0.0014) and examination length (>22 min; OR 1.67, 95% CI: 0.95-2.92, p = 0.07) were risk factors for adverse events.High body mass index (OR 1.87, 95% CI: 1.10-3.16, p = 0.02) and extended examination time (OR 4.23, 95% CI: 2.08-8. 57, p < 0.001) were risk factors for delayed recovery. During observational biliopancreatic EUS, propofol is useful as a single sedative and offers high patient satisfaction and relative safety.

Determining the Target Concentration of Propofol for Sedation in Patients Undergoing Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography: A Target-Controlled Infusion Approach.

Introduction Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is vital for diagnosing and treating biliary and pancreatic diseases, necessitating deep sedation typically achieved through total intravenous anesthesia. Propofol, with its favorable pharmacokinetic profile, is the preferred sedative, but conventional administration methods of mg/kg boluses or infusion rates pose challenges. Target-controlled infusion (TCI) systems offer a solution that ensures precise dose delivery of propofol. Despite its widespread use, the literature lacks specific guidance on the target plasma concentration (Cp) of propofol for sedation in patients undergoing ERCP. Methods A prospective interventional study was conducted at the Institute of Liver and Biliary Sciences, Delhi, India to determine the target Cp of propofol for sedation during ERCP. The study enrolled 86 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade I and II patients aged 18-70 years. The primary objective was to establish the optimal propofol concentration for sedation as guided by a bispectral index (BIS) value of 60-70. Secondary outcomes included induction time, recovery time, total propofol consumption, and the occurrence of adverse events (if any). The Marsh pharmacokinetic model guided the TCI pump, adjusting Cp until the target sedation was achieved. Results The mean Cp of propofol to maintain the BIS value 60-70 was 2.21 ± 0.42 µg/ml. Age-wise analysis revealed variations, emphasizing the need for individualized dosing. Induction time was 4.21 ± 0.68 minutes; recovery times were seven minutes (median, IQR: 5-10 minutes) for BIS >80 and seven minutes (median, IQR: 5-10 minutes) for achieving a Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation score of ≥5. The mean propofol consumption was 6.24 mg/kg/hr. Side effects were minimal, with 1.16% experiencing transient hypoxia and hypotension. Conclusion The study establishes a mean target propofol concentration of 2.21 ± 0.42 µg/ml for sedation in ASA I and II patients undergoing ERCP.

Efficacy and safety during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) under total intravenous anesthesia – propofol alone versus propofol supplemented with dexketa, a comparative study in medical college, Kolkata

Background: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is an invasive procedure and, hence, is distressing for awake patients, requiring an adequate level of anesthesia. Recent advancements have encouraged the use of monitored anesthesia care, that allows the patient to tolerate unpleasant experiences during procedures while maintaining cardio-respiratory function. Usually, propofol-based anesthesia is given in ERCP. The main aim of this study is to compare the effect of propofol alone and propofol with ketamine and dexmedetomidine on the hemodynamics during ERCP, recovery profile, and side effects (if any). Aims and Objectives: (1) To compare efficacy in terms of hemodynamic stability and desaturation events. (2) Recovery and quality of recovery. (3) Pain score. (4) Incidence of post-operative nausea and vomiting. Materials and Methods: This is a comparative double-blinded study. Adult patients from the age group of 18–70 years belonging to the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA-I) and ASA-II who had undergone ERCP under total intravenous anesthesia were taken and randomly assigned to either of the two groups. Both groups received 0.01 mg/kg glycopyrrolate, 0.1 mg/kg ondansetron, 0.05 mg/kg midazolam, 50 mcg fentanyl, and 40 mg hyoscine. Group A patients received 30 mg propofol as a bolus dose and then repeated according to requirements. Group B patients received 0.5 mcg/kg dexmedetomidine as a loading dose and 0.3 mcg/kg/h as a maintenance infusion dose. 30 mg propofol was given before negotiating scope and then 1 mL (1:1) mixture of propofol and ketamine was repeated according to requirements. Total propofol consumption, hemodynamics, quality of recovery, and side effects (if any) were recorded at regular intervals. Results: The study showed significant cases in Group A had episodes of hypotension and apneic events, whereas there were very few hemodynamic instability and almost no apneic events in Group B patients. The requirement of propofol was much higher in Group A patients. Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine when used along with propofol and ketamine in ERCP patients reduced the dose requirement of propofol and maintained hemodynamic stability without causing any apneic events.

