Remifentanil-propofol versus sufentanil-propofol anaesthesia for supratentorial craniotomy: a randomized trial:

The impact of sufentanil versus remifentanil on surgical site wound healing in caesarean section primiparas undergoing epidural anaesthesia: A systematic meta-analysis

Caesarean section (C-section) is a prevalent obstetric surgical procedure, with the choice of analgesic agents playing a pivotal role in postoperative recovery. This systematic meta-analysis aimed to compare the effects of sufentanil (ST) and remifentanil (RT) on postoperative wound healing in caesarean section primiparas undergoing epidural anaesthesia. A comprehensive search was conducted across multiple databases, adhering to PRISMA guidelines, yielding eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for inclusion. The primary outcome was wound healing assessment using the REEDA (redness, edema, ecchymosis, discharge, approximation) scale on the third, fifth and tenth postoperative days. The meta-analysis encompassed 691 primiparas. A significant difference in wound healing was observed between ST and RT on the third (I2  = 99%; Random: SMD: 6.75, 95% CIs: 3.11-10.39, p < 0.01) and fifth days (I2  = 99%; Random: SMD: 3.63, 95% CIs: 1.56-5.70, p < 0.01) postcaesarean section. However, no significant difference was noted on the tenth day (I2  = 5%; Random: SMD: 0.00, 95% CIs: -0.45-0.45, p = 0.35). Sufentanil and remifentanil exhibit differential effects on early postoperative wound healing in caesarean section primiparas undergoing epidural anaesthesia. While both opioids are effective analgesics, sufentanil demonstrates a more pronounced impact on wound healing during the immediate postoperative days. Clinicians should consider these findings when selecting an opioid for pain management in this patient population.

Opioid-Sparing Effects of Flurbiprofen Axetil as an Adjuvant to Ropivacaine in Pre-Emptive Scalp Infiltration for Post-Craniotomy Pain: Study Protocol for a Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Pain after craniotomy remains a poorly controlled problem that is mainly caused by the inflammatory reaction at the incision site. Nowadays, systemic opioids use, as first-line analgesics, is often limited because of adverse effects. Flurbiprofen axetil (FA) is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug merged into emulsified lipid microspheres, which represent a strong affinity to inflammatory lesions. Local administration of flurbiprofen into a surgical wound has induced enhanced analgesic efficacy and few systemic or local adverse effects after oral surgery. However, the impact of local FA, as a non-opioid pharmacologic alternative, remains elusive on postoperative pain in craniotomy. In this study, we presume that pre-emptive infiltration of scalp with FA as an adjuvant to ropivacaine can lead to less sufentanil consumption postoperatively in patient controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) compared with ropivacaine alone.

Methods/Design

We design a multicenter, randomized controlled study that will enroll 216 subjects who are planned to receive supratentorial craniotomy. Patients will receive pre-emptive infiltration of scalp either with 50 mg FA and 0.5% ropivacaine, or with 0.5% ropivacaine alone. Primary outcome is total consumption of sufentanil with PCIA device at 48 h postoperatively.

Discussion

This is the first study attempting to explore the analgesic and safety profile of local FA as an adjuvant to ropivacaine for incisional pain in patients undergoing craniotomy. It will provide additional insights into the opioid-sparing analgesia pathways by local administration of NSAIDs for neurosurgery.

Effects of Remifentanil and Sufentanil Anesthesia on Cardiac Function and Serological Parameters in Congenital Heart Surgery

