Drug interactions with inhalational anaesthetics

In vivo assessment of myocardial blood flow in rat heart using magnetic resonance imaging: effect of anesthesia

PURPOSE

To assess the influence of isoflurane and pentobarbital anesthesia and the carrier gases on myocardial blood flow (MBF) in the rat heart in vivo.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

MBF was quantified in vivo using arterial spin-labeling (ASL) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Left ventricular (LV) function was estimated during the same experiment using cine-MRI. Thirty-four male Wistar-Kyoto rats were divided in four groups, one anesthetized with isoflurane in oxygen:nitrous oxide mix (ISO), the three others with intraperitoneal pentobarbital, and breathing either room air (PB), oxygen:nitrous oxide (PB + N(2)O), or oxygen:nitrogen (PB + N(2)).

RESULTS

MBF was significantly higher in the ISO and PB + N(2)O groups vs. PB and in ISO vs. PB + N(2), with the following respective MBF values: ISO, 5.9 +/- 1.1; PB, 4.0 +/- 0.8; PB + N(2)O, 5.1 +/- 1.4; and PB + N(2), 4.6 +/- 0.8 mL/g/minute, mean +/- SD. Ejection fractions were reduced by 10% in PB and PB + N(2)O rats vs. ISO rats. Cardiac output (CO) and index (CI) were 25 to 30% lower in all rats anesthetized with pentobarbital than with isoflurane.

CONCLUSION

Isoflurane and nitrous oxide induce a higher MBF than pentobarbital. Isoflurane also induces a higher ejection fraction in healthy rats.

Incidence of post-anaesthetic arrhythmias in dogs

OBJECTIVES

To assess the use of Holter monitoring for evaluating the incidence of post-anaesthetic cardiac arrhythmias and associated anaesthetic risk for two different anaesthetic protocols.

METHODS

Patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery were randomly divided into two groups with different anaesthetic regimens (group A, isoflurane n = 30; group B, propofol n = 30). Two 24-hour Holter recordings were performed for each patient: the first directly following anaesthesia and the second, as a comparison, on the fifth postoperative day.

RESULTS

Although all dogs were healthy on pre-anaesthetic cardiac evaluation, 56 dogs showed arrhythmias in the two 24-hour (Holter) electrocardiograms performed. However, the number of arrhythmias recorded was low in most cases (less than 10 supraventricular extrasystoles and less than 100 ventricular extrasystoles). One patient in group A showed 94 supraventricular extrasystoles during the second monitoring period. Three patients in each group developed more than 100 ventricular extrasystoles during both Holter recordings. There were no statistically significant differences between the two anaesthetic regimens or between the two recordings in both groups.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The two anaesthetic protocols investigated in this study did not induce an increased incidence of severe arrhythmias in healthy dogs in the post-anaesthetic phase.

Interrupting drug therapy in the perioperative period

Millions of patients undergo surgery each year and an increasing proportion of these patients are consuming therapeutic drugs. Drug therapy is often withheld in the immediate perioperative period and after major surgery, in particular, there is often a prolonged period of fasting. This may lead to withdrawal effects including recurrence or worsening of patients' disease symptomatology. These effects will occur during a period of physiological and pathophysiological stresses and render patients more vulnerable to drug withdrawal phenomena. Thus, patients may be exposed to greater and sometimes unnecessary risks in the perioperative period. There are relatively few studies that have investigated this problem. The ones that have, however, confirm that drug abstinence in the perioperative period is a relatively common phenomenon and one study has demonstrated an association between duration of drug abstinence and adverse outcomes. The pathophysiological effects of major surgery on gastrointestinal function, neuro-humoral and cytokine adaptive responses to surgical stress are under-appreciated. These responses can reduce the effectiveness of oral administration and exacerbate co-existing disease processes. These problems are compounded by a fragmented approach to perioperative drug therapy with no one group of healthcare professionals assuming responsibility for this aspect of care. This may in part be a consequence of the complexities of rationalising drug therapy in the perioperative period together with the lack of readily available and evidence based information strategies for individual drugs or drug classes. An additional problem relates to the formulations, inherent pharmacokinetics and limited routes of administration of many prescribed drugs. These can prevent a 'seamless' transition from preoperative to postoperative management. Consumers, health professionals, pharmaceutical companies and drug regulatory agencies must all play a part in rectifying this problem. There remains a need for further research to clarify the effects of abstinence on patient outcomes and also to identify optimum strategies to avoid unwanted drug abstinence.

ADVERSE DRUG INTERACTIONS IN DENTAL PRACTICE: INTERACTIONS ASSOCIATED WITH VASOCONSTRICTORS

BACKGROUND

Adrenergic vasoconstrictors are commonly used by dentists to enhance the pain-relieving action of local anesthetics and to control local bleeding. Although normally considered safe for these applications, vasoconstrictors can participate in drug interactions that potentially are harmful to patients.

METHODS

The faculty of a March 1998 symposium entitled "Adverse Drug Interactions in Dentistry: Separating the Myths From the Facts" extensively reviewed the literature on drug interactions. They then established a significance rating of alleged adverse drug interactions pertaining to dentistry, based on the quality of documentation and severity of effect. The author of this article focused on the adrenergic vasoconstrictors epinephrine and levonordefrin.

RESULTS

Vasoconstrictor drug interactions involving tricyclic antidepressants, nonselective beta-adrenergic blocking drugs, certain general anesthetics and cocaine are well-documented in both humans and animals as having the potential for causing serious morbidity or death. Evidence for adverse interactions involving adrenergic neuronal blocking drugs, drugs with alpha-adrenergic blocking activity, local anesthetics and thyroid hormones is much less compelling, suggesting for the most part that clinically significant reactions may occur only when both the vasoconstrictor and the interacting drug are used in excessive doses. In the case of monoamine oxidase inhibitors, there is no credible evidence of a significant interaction with epinephrine or levonordefrin.

CONCLUSIONS

Potentially serious adverse drug interactions involving adrenergic vasoconstrictors can occur in dental practice. In most circumstances, careful administration of small doses of vasoconstrictors and avoidance of gingival retraction cord containing epinephrine, coupled with monitoring of vita signs, will permit these drugs to be used with no risk or only minimally increased risk. Only in the case of cocaine intoxication must adrenergic vasoconstrictors be avoided completely.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

For optimal patient safety, dentists must recognize potential drug interactions involving adrenergic vasoconstrictors and modify their use of these agents accordingly.

Drug interactions with intravenous and local anaesthetics

Relatively few clinically significant drug interactions with anaesthetics have been documented in the literature. The following should be stressed since these interactions are not readily predictable or are potentially fatal. Pethidine should never be administered to patients who have received monamine oxidase inhibiting drugs within the last fortnight, since a fatal hyperpyrexia and/or hypertension may result. Thiopentone induction seems to make the heart more susceptible to arrhythmias caused by adrenergic drugs, and may cause severe arterial hypotension in patients treated with diazoxide. Midazolam orally should possibly be avoided as premedication in patients treated with erythromycin since anaesthetic concentrations of midazolam may result. Patients for whom bupivacaine analgesia is planned could preferentially be premedicated with other drugs than diazepam, which causes the serum level of bupivacaine to increase. Bradycardia and hypotension not attributable to sympathetic blockade have been reported following bupivacaine extradurally in verapamil-treated patients. Sulfonamides and the ester group of local anaesthetics, such as prilocaine in combination, may result in severe methaemoglobinaemia in infants. Epinephrine added to local anaesthetics may cause local vasodilation if administered to patients concurrently being treated with cyclic antidepressants, and the combination imposes the risk of severe hypertension and arrhythmias.