Efficacy and safety of esketamine combined with propofol for curative endoscopic resection in colorectum: a prospective, randomized controlled trial

BackgroundCurative endoscopic resection is widely used to treat colonic polyps and early stage cancers. The anesthetic strategy commonly involves the use of propofol combined with a small dose of opioids for sedation. Adverse respiratory or cardiovascular events such as hypotension often occur when attempting to achieve the necessary level of sedation. Several studies have suggested its advantages owing to the anesthetic, analgesic, and sympathomimetic properties of esketamine. However, there are no reports on curative colorectal endoscopic resection. We designed this randomized controlled trial to assess the efficacy and safety of esketamine combined with propofol for sedation in patients undergoing curative colorectal endoscopic resection.MethodsA total of 166 patients who underwent curative colorectal endoscopic resection were randomly assigned to groups A (propofol + fentanyl) or E (propofol + esketamine). Ideal sedation was assessed using the MOAA/S scale and was achieved using TCI-propofol with different doses of fentanyl and esketamine. The propofol consumption and vasoactive drug dosages were recorded. Sedation-related times, adverse events, and satisfaction were recorded.ResultsOf the 160 patients, the total propofol consumption was significantly lower in group E (n = 81) (300 mg) than in group A (n = 79) (350 mg). Hypotension and bradycardia were significantly lower in Group E than in Group A. The groups showed no significant differences in other adverse events, induction time, recovery time, or patient or endoscopist satisfaction.ConclusionCompared to fentanyl, esketamine helps decrease propofol consumption and increases cardiovascular stability during curative colorectal endoscopic resection in American Society of Anesthesiologists Class I–III patients without affecting anesthesia, patient and endoscopist satisfaction, or other adverse events.Trial registrationThe study was retrospectively registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (www.chictr.org.cn; registration number: ChiCTR2300069014 on 03/03/2023).

Effect of intravenous lidocaine on the ED50 of propofol induction dose in elderly patients undergoing painless gastroscopy: a prospective, randomized, double-blinded, controlled study

BackgroundIntravenous lidocaine could be a potential alternative adjuvant to propofol-based sedation for gastroscopy in elderly patients. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of intravenous lidocaine on the median effective dose (ED50) of propofol induction dose in elderly patients undergoing painless gastroscopy.MethodsThe study included 70 patients aged ≥ 60 years undergoing painless gastroscopy with 64 randomly assigned to either group L (2% lidocaine 1.5 mg/kg, n = 31) or group N (equal volume normal saline, n = 33). All patients received propofol induction following 0.1 μg/kg intravenous sufentanil. The Dixon “up-and-down” sequential method was used, with a 1.5 mg/kg initial induction dose of propofol followed by a 0.1 mg/kg sequential variable dose. The primary endpoint was the ED50 of the propofol induction dose. The total propofol dose, recovery time, adverse events, and local anesthetic intoxication reactions were also recorded.ResultsThe ED50 of propofol induction dose was 0.670 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.216–0.827) mg/kg in group L and 1.118 (95% CI 0.803–1.232) mg/kg in group N. There was a statistically significant difference between the two groups (p < 0.001). The incidence of hypotension and propofol injection pain were lower in group L than in group N (p < 0.05). Furthermore, the orientation recovery time in group L was shorter compared to group N (p < 0.05). None of the participants in group L observed local anesthetic intoxication reactions after receiving lidocaine.ConclusionsThe administration of intravenous lidocaine to elderly patients undergoing painless gastroscopy resulted in a significant 40% reduction in the ED50 of propofol induction dose, which may be related to the decreased incidence of hypotension and injection pain, as well as the improved post-gastroscopy orientation recovery.Trial registrationChiCTR, ChiCTR2200065530. Registered on 08 November 2022.

Comparing sedation protocols for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP): A retrospective study

BackgroundEndoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a widely used diagnostic and therapeutic procedure. Effective sedation is crucial to enhance patient comfort and optimize endoscopist performance. Various sedation protocols, including Propofol and Dexmedetomidine (Pro-Dex), Ketamine and Propofol (Keto-Fol), Propofol and Midazolam (Pro-Mid), and Propofol alone, have been utilized during ERCP. This retrospective study aims to compare the safety and efficacy of these four sedation protocols. MethodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on data from 600 patients who underwent ERCP between 2018 and 2021, with each patient receiving one of the four sedation protocols. Protocol assignment was based on the endoscopist's preference. Data on hemodynamic parameters, sedation level, recovery time, and procedure-related complications were collected. ResultsBaseline data showed no significant differences among the groups pre-procedure. The Pro-Dex group exhibited significantly lower mean total propofol dose, shorter recovery time, and faster achievement of Ramsay Sedation Scale (RSS) score 3–4 compared to the other groups. The Pro-group demonstrated significantly longer hospital stay than the other three groups (median, 4.19 ± 1.1 vs. 3.48 ± 1.2 days in the KP groups, p = 0.042). There were no significant variations in the incidence of respiratory depression, hypotension, or bradycardia among the four groups. Additionally, notable trends were found for hemodynamic measures, total propofol dosage, time to reach the desired level of sedation (as measured by the Ramsay Sedation Scale), and hospital stay based on BMI categories, indicating that higher BMI is linked to more serious outcomes. ConclusionOur retrospective study demonstrates that the Pro-Dex protocol offers superior sedation quality, faster recovery, and fewer complications compared to the other protocols during ERCP. However, the incidence of ERCP-related adverse events did not significantly differ among the four sedation protocols. These findings can aid clinicians in selecting the most appropriate sedation protocol for ERCP, considering patient and endoscopist preferences.

Effect of Remimazolam Supplementation on Propofol Requirements During Hysteroscopy: A Double-Blind, Dose-Response Study.

Propofol is commonly used for procedural sedation but may increase side effects in a dose-dependent manner. Remimazolam, an ultrashort-acting benzodiazepine, has been approved for procedural sedation but may delay awakening. This study tested the hypothesis that remimazolam as a supplement reduces effect-site propofol concentration (Ceprop) required to suppress response to cervical dilation in patients undergoing hysteroscopy. One hundred and fifty patients who were scheduled for hysteroscopy were randomized to receive 0, 0.05, 0.1, 0.15, or 0.2 mg·kg-1 intravenous remimazolam, followed by a bolus of sufentanil 0.15 μg⋅kg-1, and a target-controlled propofol infusion. The initial target Ceprop was 3.5 μg·mL-1 and was increased or decreased in subsequent patients by steps of 0.5 μg·mL-1 according to whether there was loss of response to cervical dilation in the previous patient. We used up-down sequential analysis to determine values of Ceprop that suppressed response to cervical dilation in 50% of patients (EC50). The EC50 of propofol for suppressing response to cervical dilation was lower in patients given 0.1 mg·kg-1 (2.08 [95% confidence interval, CI, 1.88-2.28] μg·mL-1), 0.15 mg⋅kg-1 (1.83 [1.56-2.10] μg·mL-1), and 0.2 mg⋅kg-1 (1.43 [1.27-1.58] μg·mL-1) remimazolam than those given 0 mg⋅kg-1 (3.67 [3.49-3.86] μg·mL-1) or 0.05 mg⋅kg-1 (3.47 [3.28-3.67] μg·mL-1) remimazolam (all were P < .005). Remimazolam at doses of 0.1, 0.15, and 0.2 mg·kg-1 decreased EC50 of propofol by 43.3% (95% CI, 41.3%-45.5%), 50.3% (48.0%-52.8%), and 61.2% (58.7%-63.8%), respectively, from baseline (remimazolam 0 mg⋅kg-1). Propofol consumption was lower in patients given 0.1 mg⋅kg-1 (4.15 [3.51-5.44] mg·kg-1), 0.15 mg⋅kg-1 (3.54 [3.16-4.46] mg·kg-1), and 0.2 mg⋅kg-1 (2.74 [1.73-4.01] mg·kg-1) remimazolam than those given 0 mg⋅kg-1 (6.09 [4.99-7.35] mg·kg-1) remimazolam (all were P < .005). Time to anesthesia emergence did not differ significantly among the 5 groups. For women undergoing hysteroscopic procedures, remimazolam at doses from 0.1 to 0.2 mg·kg-1 reduced the EC50 of propofol inhibiting response to cervical dilation and the total propofol requirement. Whether the combination could improve perioperative outcomes deserves further investigation.

Impact of different doses of esketamine on the incidence of hypotension in propofol-based sedation for colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial.