In this study, we have investigated feasibility of remifentanil and sufentanil anesthesia in children with congenital heart disease surgery and its effects on cardiac function and serological parameters. For this purpose, a retrospective study was conducted on 120 children with congenital heart disease who underwent repair of ventricular septum or atrial septum in our hospital, specifically from January 2016 to January 2018, and 60 patients in each group were randomly divided into the control and treatment groups, respectively. The control group was anesthetized with sufentanil, and the treatment group was anesthetized with remifentanil. The heart function, serological indexes, and adverse reactions were observed and compared. We have observed that there was no significant difference in HR levels between these groups (P > 0.05), but SDP and DBP values of the two groups were decreased after anesthetic induction (P < 0.05). ACH, cortisol, and lactic acid in the treatment group were significantly lower than those in the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The incidence of bradycardia, nausea and vomiting, hypotension, muscle rigidity, and respiratory depression in the treatment group was 16.67% lower than that in the control group (P < 0.05). Remifentanil has less influence on hemodynamics and a better analgesic effect than fentanyl in inhibiting stress response in congenital heart surgery, which provides reference and basis for children congenital heart surgery.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery strategies for elective craniotomy: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) has led to a paradigm shift in perioperative care through multimodal interventions. Still, ERAS remains a relatively new concept in neurosurgery, and there is no summary of evidence on ERAS applications in cranial neurosurgery.

METHODS

The authors systematically reviewed the literature using the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases for ERAS protocols and elements. Studies had to assess at least one pre-, peri-, or postoperative ERAS element and evaluate at least one of the following outcomes: 1) length of hospital stay, 2) length of ICU stay, 3) postoperative pain, 4) direct and indirect healthcare cost, 5) complication rate, 6) readmission rate, or 7) patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

A final 27 articles were included in the qualitative analysis, with mixed quality of evidence ranging from high in 3 cases to very low in 1 case. Seventeen studies reported a complete ERAS protocol. Preoperative ERAS elements include patient selection through multidisciplinary team discussion, patient counseling and education to adjust expectations of the postoperative period, and mental state assessment; antimicrobial, steroidal, and antiepileptic prophylaxes; nutritional assessment, as well as preoperative oral carbohydrate loading; and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) prophylaxis. Anesthesiology interventions included local anesthesia for pin sites, regional field block or scalp block, avoidance or minimization of the duration of invasive monitoring, and limitation of intraoperative mannitol. Other intraoperative elements include absorbable skin sutures and avoidance of wound drains. Postoperatively, the authors identified early extubation, observation in a step-down unit instead of routine ICU admission, early mobilization, early fluid de-escalation, early intake of solid food and liquids, early removal of invasive monitoring, professional nutritional assessment, PONV management, nonopioid rescue analgesia, and early postoperative imaging. Other postoperative interventions included discharge criteria standardization and home visits or progress monitoring by a nurse.

CONCLUSIONS

A wide range of evidence-based interventions are available to improve recovery after elective craniotomy, although there are few published ERAS protocols. Patient-centered optimization of neurosurgical care spanning the pre-, intra-, and postoperative periods is feasible and has already provided positive results in terms of improved outcomes such as postoperative pain, patient satisfaction, reduced length of stay, and cost reduction with an excellent safety profile. Although fast-track recovery protocols and ERAS studies are gaining momentum for elective craniotomy, prospective trials are needed to provide stronger evidence.

Role of anaesthesia in neurosurgical enhanced recovery programmes

The application of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) in neurosurgical practice is a relatively new concept. A limited number of studies involving ERAS protocols within neurosurgery, specifically for elective craniotomy, have been published, contrary to the ERAS spine surgery pathways that are now promoted by numerous national and international dedicated surgical societies and hospitals. In this review, we want to present the patient surgical journey from an anaesthesia perspective through the key components that can be included in the ERAS pathways for neurosurgical procedures, both craniotomies and major spine surgery.

Effects of anesthesia on cerebral blood flow, metabolism, and neuroprotection

Administration of anesthetic agents fundamentally shifts the responsibility for maintenance of homeostasis from the patient and their intrinsic physiological regulatory mechanisms to the anesthesiologist. Continuous delivery of oxygen and nutrients to the brain is necessary to prevent irreversible injury and arises from a complex series of regulatory mechanisms that ensure uninterrupted cerebral blood flow. Our understanding of these regulatory mechanisms and the effects of anesthetics on them has been driven by the tireless work of pioneers in the field. It is of paramount importance that the anesthesiologist shares this understanding. Herein, we will review the physiological determinants of cerebral blood flow and how delivery of anesthesia impacts these processes.

