Changes in intracranial pressure and cerebral blood flow during volatile anaesthesia: Fact or fiction?

Noninvasive intracranial pressure profile in 31 patients submitted to fullendoscopic spine surgery

PURPOSE

Full-endoscopic spine surgery (FESS) is associated with specific complications, possibly linked to increased intracranial pressure (ICP) resulting from continuous saline infusion into the epidural space. This study aimed to assess the impact of saline irrigation and its correlation with noninvasively obtained ICP waveform changes.

METHODS

Patients undergoing FESS between January 2019 and November 2020 were included. Noninvasive ICP (n-ICP) monitoring utilized an extracranial strain sensor generating ICP waveforms, from which parameters P2/P1 ratio and time to peak (TTP) values were derived and correlated to irrigation and vital parameters. Documentation occurred at specific surgical intervals (M0-preoperatively; M1 to M4-intraoperatively; M5-postoperatively). Mixed-model analysis of variance and multiple comparisons tests were applied, with M0 as the baseline.

RESULTS

Among 31 enrolled patients, three experienced headaches unrelated to increased ICP at M5. The P2/P1 ratio and TTP decreased during surgery (p < 0.001 and p < 0.004, respectively). Compared to baseline, P2/P1 ratio and vital parameters remained significantly lower at M5. No significant differences were observed for fluid parameters throughout surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated a decline in the n-ICP parameters after anesthetic induction despite the anticipated increase in ICP due to constant epidural irrigation. The n-ICP parameters behaved independently of fluid parameters, suggesting a potential protective effect of anesthesia.

Total intravenous anaesthesia with propofol and remifentanil is associated with reduction in operative time in surgery for glioblastoma when compared with inhalational anaesthesia with sevoflurane

BACKGROUND

Total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) is emerging as a preferred neuroanaesthetic agent compared with inhalational anaesthetic (IA) agents. We asked if TIVA with propofol and remifentanil was associated with shorter operative times compared to IA using sevoflurane in brain tumour surgery under GA.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients undergoing surgery for glioblastoma (GBM). We assessed choice of GA agent (TIVA or IA) with total time patient was under GA (anaesthetic time), operative time and time taken to recover fully from GA (recovery time).

RESULTS

Over a two year period 263 patients underwent surgery under GA for their GBM including 188 craniotomy operations, 63 burr hole biopsy procedures and 12 open biopsy procedures. Of these, 79 operations took place under TIVA and 184 operations under IA. TIVA was associated with significantly reduced mean operative time including time taken to wake up in theatre (104 min with TIVA, 129 min with IA; p = 0.02). TIVA was also associated with trends toward shorter mean recovery time (118 min, versus 135 min with IA; p = 0.08) and shorter mean anaesthetic time (163 min, versus 181 min with IA; p = 0.07). There was no difference between TIVA and IA groups as regards duration of inpatient stay, readmission rates, complications or survival.

CONCLUSIONS

TIVA with propofol and remifentanil may reduce anaesthetic, operative and recovery times in patients undergoing surgery for their GBM. These findings may be attributable to favourable effects on intracranial pressure and cerebral perfusion, as well as rapid recovery from GA. In addition to clinical advantages, there may be financial and logistical benefits.

The choice of the hypnotic drug (volatile or propofol) for maintenance of anesthesia does not influence surgical conditions during cranioplasty

Background and Aims:

In contrast to propofol, volatile agents are often considered harmful to maintain anesthesia due to increasing brain volume and potential deleterious effects. Patients for cranioplasty, including patients with large bone defects, could be susceptible for intraoperative complications but have not properly been investigated so far. The aim of the present study was to evaluate brain swelling, intraoperative conditions, surgical course, and postoperative complication rates of propofol-based vs. volatile-based anesthesia.

Material and Methods:

In this monocentric, retrospective, and observational study, we collected demographic, clinical, and outcome data of patients undergoing cranioplasty between December 2010 and September 2014. According to the hypnotic drug used, patients were assigned to either a propofol or a volatile group. The primary outcome parameter was brain swelling. For comparison of the groups, univariate analysis was performed using Chi-square and Mann–Whitney-U test.

Results:

One hundred and one patients were identified in the period. Twenty-three patients were excluded due to cerebrospinal fluid diversion. Baseline characteristics and preoperative conditions did not vary between the groups except a higher body mass index and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in the propofol group. The choice of anesthesia (volatile or intravenous) influence neither the intraoperative local conditions nor postoperative complication rate. No significant risk factor for impaired bone flap placement was identified.

Conclusions:

In a well-defined cohort, the choice of the anesthetic agent does not influence the degree of intraoperative brain swelling, bone flap fit, and postoperative course.