Hypovolemia is common in colonoscopy due to fasting and bowel preparation, and propofol itself can reduce systemic vascular resistance, resulting in relative hypovolemia. Therefore, hypotension is not a rare event during propofol-based sedation for colonoscopy. Our objective was to explore the efficacy of esketamine as a sedative adjuvant in reducing the incidence of hypotension during colonoscopy. This was a prospective randomized trial. The trial was registered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ID: ChiCTR 2100047032). We included 100 eligible patients who planned to receive a colonoscopy and randomly divided them into 4 groups with 25 patients in each group, which were propofol 2 mg/kg (Group P), propofol 1 mg/kg with esketamine 0.2 mg/kg (Group E1), propofol 1 mg/kg with esketamine 0.3 mg/kg (Group E2), and propofol 1 mg/kg with esketamine 0.4 mg/kg (Group E3). The hemodynamic and respiratory parameters were documented at various times during the procedure, including the patient's entry into the endoscopic room (T0), the induction of sedation (T1), the insertion of the colonoscope (T2), the removal of the colonoscope (T3), and the awakening of the patient (T4). The primary outcome was the incidence of hypotension. Secondary outcomes were cardiovascular side effects other than hypotension, incidence of hypoxia, cumulative changes in cardiovascular and respiratory parameters, total propofol dosage, anesthesia recovery time, and satisfactory levels of both patients and endoscopists. The incidence of hypotension in Group E1 (16%), Group E2 (16%), and Group E3 (12%) was significantly lower than in Group P (60%), with p values 0.003, 0.003, and <0.001 respectively. The cumulative changes in diastolic blood pressure and mean arterial pressure in Groups E1, E2, and E3 were significantly higher than in Group P (p = 0.024, p < 0.001, p = 0.006, respectively). Cumulative changes in systolic blood pressure in Group E3 were significantly higher than those in Group P (p = 0.012). The respiratory-related parameters were not statistically significant. This study showed that the application of 0.4 mg/kg esketamine in propofol-based sedation reduced the incidence of hypotension during colonoscopy while providing satisfactory sedation.

An Entropy Based Observational Study to Assess the Dosage of Propofol Required for Induction of Anaesthesia by Varying the Time Intervals between Fentanyl and Propofol Administration

Background: Propofol is the preferred drug for the induction of anesthesia in many centers. However, its ubiquitous use is hampered by adverse effects. The rationale behind our study is to prove that whether the administration of an opioid drug before propofol induction, lowers the amount of propofol requirement for balanced anesthesia, and enhances hemodynamic stability. Aim: The present study intends to know the consequence of the differing time intervals between the administration of fentanyl and propofol on the dosage of propofol required to achieve induction of general anesthesia. Methods: In this observational study, 84 patients were included in the study. Patients who received propofol immediately after fentanyl injection were included in Group 1, whereas patients who received propofol at 3 min and 6 min after fentanyl injection, respectively, were grouped as Group 2 and Group 3. The total propofol required, the hemodynamic variations and the entropy values were recorded. SSPS version 25.09 (IBM) was used for statistical analysis. Results: In this study, it was observed that there was a significant reduction in propofol requirement in Group 2 and Group 3 compared with Group 1. The incidence of hypotension was seen in about 42.9% of Group 1 when compared to Group 2 and 3, which was 28.6% and 17.8%, respectively. Furthermore, the entropy values in Group 3 were initially higher and later were comparable in all the groups. Conclusion: Our study concluded that as the duration between the administration of propofol and fentanyl increases, the hemodynamic stability also increases and there is no variation in the depth of anesthesia attained in the distinct study population.

Comparative study between the effect of dexmedetomidine and lidocaine infusion on intraoperative analgesic requirement and hemodynamics during craniotomy

Background: Nowadays, anesthesiologists are evaluating several analgesic adjuncts to minimize opioid use during craniotomy. Some studies have evaluated the analgesic-sparing effect of intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine and lidocaine on intraoperative hemodynamics and post-operative analgesia. There is a paucity of studies focussing on the intraoperative analgesic requirement. Aims and Objectives: The present study compared dexmedetomidine and lidocaine infusion primarily for their effects on intraoperative fentanyl requirements during craniotomy. Materials and Methods: This study was done on 70 patients aged 18–80 years, the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I–II, having Glasgow Coma Scale 15, undergoing craniotomies. Patients were randomly allocated to receive either dexmedetomidine (group A, n=35) at a dose of 0.6 mcg/kg bolus over 10 min followed by 0.6 mcg/kg/h infusion or lidocaine (group B, n=35) at a dose of 1.5 mg/kg bolus over 10 min, followed by 1.5 mg/kg/h infusion till the end of skin suture, respectively. Study drugs were started 10 min before the start of surgery. Intraoperative total fentanyl and propofol consumption, intraoperative hemodynamics, recovery from hypnosis, and time to extubation were recorded. Results: The use of dexmedetomidine resulted in considerably less total fentanyl requirement (245.1 vs. 300.7 mcg, P&lt;0.0001) and total propofol requirement (172.7 vs. 236.7 mg, P&lt;0.0001) compared with lidocaine. Comparatively better hemodynamics were observed with the use of dexmedetomidine at all the points of observation. Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine as an analgesic adjunct can be a better alternative to lidocaine in terms of reduced fentanyl consumption, reduced propofol use and favorable hemodynamics, and early recovery from anesthesia.