Efficacy and Safety of Sufentanil-Propofol Versus Remifentanil-Propofol as Anesthesia in Patients Undergoing Craniotomy: A Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of sufentanil-propofol (SF) versus remifentanil-propofol (RF) as maintenance therapy for anesthesia in patients undergoing craniotomy.

METHODS

Randomized controlled studies on SF and RF as anesthesia for craniotomy were searched in electronic databases such as PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, and Wanfang Data. All studies were published up to December 31, 2017. The primary outcomes were wake-up time, extubation time, and pain score. The secondary outcomes were heart rate, mean arterial pressure (MAP), and adverse reactions.

RESULTS

In this meta-analysis, 14 studies involving 927 patients were investigated. Compared with the SF group, RF could significantly reduce the wake-up time and extubation time after craniotomy (P = 0.02, standardized mean difference [SMD], 1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.21-2.18; P = 0.0001; SMD, 1.87; 95% CI, 0.90-2.83, respectively). Meanwhile, SF had better efficacy to alleviate postoperative pain than RF (P = 0.001; SMD, 2.10; 95% CI, -3.37 to -0.82). However, there were no obvious differences in improving heart rate and MAP between the 2 groups (P = 0.46; SMD, 0.17; 95% CI, -0.28 to 0.62; P = 0.43; SMD, 0.16; 95% CI, -0.54 to 0.23, respectively). Moreover, there were no significant differences in the incidents of nausea and vomiting, shivering, fidgeting, and respiratory depression between the SF and RF groups.

CONCLUSIONS

RF as anesthesia for craniotomy had better effects in reducing the time of postoperative wake-up and extubation and significantly alleviating pain. Moreover, there were no significant differences in the incidence of adverse reactions between the 2 groups. The findings will prove beneficial for the rational use of clinical anesthetic drugs in the future.

Comparing the pain of propofol via different combinations of fentanyl, sufentanil or remifentanil in gastrointestinal endoscopy

PURPOSE

To evaluate the pain on injection of propofol via different combinations of fentanyl, sufentanil or remifentanil in gastrointestinal endoscopy.

METHODS

Total 439 patients were randomly allocated into 6 groups. Propofol & fentanil (PF) group received 1 μg/kg fentanyl, propofol & sufentanil (PS) group received 0.1 μg/kg sufentanil and propofol & remifentanyl (PR) group received 1 μg/kg remifentanyl prior to administration of 1-2 mg/kg of propofol. The propofol & half-fentanil (Pf) group, propofol & half-sufentanil (Ps) group and propofol & half-remifentanyl (Pr) group were given 0.5 μg/kg fentanyl, 0.05 μg/kg sufentanil and 0.5 μg/kg remifentanyl, respectively and later administrated 1-2 mg/kg propofol. All patients were monitored for the blood pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), and oxygen saturation (SpO2). Additionally, the pain intensity was assessed using a 4-point verbal rating scale (VRS) by professional doctors.

RESULTS

The incidence of pain due to propofol injection in Ps group (33.8%) was significantly lower than other 5 groups. The heart rate (HR) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) were maintained within the normal limits in all six groups and there was no hypotension or bradycardia encountered during the study period.

CONCLUSION

Propofol and sufentanil group was the most suitable program for painless gastroscopy.

Recovery of psychomotor function after total intravenous anesthesia with remifentanil-propofol or fentanyl-propofol

PURPOSE

Total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with propofol combined with remifentanil or fentanyl has commonly been used to achieve general anesthesia. The purpose of this study was to examine recovery of psychomotor function, by use of the Trieger dot test, after TIVA with remifentanil-propofol or with fentanyl-propofol.

METHODS

Forty patients were randomly divided into two groups of 20, to receive TIVA with either remifentanil-propofol (group R) or fentanyl-propofol (group F). Anesthesia was induced by intravenous injection of propofol. In group R, remifentanil at 0.3 μg/kg/min was infused continuously during surgery. In group F, 3 μg/kg fentanyl was injected as an initial dose and 1 μg/kg fentanyl was administered intravenously every 30 min during surgery. Psychomotor function, as measured by the Trieger dot test, was evaluated before anesthesia and 30, 60, 90, 120, and 150 min after the end of TIVA.

