Changes in propofol concentration in a propofol-lidocaine 9:1 volume mixture

A New Anaesthetic Protocol for Adult Zebrafish (Danio rerio): Propofol Combined with Lidocaine

Background

The increasing use of zebrafish model has not been accompanied by the evolution of proper anaesthesia for this species in research. The most used anaesthetic in fishes, MS222, may induce aversion, reduction of heart rate, and consequently high mortality, especially during long exposures. Therefore, we aim to explore new anaesthetic protocols to be used in zebrafish by studying the quality of anaesthesia and recovery induced by different concentrations of propofol alone and in combination with different concentrations of lidocaine.

Material and Methods

In experiment A, eighty-three AB zebrafish were randomly assigned to 7 different groups: control, 2.5 (2.5P), 5 (5P) or 7.5 μg/ml (7.5P) of propofol; and 2.5 μg/ml of propofol combined with 50, (P/50L), 100 (P/100L) or 150 μg/ml (P/150L) of lidocaine. Zebrafish were placed in an anaesthetic water bath and time to lose the equilibrium, reflex to touch, reflex to a tail pinch, and respiratory rate were measured. Time to gain equilibrium was also assessed in a clean tank. Five and 24 hours after anaesthesia recovery, zebrafish were evaluated concerning activity and reactivity. Afterwards, in a second phase of experiments (experiment B), the best protocol of the experiment A was compared with a new group of 8 fishes treated with 100 mg/L of MS222 (100M).

Results

In experiment A, only different concentrations of propofol/lidocaine combination induced full anaesthesia in all animals. Thus only these groups were compared with a standard dose of MS222 in experiment B. Propofol/lidocaine induced a quicker loss of equilibrium, and loss of response to light and painful stimuli compared with MS222. However zebrafish treated with MS222 recovered quickly than the ones treated with propofol/lidocaine.

Conclusion

In conclusion, propofol/lidocaine combination and MS222 have advantages in different situations. MS222 is ideal for minor procedures when a quick recovery is important, while propofol/lidocaine is best to induce a quick and complete anaesthesia.

Propofol-Induced Injection Pain: Comparison of a Modified Propofol Emulsion to Standard Propofol with Premixed Lidocaine

Propofol is well known for its association with pain on injection. The most frequently used method to reduce this pain is premixture with lidocaine. Recently, a modified lipid emulsion of propofol containing medium-chain triglycerides (MCT) with long-chain triglycerides (LCT), in contrast to the usual LCT formulation, has been advocated to alleviate pain. In a randomized, prospective, controlled, double-blind study on 222 surgical patients, we compared the effect of the two solutions on the incidence and intensity of injection pain. Patients were randomly allocated to receive either propofol MCT/LCT (group M; n = 109) or standard propofol LCT with the addition of 20 mg of lidocaine (2 mL of lidocaine 1%) to 200 mg of propofol (group L; n = 113). Pain scores were assessed using a verbal analog scale (VAS) ranging from 0-10. Group L was found to have significantly less pain on the injection of propofol (mean VAS, 2.5 +/- 2.9) (mean +/- sd) than group M (mean VAS, 3.8 +/- 3.2; P = 0.002). Regarding postoperative recall of pain on injection, patients in group L indicated significantly less pain (mean VAS, 2.2 +/- 2.4) than patients in group M (mean VAS, 3.0 +/- 2.7; P = 0.02). Premixing of 20 mg of lidocaine (2 mL of lidocaine 1%) to 200 mg of standard propofol LCT causes less pain on injection than propofol MCT/LCT and thus increases patient comfort.

Physicochemical Compatibility of Propofol-Lidocaine Mixture

To examine the physicochemical stability of combinations of propofol-lidocaine mixtures frequently used in clinical practice, we added lidocaine 5, 10, 20, or 40 mg to commercially available 1% propofol 20 mL. To assess chemical stability, propofol concentrations were determined by gas chromatography assay for 24 h after preparation of the mixture. In addition, scanning electron microscopy was used to determine the maximum detectable droplet size in randomly selected fields. Macroscopically, separate, colorless layers were first seen at 3 and 24 h after the addition of 40 and 20 mg of lidocaine to propofol, respectively, whereas the mixture with 5 or 10 mg of lidocaine was macroscopically stable. Propofol concentrations in the mixture with 40 mg of lidocaine decreased linearly and significantly from 4 to 24 h after preparation, whereas those combined with other lidocaine doses were unchanged compared with baseline concentrations. Scanning electron microscopy showed that droplets with diameters >or=5 microm first appeared 30 min after the addition of 40 mg of lidocaine to propofol, and the emulsion droplets were enlarged in a time- and dose-dependent fashion. Our results indicate that the addition of lidocaine to propofol results in a coalescence of oil droplets, which finally proceeds to a visible separate layer. Depending on the dose of lidocaine and the duration between its preparation and administration, this combination may pose the risk of pulmonary embolism.

IMPLICATIONS

The addition of lidocaine to propofol results in time- and dose-dependent increases in oil droplet diameters in emulsion. This mixture is physicochemically unstable over time and may cause pulmonary embolism, depending on the dose of lidocaine.

The effect of mixing lidocaine with propofol on the dose of propofol required for induction of anesthesia

Lidocaine is used to reduce pain associated with propofol injection, either mixed with propofol or preceding it as a separate injection. The addition of lidocaine to propofol causes destabilization of the emulsion and reduces anesthetic potency in rats and humans. We conducted a randomized double-blinded study on 67 patients to assess the effect of mixing lidocaine with propofol on the dose of propofol required for the induction of anesthesia. Patients in Group S (n = 32) received IV lidocaine 0.2 mg/kg followed by an infusion of propofol whereas those in Group M (n = 35) received IV normal saline (placebo) followed by an infusion of a freshly prepared mixture of propofol 1%/lidocaine 1% in 10:1 volume ratio. The infusion was stopped when the subjects lost consciousness, as detected by the syringe-drop method. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in the mean (95% confidence interval) doses of propofol required for loss of consciousness: 2.0 (1.8-2.2) mg/kg for Group S versus 1.9 (1.7-2.0) mg/kg for Group M (P = 0.206). Mixing 20 mg of lidocaine with 200 mg of propofol is unlikely to affect the dose of propofol required for the induction of anesthesia.

IMPLICATIONS

Adding lidocaine to propofol destabilizes the propofol emulsion. A randomized double-blinded trial found no statistically significant difference in the doses of propofol required for the induction of anesthesia whether administered as a freshly prepared propofol 1%/lidocaine 1% 10:1 mixture or as a separate injection after a dose of lidocaine.