Risk Factors for Intraoperative Instability in Sedated Patients Undergoing Pulmonary Vein Isolation Ablation.

Persistent or paroxysmal atrial fibrillation is typically treated with pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) ablation under deep sedation with propofol. Intraoperative hemodynamic or respiratory instability often interferes with the surgical procedure. We retrospectively investigated risk factors in 80 patients who underwent their first PVI ablation for atrial fibrillation at our hospital. Background and echocardiography findings were collected from their electronic charts and the questionnaires they completed during hospitalization. Total intraoperative propofol dose and bolus injections (total number and volume) were defined as surrogate measures of patient instability. Single and stepwise multiple regression were performed using each measure as the dependent variable. When total propofol dose was employed as the dependent variable, significant associations were observed with drinking status (P < 0.05) and body mass index (BMI) (P < 0.05). When total number or volume of intravenous propofol boluses were each used as the dependent variable, significant associations were noted with age (P < 0.05) and BMI (P < 0.05). Separately, statistical analyses were conducted using total propofol dose or total number of bolus injections as the dependent variable and echocardiography parameters as independent variables. A significant association was detected between total dose and left atrial dimension (P < 0.05). These results suggested that younger age, higher BMI (obesity), and current drinking status adversely affect patient stability under deep sedation. To ensure safe ablation, physicians should pay attention to these risk factors when administering deep sedation for PVI.

Infusion of propofol with bispectral index monitoring does not reduce the amount of propofol used during transvaginal oocyte retrieval procedure

In our study we aimed to investigate whether the use of bispectral index (BIS) monitoring would decrease total propofol consumption during the transvaginal oocyte retrieval procedure. This was a prospective, randomized, controlled, parallel-group clinical trial. The study was conducted in the operating room, and postoperative recovery room. One hundred and thirty, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I–II patients, over age 18, undergoing transvaginal oocyte retrieval were included in this study. All patients were administered 2 μg/kg fentanyl, and 2 mg/kg propofol for the induction of anesthesia. The patients were divided into two groups. Patients in the group bolus were given 0.5 mg/kg of propofol when necessary, according to the observer's range of motion. Patients in the group BIS were given 10 mg/kg/h propofol infusion adjusted to keep the BIS value between 40 and 60. The primary outcome was the total dose of propofol administered per patient. The secondary outcomes were the time to reach the value of 5 on the Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness Sedation Scale (MOASs), the time to reach Post Anesthetic Discharge Scoring System (PADSS) ≥ 9 of the patients, satisfaction of the patient, and the gynecologist. The amount of total propofol was higher in the group BIS than in the group bolus administered according to the patient's clinic. There was no difference in the time to reach the value of 5 on the MOASs between the groups. The time to reach PADSS ≥ 9 was longer in the group BIS than in the group bolus. There was no difference between the two groups in terms of the satisfaction of the patient and the gynecologist. Administration of propofol as an infusion with BIS monitoring did not reduce the amount of propofol administered to patients during transvaginal oocyte retrieval.Clinical trial registration number: NCT05631925—30/11/2022.

A comparison between magnesium sulphate and fentanyl as adjuvants to propofol infusion for sedation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: A randomized controlled trial

ABSTRACT Background Propofol-based sedations are used widely during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) procedures. However, respiratory depression and cardiovascular adverse events commonly occur. Therefore, we designed this study to evaluate the effects of adding a single boules induction dose of fentanyl or magnesium sulphate to propofol infusion for sedation of patients subjected to ERCP. Methods This randomized parallel double-blind controlled trial included 60 adult patients scheduled for ERCP procedures. Before starting the propofol infusion, patients immediately received either magnesium sulphate 50 mg.kg−1 intravenously (IV) over 10 min (Group M) (n = 30) or fentanyl 2 µg.kg−1 IV over 10 min (Group F) (n- = 30). Continuous propofol infusion was given with a syringe pump for maintenance, with the initial rate set at 25–75 mic/kg/min IV during the first 10–15 min. Results The magnesium group had significantly reduced the total propofol consumption and increased the onset time of sedation than the fentanyl group (P < 0.05). Heart rate and mean arterial pressure were statistically lower after adjuvant bolus injection and 15 min in the magnesium group than in the fentanyl group (P < 0.001). Procedure time, involuntary movement, physician satisfaction, and complications exhibited no significant differences between both groups. Conclusions During ERCP, adding a single bolus of magnesium sulphate to propofol was associated with a lower total propofol consumption and better hemodynamics than fentanyl but with a delayed onset time of sedation and comparable respiratory depression.