RESULTS

From assessment of the Trieger dot test, the number of dots missed in group R from 30 to 120 min after the end of TIVA was significantly lower than in group F. The maximum distance of dots missed in group R from 30 to 120 min after the end of TIVA was significantly shorter than in group F. The average distance of dots missed in group R from 30 to 120 min after the end of TIVA was significantly shorter than in group F.

CONCLUSION

Recovery of psychomotor function in TIVA with remifentanil-propofol is faster than that in TIVA with fentanyl-propofol.

[Neuroanaesthesia. Principles of optimized perioperative management]

Because of the high vulnerability of the brain as a primary target, neuroanaesthesia requires a close look at basic physiological principles and factors of influence during surgery and subsequent intensive care. Anticipatory management is crucial for anaesthesia within the scope of neurosurgical interventions: essential components of anaesthesia management must already be prepared before the surgical procedure. Intracranial compliance and pressure determine the patient's fate; accordingly they have to be assessed correctly and measured continuously. Advanced methods of monitoring allow sophisticated and individually focused treatment thus contributing to patient safety. Only few pharmacologic approaches have been proven with solid evidence, yet some new studies have revealed interesting brain protective effects of pharmacological and/or adjuvant therapeutic measures. For the treatment of intracranial hypertension, osmotherapy is still of the highest value. Decompressive craniotomy seems to have become a promising alternative, although this must be judged to date as a last resort therapy. Perioperative care of patients with complex intracranial pathologies thus needs a close interaction and cooperation between the operation theatre and intensive care units in the sense of continuous track anaesthesia.

The potential for mu-opioid receptor agonists to be anti-emetic in humans: a review of clinical data

In animal models of vomiting, mu-opioid (MOP, OP(3)) receptors mediate both emesis and anti-emesis. mu-receptors within the blood-brain barrier, mediating anti-emesis, are more rapidly accessible to lipid-soluble mu-opioid receptor agonists such as fentanyl than to morphine, and fentanyl has broad-spectrum anti-emetic effects in a number of species. Whether a similar situation exists in humans is not known. A search was performed for clinical studies comparing the emetic side effects of opioids administered peri-operatively in an attempt to identify differences between morphine and more lipid-soluble mu-receptor-selective agonists such as fentanyl. Overall, the evidence appears to suggest that fentanyl and other phenylpiperidines are associated with less nausea and vomiting than morphine, but not all studies support this, and fentanyl-like drugs are associated with nausea and vomiting per se. Good evidence, however, exists to show that fentanyl and alfentanil do not cause more nausea and vomiting than the ultra fast-acting remifentanil. Because remifentanil is cleared rapidly post-operatively, such trials suggest that the emetic side effects of fentanyl and alfentanil are minimal. The clinical evidence, although limited, is at least consistent with the possibility that central mu-opioid receptors may mediate anti-emesis in humans. It is possible that the role of mu-opioid agonists in anti-emesis may become clearer in the future as a result of the use of peripheral mu-opioid receptor antagonists.

The perioperative management of pain from intracranial surgery

Analgesic therapy following intracranial procedures remains a source of concern and controversy. Although opioids are the mainstay of the "balanced" general anesthetic techniques frequently used during intracranial procedures, neurosurgeons and others have been reluctant to administer opioid analgesics to patients following such procedures. This practice is supported by the concern that the sedation and miosis associated with opioid administration could mask the early signs of intracranial catastrophe, or even exacerbate it through decreased ventilatory drive, elevated arterial carbon dioxide levels, and increased cerebral blood flow. This reluctance to use opioids following intracranial surgery is enabled by decades of training and anecdote emphasizing that pain is minimal following these procedures. However, recent data suggests otherwise, and raises the question of how to provide safe and effective analgesia for these patients. Here, this data is reviewed along with the relevant pain pathways, analgesic drugs and techniques, and the available data on their use following intracranial surgery. Although pain following intracranial surgery appears to be more intense than initially believed, it is readily treated safely and effectively with techniques that have proven useful following other types of surgery, including patient-controlled administration of opioids. The use of multimodal analgesic therapy is emphasized not only for its effectiveness, but to reduce dosages and, therefore, side effects, primarily of the opioids, that could be of legitimate concern to physicians and affect the comfort of their patients.