The median effective dose of propofol combined with butorphanol during artificial abortion: a randomized controlled trial

ObjectivePropofol-opioids are the most common drug combination and can reduce the dose of propofol and the incidence of adverse events in painless artificial abortion. We hypothesized that butorphanol may reduce the median effective dose (ED50) of propofol, propofol injection pain, and postoperative uterine contraction pain.MethodsThis was a randomized, double-blind, controlled study. A total of 54 female patients, who had ASA I or II, aged 18–49 years, undergoing painless artificial abortion, were randomly assigned into two groups, namely, Group P (propofol) and Group PB (propofol plus 10 μg/kg butorphanol). According to the pre-experiment, the initial dose of propofol for the P and PB groups was 3 and 2.5 mg/kg, respectively, with a dose gradient of 0.25 mg/kg. The ED50 of propofol was analyzed using probit regression analysis. The total propofol dose consumed, recovery time, and anesthesia-related adverse events were also recorded.ResultsThere were 25 and 29 patients in the P and PB groups, respectively. The ED50 (95% CI) of propofol for artificial abortion were 2.477 (2.186–2.737) and 1.555 (1.173–1.846) mg/kg in the P and PB groups, respectively. The total propofol dose consumed was (150.7 ± 21.7) mg and (110.4 ± 28.2) mg in the P and PB groups, respectively (P &amp;lt; 0.001). Compared with the P group, injection-site pain (76 vs. 20.7%) and uterine contraction pain (72 vs. 6.9%) in the PB group had a significant decrease (P &amp;lt; 0.001).ConclusionCombination of propofol with 10 μg/kg butorphanol reduced the ED50 of propofol and decreased the incidence of propofol injection-site pain and postoperative uterine contraction pain during painless artificial abortion compared with propofol alone.Clinical trial registrationhttps://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=166610, identifier: ChiCTR2200059795.

Post-Operative Cognitive Dysfunction in Elderly Patients Receiving Propofol Sedation for Gastrointestinal Endoscopies: An Observational Study Utilizing Processed Electroencephalography.

Propofol sedation is commonly administered during gastrointestinal (GI) procedures. The Patient State Index (PSI) is a processed electroencephalography (EEG) parameter obtained with the SedLine® Sedation Monitoring system (Masimo Corporation, Irvine, CA). When used to objectively assess the patient's level of consciousness, PSI may provide a more effective, safer titration of sedation during GI procedures. We hypothesize that having more or longer episodes of deep sedation as assessed by PSI (i.e., PSI<26) would correlate with developing new-onset or worsening post-operative cognitive dysfunction (POCD). This was a pragmatic, double-blinded observational study of 400 patients aged ≥65 years undergoing upper GI endoscopy, lower GI endoscopy, or a combined procedure utilizing propofol sedation at a tertiary-care [A1]academic medical center. The patients were monitored with the SedLine®Brain Function Monitor, software version 2 (Masimo Corporation, Irvine, CA), throughout the case, starting at baseline (i.e., before administration of propofol) and stopping at case end. We assessed the subjects' cognitive function via an in-person interview at baseline (pre-procedure) and telephone interviews at 1, 7 (±1), and 90 days after study enrollment. Cognitive function was assessed by administering the short blessed test (SBT), which is a validated brief cognitive screening appropriate for in-person and telephone administration. The correlations between the change in SBT score and the pre-defined parameters of PSI were not significant (allp-values >5%). There was a significant drop in SBT scores on day seven. Higher age was also significantly associated with a drop in SBT from baseline. Deep sedation, as evidenced by the number of times PSI was lower than 26, was not predictive of the change in SBT, nor was gender, total propofol dose, or vasoactive drug use during the procedure. The observed incidence of POCD after GI procedures with propofol sedation was low (1.3% at seven days and 2.95% at 90 days) and lower than at the baseline. Age was associated with a greater average decline in SBT score, although the absolute change was small (-0.067 per year of age increase). Deeper sedation, as documented by the PSI score, was not associated with a change in POCD measured with the SBT.

Effect of Preoperative Anxiety on Depth of Anaesthesia and In Vitro Fertilization Success.

Infertility anxiety may have a harmful effect on embryo quality and fertilization during in vitro fertilization (IVF). Monitoring brain function gives real-time information about the depth of anaesthesia of a patient. This study examined the effect of preoperative anxiety on the depth of anaesthesia and IVF success. One hundred thirty-one patients who had undergone oocyte retrieval were divided into two groups according to the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI): the low-anxious Group L (n = 71) and high-anxious Group H (n = 60). Hemodynamic stability, intraoperative total propofol and fentanyl consumption, good quality embryo (GQE) rate, and fertilization rate were recorded. Fertilization and GQE rates were not significant between groups L and H. Total propofol consumption was significantly higher in group H than in group L. Heart rate (HR) preoperatively and postoperatively and systolic arterial pressure (SAP) preoperatively and diastolic arterial pressure (DAP) postoperatively were significantly increased in group H than in group L. The time for the modified Aldrete score to reach 9 (MAS 9) in group H was significantly higher than that in group L. The effect of variables that were found significantly in the univariate analysis (Propofol, HRpreop, HRpostop, SAPpreop, DAPpostop, and MAS 9) on BAI score. Total propofol consumption was higher in patients with high anxiety levels, but it did not have a negative effect on IVF success.

The Effects of Magnesium Sulphate on Integrated Pulmonary Index Scores and Propofol Consumption During Endobronchial Ultrasonography: A Retrospective Study.

Aim Our aim in this studywas to investigate the effect of inhaled and intravenous (iv) magnesium (Mg) use on Integrated Pulmonary Index (IPI) score and propofol consumption in patients undergoing endobronchial ultrasonography (EBUS) procedure under sedoanalgesia. Materials and methods After obtaining the approval of the local ethics committee, the files of 96 patients aged 18-75 who underwent EBUS were reviewed retrospectively. Patients using Mg were classified as the M group, and patients not using Mg were classified as the control (C) group. IPI values, amount of propofol consumed, and intubation scores of group M and group C were evaluated. Results When the intubation score values ​​at the time of the bronchoscope passing through the vocal cords (assessment of vocal cord movement, cough reflex, and leg movement) during the EBUS procedure were compared, the intubation conditions were found to be significantly better in the M group than in the C group (p<0.05). Group M had less cough reflex than group C (p<0.05). IPI scores were significantly higher in the M group than in the C group at the 10th and 15th minutes (p<0.05). Total propofol consumption was found to be significantly lower in the M group(254.61±82.80 mg)than in the C group (321.25±90.04 mg) (p<0.05). Conclusion According to our results, the use of intravenous and inhaler Mg in addition to propofol sedation during the EBUS procedure may improve the respiratory parameters and can also significantly reduce the propofol dose.

Use of a propofol infusion for anaesthetic maintenance in Guinea pigs (Cavia porcellus): a retrospective case series

ObjectiveTo retrospectively evaluate the feasibility of a propofol infusion for anaesthetic maintenance in guinea pigs. Study designRetrospective case series. AnimalsClient-owned guinea pigs undergoing general anaesthesia. MethodsAnaesthetic records of guinea pigs anaesthetized between March 2015 and March 2018 were reviewed. Animals administered a propofol infusion for > 20 minutes were identified and evaluated. Procedure performed, pre-anaesthetic medication, preoperative and intraoperative respiratory rate (fR) and heart rates (HRs), total amount of propofol administered, total anaesthesia and recovery times were extracted from the records and analysed using descriptive statistics and Pearson correlation tests. Data are reported as mean (range). ResultsRecords of 14 animals meeting the criteria were identified. Following drug combinations were administered for premedication: butorphanol 0.43 (0.3–0.5) mg kg–1, medetomidine 0.1 (0.05–0.2) mg kg–1 and midazolam 1 (0.5–2) mg kg–1 (n = 3); methadone 0.33 (0.25–0.5) mg kg–1, medetomidine 0.07 (0.01–0.1) mg kg–1 and midazolam 0.66 (0.5–1) mg kg–1 (n = 3); butorphanol 0.5 mg kg–1, medetomidine 0.05 mg kg–1 and ketamine 5 mg kg–1 (n = 2); buprenorphine 0.01 mg kg–1, medetomidine 0.07 (0.04–1) mg kg–1 and ketamine 4 (3–5) mg kg–1 (n = 3); butorphanol 0.5 mg kg–1, alfaxalone 1 mg kg–1 and midazolam 0.5 mg kg–1 (n = 1); and methadone 0.38 (0.25–0.5) mg kg–1, medetomidine 0.08 (0.06–1) mg kg–1 with midazolam 0.75 (0.5–1) mg kg–1 (n = 2).Preoperative and intraoperative HRs were 240 (160–300) and 170 (140–200) beats minute–1, respectively. Preoperative and intraoperative fR were 63 (50–86) and 37 (18–80) breaths minute–1, respectively. The propofol infusion rate was 0.45 (0.17–0.80) mg kg–1 minute–1. Total anaesthesia and recovery times were 60 (25–145) and 17 (8–60) minutes, respectively. A slight correlation was found between total propofol dose infused and recovery time (r = 0.58). Conclusion and clinical relevancePropofol infusions may be a useful alternative to inhalant anaesthetics.