Remifentanil for general anaesthesia: a systematic review

We performed a quantitative systematic review of randomised, controlled trials that compared remifentanil to short-acting opioids (fentanyl, alfentanil, or sufentanil) for general anaesthesia. Eighty-five trials were identified and these included a total of 13 057 patients. Intra-operatively, remifentanil was associated with clinical signs of deeper analgesia and anaesthesia, such as fewer responses to noxious stimuli (relative risk 0.65, 95% CI 0.48-0.87), more frequent episodes of bradycardia (1.46, 1.04-2.05), more hypotension (1.68, 1.36-2.07) and less hypertension (0.60, 0.46-0.78). Postoperatively, remifentanil was associated with faster recovery (difference in extubation time of -2.03, 9.5% CI, -2.92 to -1.14 min), more frequent postoperative analgesic requirements (1.36, 1.21-1.53) and fewer respiratory events requiring naloxone (0.25, 0.14-0.47). Remifentanil had no overall impact on postoperative nausea (1.03, 0.97-1.09) or vomiting (1.06, 0.96-1.17), but was associated with twice as much shivering (2.15, 1.73-2.69). Remifentanil does not seem to offer any advantage for lengthy, major interventions, but may be useful for selected patients, e.g. when postoperative respiratory depression is a concern.

The long-term effect of craniotomy on temporalis muscle function

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate jaw movements and the masticatory muscle in patients who underwent craniotomy for treatment of cerebral aneurysm.

STUDY DESIGN

Descriptive study.

RESULTS

There were 71 patients evaluated between 4 and 6 months after craniotomy, by means of a systematized approach. Their mean age was 45.3 years. Thirty-four (47.9%) patients complained of headache during dental evaluation. Twenty (28.2%) patients reported pain during normal jaw movements. There was a correlation between pain complaints and jaw movements during dental examinations (P = .03). Patients with postcraniotomy headache had more masticatory muscle tenderness on palpation than those without post-craniotomy headache (P < .02). Jaw protrusion was worse than the reference values (P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Headache was the complaint in 47.9% of the sample. Jaw movement was statistically a pain-precipitating factor. Patients who suffered from postcraniotomy headache had more masticatory muscle tenderness. There were functional jaw limitations.

Early postoperative cognitive recovery after remifentanil–propofol or sufentanil–propofol anaesthesia for supratentorial craniotomy: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

This study was designed to evaluate early postoperative cognitive recovery after total intravenous anaesthesia with remifentanil-propofol or sufentanil-propofol in patients undergoing craniotomy for supratentorial expanding lesions.

METHODS

Sixty patients were consecutively enrolled, and randomly assigned to one of two study groups: remifentanil-propofol or sufentanil-propofol anaesthesia. To evaluate cognitive function the Short Orientation Memory Concentration Test (SOMCT) and Rancho Los Amigos Scale (RLAS) were administered to all patients in a double-blind procedure before surgery at 15, 45 min and 3 h after extubation.

RESULTS

Mean extubation time was similar in the two groups (13 +/- 5 min vs. 19 +/- 6 min). A significantly larger number of patients in the remifentanil-propofol group than in the sufentanil-propofol group required antihypertensive medication postoperatively to maintain mean arterial pressure within 20% of baseline (18/30 vs. 4/29; P = 0.0004). Intergroup analysis showed no differences in baseline SOMCT scores (28 +/- 1 vs. 28 +/- 1) whereas mean SOMCT scores at 15, 45 min and 3 h after extubation were significantly higher in the remifentanil-propofol group (30 patients) than in the sufentanil-propofol group (29 patients) (22 +/- 3 vs. 16 +/- 3; P < 0.0001 and 27 +/- 1 vs. 22 +/- 3; P < 0.0001; 28 +/- 1 vs. 26 +/- 2; P = 0.0126).