Effects of intravenous administration of magnesium sulfate in propofol-based sedation for ERCP in elderly patients: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

BackgroundPropofol-based sedations are widely used in elderly patients for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) procedure, but respiratory depression and cardiovascular adverse events commonly occur. Magnesium administered intravenously can alleviate pain and decrease propofol requirements during surgery. We hypothesized that intravenous magnesium was used as adjuvant to propofol might be beneficial in elderly patients undergoing ERCP procedures.MethodsEighty patients aged from 65 to 79 years who were scheduled for ERCP were enrolled. All patients were intravenously administered 0.1 µg/kg sufentanil as premedication. The patients were randomized to receive either intravenous magnesium sulfate 40 mg/kg (group M, n = 40) or the same volume of normal saline (group N, n = 40) over 15 min before the start of sedation. Intraoperative sedation was provided by propofol. Total propofol requirement during ERCP was the primary outcome.ResultsThe total propofol consumption were reduced by 21.4% in the group M compared with the group N (151.2 ± 53.3 mg vs. 192.3 ± 72.1 mg, P = 0.001). The incidences of respiratory depression episodes and involuntary movement were less in the group M than those in the group N (0/40 vs. 6/40, P = 0.011; 4/40 vs. 11/40, P = 0.045; respectively). In the group M, the patients experienced less pain than those in the group N at 30 min after the procedure (1 [0–1] vs. 2 [1–2], P < 0.001). Correspondingly, the patients’ satisfaction was clearly higher in the group M (P = 0.005). There was a tendency towards lower intraoperative heart rate and mean arterial pressure in group M.ConclusionsA single bolus of 40 mg/kg of intravenous magnesium can significantly reduce propofol consumption during ERCP, with higher sedation success and lower adverse events.Trial RegistrationID UMIN000044737. Registered 02/07/2021.

Safety and efficacy of dexmedetomidine vs ketamine vs midazolam combined with propofol in gastrointestinal endoscopy for cancer patients: A randomized double-blinded trial

ABSTRACT Background A wide range of drugs are used for sedation in gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy procedures, including midazolam, dexmedetomidine, and ketamine. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the effects of these drugs in combination with propofol among cancer patients undergoing GI endoscopy. Methods This randomized, double-blinded study was carried out on 75 cancer patients who underwent GI endoscopy. Patients were categorized into three equal groups. Group D: received dexmedetomidine 0.5 µg/kg bolus infusion over 10 min. Group K: received ketamine 0.5 mg/kg. Group M: received midazolam 0.05 mg/kg. With these drugs, 0.5 mg/kg propofol was administered intravenously with incremental 20 mg till achievement of Ramsey sedation score (RSS) 3–4. After that, 0.5 mg/kg propofol boluses were offered for rescue sedation. Results The endoscopy duration was comparable in the three groups. Time of RSS 3–4 achievement and total propofol dose (P < 0.05) were significantly lower in group D and group K compared to group M. Time to eye-opening were significantly lower in groups D, and K compared to group M, with insignificant difference between group K and group D. Moreover, the heart rate (HR) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) of group K at 10 min, 15 min, 20 min, 25 min, and 30 min, and PACU were significantly greater than D and M groups (P < 0.05). Incidence of hypotension and bradycardia were comparable in the three groups. Conclusions In cancer patients who underwent GI endoscopy, dexmedetomidine-propofol and ketamine-propofol had better sedation efficacy [lower achievement time of RSS 3–4, total propofol dose, and eye-opening time] compared to midazolam-propofol group with superior sedative effect of ketamine-propofol than dexmedetomidine-propofol. While ketamine-propofol had more stable HR and MAP.