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, propofol-remifentanil and propofol-sufentanil are both suitable for fast-track neuroanaesthesia and provide similar intraoperative haemodynamics, awakening and extubation times. Despite a higher risk of treatable postoperative hypertension propofol-remifentanil allows earlier cognitive recovery.

Why we still use intravenous drugs as the basic regimen for neurosurgical anaesthesia

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Evolution of neurosurgery mainly trends towards minimally invasive and functional procedures including endoscopies, small-size craniotomies, intraoperative imaging and stereotactic interventions. Consequently, new adjustments of anaesthesia should aim at providing brain relaxation, minimal interference with electrophysiological monitoring, rapid recovery, patients' cooperation during surgery and neuroprotection.

RECENT FINDINGS

In brain tumour patients undergoing craniotomy, propofol anaesthesia is associated with lower intracranial pressure and cerebral swelling than volatile anaesthesia. Hyperventilation used to improve brain relaxation may decrease jugular venous oxygen saturation below the critical threshold. It decreases the cerebral perfusion pressure in patients receiving sevoflurane, but not in those receiving propofol. The advantage of propofol over volatile agents has also been confirmed regarding interference with somatosensory, auditory and motor evoked potentials. Excellent and predictable recovery conditions as well as minimal postoperative side-effects make propofol particularly suitable in awake craniotomies. Finally, the potential neuroprotective effect of this drug could be mediated by its antioxidant properties which can play a role in apoptosis, ischaemia-reperfusion injury and inflammatory-induced neuronal damage.

SUMMARY

Although all the objectives of neurosurgical anaesthesia cannot be met by one single anaesthetic agent or technique, propofol-based intravenous anaesthesia appears as the first choice to challenge the evolution of neurosurgery in the third millennium.

A Comparison Between Scalp Nerve Block and Morphine for Transitional Analgesia After Remifentanil-Based Anesthesia in Neurosurgery

We compared transitional analgesia provided by scalp nerve block (SNB) or morphine after remifentanil-based anesthesia in neurosurgery. Fifty craniotomy patients were randomly divided into two groups: morphine (morphine 0.1 mg x kg(-1) IV after dural closure and an SNB performed with 20 mL of 0.9% saline at the end of surgery) and block (10 mL of 0.9% saline instead of morphine after dural closure and an SNB performed with a 1:1 mixture of bupivacaine 0.5% and lidocaine 2% at the end of surgery). Postoperative pain was assessed at 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 24 h using a 10-point numerical rating scale. Analgesia consisted of subcutaneous codeine. Average numerical rating scale scores were similar between the two groups at each time interval. Total codeine dosage was also similar, except at 4 h postoperatively when it was higher in the block group. The delay before administration of the first dose of codeine was not statistically different between groups: 45 min (20-2880) vs 30 min (10-2880), median and range for the block and morphine group, respectively. Postoperative hemodynamics were similar for both groups. The incidence of nausea and vomiting was slightly more frequent in the morphine group, but the occurrence of confusion did not differ between groups. In conclusion, SNB provides a quality of transitional analgesia that is similar to that of morphine with the same postoperative hemodynamic profile.

Comparison of the time to extubation after use of remifentanil or sufentanil in combination with propofol as anesthesia in adults undergoing nonemergency intracranial surgery: a prospective, randomized, double-blind trial

BACKGROUND

Anesthetics with a short context-sensitive half-time (ie, the time required for the effect-site concentration of an IV drug to decrease by 50% at steady state), such as the opioids remifentanil and sufentanil, are suitable for anesthesia when early neurologic assessment is desired to detect postoperative complications.

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the efficacy and safety profile of remifentanil and sufentanil in combination with propofol for anesthesia in adult patients undergoing nonemergency intracranial surgery.

METHODS

This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind study in adults aged 18 to 75 years who were scheduled to undergo a supratentorial neurosurgical procedure with a maximum anticipated duration of 480 minutes. Eligible patients had no incapacitating severe systemic disease (American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status class 1-3), and only those in whom immediate postoperative extubation was planned were included. Anesthesia was induced with propofol and either remifentanil 1 microg/kg or sufentanil 0.25 microg/kg. Propofol was continued using a target-controlled infusion (TCI) system. Maintenance infusion rates for remifentanil and sufentanil were 0.25 and 0.0025 microg.kg-1.min-1, respectively. The opioid and propofol infusions were adjusted based on hemodynamic parameters (mean arterial blood pressure, heart rate). The primary end point was the time to extubation. Secondary end points were hemodynamic stability (defined as the number of anesthetic adjustments required to maintain intraoperative hemodynamic parameters within 20% of preinduction values), postoperative IV morphine requirement, postoperative nausea/vomiting (PONV), and intraoperative anesthetic costs.

RESULTS

Sixty adults (29 remifentanil, 31 sufentanil) were included in the study. The 2 groups were similar with respect to sex, weight, indication for surgery, and duration of anesthesia. The sufentanil group was significantly older than the remifentanil group (55.3 vs 45.7 years, respectively; P=0.001). The median extubation time was similar in the remifentanil and sufentanil groups (10 minutes [interquartile range, 5-19 minutes] and 16 minutes [interquartile range, 10-30 minutes], respectively). Remifentanil was associated with the need for significantly fewer adjustments to maintain hemodynamic stability compared with sufentanil (0.8 vs 2.1; P=0.037), greater use of postoperative morphine (44.8% vs 22.6% of patients, P=0.01; mean IV morphine dose per patient: 4 vs 1.3 mg, P=0.016), and higher intraoperative opioid costs per patient euro vs euro P<0.001). The incidence of PONV did not differ significantly between groups. The total cost of intraoperative anesthetics per patient was similar in the 2 groups euro and euro as was the cost of propofol euro vs euro

CONCLUSION

In these adults undergoing nonemergency intracranial surgery, there was no significant difference in extubation time between those receiving remifentanil and sufentanil infusions adjusted based on hemodynamic parameters in combination with propofol administered by TCI.

Comparison of propofol-alfentanil and propofol-remifentanil anaesthesia in percutaneous nephrolithotripsy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Percutaneous nephrolithotripsy (PCNL) is used for the fragmentation and removal of stones from the renal pelvis and renal calyceal systems. We compared the effects of propofol-alfentanil or propofol-remifentanil anaesthesia on haemodynamics, recovery characteristics and postoperative analgesic requirements during percutaneous nephrolithotripsy.

METHODS

Thirty non-premedicated patients were randomly allocated to receive either propofol-alfentanil (Group A) or propofol-remifentanil (Group R). The loading dose of the study drug was administered over 60 s (alfentanil 10 microg kg(-1) or remifentanil 1 microg kg(-1)) followed by a continuous infusion (alfentanil 15 microg kg(-1) h(-1) or remifentanil 0.15 microg kg(-1) min(-1)). Propofol was administered until loss of consciousness and maintained with a continuous infusion of 75 microg kg(-1) min(-1) in both groups. Atracurium was given for endotracheal intubation at a dose of 0.5 mg kg(-1) and maintained with a continuous infusion of 0.4 mg kg(-1) h(-1). Mean arterial pressure heart rate, the total amount of propofol, time of recovery of spontaneous ventilation, extubation and eye opening in response to verbal stimulus and analgesic requirement were recorded.

RESULTS

In Group A, mean arterial pressure was higher at the first minute in the prone position, and during skin incision and lithotripsy, and heart rate was higher during skin incision and lithotripsy when compared with Group R (P < 0.05). The total amount of propofol did not differ between groups. Time of recovery of spontaneous ventilation, extubation and eye opening were significantly shorter in Group R than Group A (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Both propofol-remifentanil and propofol-alfentanil anaesthesia provided stable haemodynamics during percutaneous nephrolithotripsy, whereas propofol-remifentanil allowed earlier extubation.

Postoperative condition after the use of remifentanil with a small dose of piritramide compared with a fentanyl-based protocol in patients undergoing craniotomy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The use of remifentanil requires other analgesics for postoperative pain relief compared to fentanyl in patients undergoing craniotomy. This could possibly reduce the postoperative advantages of this short-acting opioid.

METHODS

We compared remifentanil and fentanyl-based anaesthesia in a randomized observer and patient blinded trial on patients, undergoing an elective craniotomy. Twenty patients received anaesthesia using remifentanil with a small dose of piritramide (0.1 mg kg(-1)) after closure of the dura mater. Twenty patients underwent a fentanyl-based protocol. In both groups, anaesthesia was induced with thiopental and rocuronium, and maintained with 0.6-1 minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) isoflurane in a nitrous oxide/oxygen mixture 2:1 and rocuronium. Patients received 1 g of paracetamol rectally postoperatively. A visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, the Glasgow Coma Score, a modified Aldrete Score, arterial carbon dioxide tension (PaCO2) and piritramide consumption were evaluated every half an hour postoperatively.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found for pain, Aldrete or Glasgow Coma scores or for PaCO2 between the groups when controlled for age, although the pain and Glasgow Coma Scores were consistently higher and PaCO2 lower in the remifentanil group. Furthermore, 11 out of 20 patients in the remifentanil group requested extra piritramide as opposed to 7 out of 20 in the fentanyl group (P = 0.11).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the intraoperative use of piritramide in the remifentanil group, patients experienced more pain postoperatively. A significant influence of age on pain intensity was found. The use of remifentanil with a small dose of piritramide of 0.1 mg kg(-1) has no evident advantage over the use of fentanyl considering the postoperative conditions after craniotomy.

Anaesthesia in day case laparoscopic female sterilization: a comparison of two anaesthetic methods

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic sterilization (LS) in women is a procedure frequently carried out in a day case setting. The purpose of the study was to measure postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting (PONV), the incidence of unplanned overnight admissions and patient satisfaction with two different anaesthetic methods.

METHODS

From August 1997 to January 1999 the LS patients were anaesthetized with propofol + fentanyl/alfentanil, N2O and atracurium, and from January 1999 to end of 2001 they were given TIVA with propofol + remifentanil. Postoperative pain was managed with standardized high doses of paracetamol and NSAID in both groups. Data were collected from hospital records and from questionnaires given to all the patients.

RESULTS

Six hundred and eighty-one women were sterilized. There were no significant differences in postoperative pain between the two groups, with 8.2 and 12.1 per cent, respectively, experiencing severe pain. Significantly fewer patients experienced moderate or severe postoperative nausea after the introduction of remifentanil anaesthesia (3.3 vs. 11.7%, P = 0.001). Eleven patients (1.8%) were admitted overnight, with no difference between the two groups. 94.5% and 96.3% of the patients were either satisfied or very satisfied with their treatment (P = 0.50).

CONCLUSION

Both anaesthetic methods provide equally good postoperative pain relief, few unplanned admissions and a high degree of patient satisfaction when combined with postoperative paracetamol and NSAID. Patients anaesthetized with remifentanil and propofol have less postoperative nausea.

Les morphiniques (sufentanil et rémifentanil) en neuro-anesthésie

Remifentanil is the latest available compound of the 4-anilidopiperidine derivatives. It is characterized by an ultrashort duration of action and a metabolism independent of both hepatic and renal functions. Its main drawback is a lack of residual analgesia and the risk of postoperative hyperalgesia. Since its introduction in clinical practice, this drug has been compared to other congeners in a few studies in the setting of neurosurgery. Cerebral hemodynamics, intracranial pressure and CO(2) reactivity are similar to the effects of fentanyl and sufentanil provided that systemic arterial pressure is maintained. Haemodynamics does not greatly vary according to the type of the opioid. Fentanyl and sufentanil require higher hypnotic dosage (halogenated agents, propofol) and remifentanil is accompanied by greater volumes of fluid infusion. A marked reduction in extubation times and superior level of consciousness are reported with remifentanil. Rescue analgesic has to be given faster but pain scores remain low. Morphine 0.08 mg/kg IV administered at bone replacement results in good postoperative analgesia without delayed recovery. In summary, remifentanil is appropriate when rapid recovery and neurological evaluation are desired. Conversely, sufentanil is more suitable and easier to administer when postoperative mechanical ventilation and postponed awakening are scheduled.