Target-controlled infusion (Propofol) versus inhaled anaesthetic (Sevoflurane) in patients undergoing shoulder arthroscopic surgery

Effects of propofol versus sevoflurane on surgical field visibility during arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

During arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR), clear surgical field visibility (SFV) is the basis of successful surgery, but the choice of anesthesia maintenance drugs may have different effects on SFV. In this study, we aimed to compare the effects of propofol- and sevoflurane-based general anesthesia on SFV in patients undergoing ARCR.

METHODS

Patients (n = 130) undergoing elective ARCR in the lateral decubitus position were randomized into either the propofol group or sevoflurane group (65 per group). The duration of surgery and increased pressure irrigation (IPI), Boezaart score, rocuronium consumption and usage of remifentanil were recorded. The time of both spontaneous respiration recovery and extubation and the incidences of postoperative nausea and vomiting and agitation were also recorded.

RESULTS

The Boezaart score, duration of IPI and ratio of the duration of IPI to the duration of surgery (IPI/S ratio) were similar between the groups (P > 0.05). Rocuronium consumption, number of patients requiring remifentanil infusion and total remifentanil consumption were significantly lower in the sevoflurane group (P < 0.05). The spontaneous respiration recovery time was significantly longer in the propofol group (P < 0.05), but there were no differences in the extubation time between the groups(P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with propofol, sevoflurane provides equally clear SFV while improving the convenience of anesthesia maintenance in ARCR patients with interscalene plexus (ISB) combined with general anesthesia.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This single-center, prospective, RCT was retrospective registered at Chinese Clinical Trial Registry with the registration number ChiCTR2300072110 (02/06/2023).

Sevoflurane versus isoflurane in shoulder arthroscopy in beach chair position in patients with prior interscalene brachial plexus block: A prospective randomised equivalency-based haemodynamic evaluation trial

Background and Aims:

There is a paucity of literature on comparative effects of different inhalational anaesthetics in beach chair position (BCP) for shoulder arthroscopy. We aimed to investigate and compare the haemodynamic effects, anaesthetic and surgical outcomes between two inhalational agents.

Methods:

In this randomised study, patients of age 18–60 years, were allotted to two groups (29, sevoflurane and 28, isoflurane) and received protocol-based anaesthesia. Intraoperatively, different haemodynamic and other data were recorded.

Results:

All mean of averages of individual subject's vitals were comparable between the groups [P = 0.681, 0.325, 0.803, and 0.051, respectively for systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean blood pressure (MBP) and heart rate (HR)]. Higher mean HR was recorded for maximum readings of isoflurane (P = 0.028). Equivalency was observed for SBP, MBP, and DBP (P = 0.000, 002, and 0.027, respectively). Process capability indices indicated that sevoflurane had better values (Pp: 0.55 versus 0.41, Ppk: 0.35 versus 0.22) for SBP as with MBP (Pp: 0.62 versus 0.51, Ppk: 0.36 versus 0.33). For achieving optimal vision, higher pump pressures (PPs) were demanded by surgeon (P = 0.025) and higher differences observed between initial and highest PPs (P = 0.027), in isoflurane subjects. Multivariable analysis revealed that no continuous predictor was able to predict the quality of vision except additional pump flow factor, for both groups.

Conclusion:

Both inhalational agents demonstrated equivalent haemodynamic effects. Increased arthroscopic PP requirements were observed with isoflurane anaesthesia. Sevoflurane may be superior to isoflurane during BCP arthroscopy.

Evaluation of the efficacy of desflurane with or without labetalol for hypotensive anesthesia in middle ear microsurgery

Background and Aims:

Hypotensive anesthesia technique is used to reduce intraoperative bleeding and to improve the visibility of the operative field. The aim was to evaluate the efficacy of desflurane with and without labetalol for producing hypotensive anesthesia.

Material and Methods:

Sixty adult patients undergoing elective middle ear surgery were administered general anesthesia and randomly divided into two groups – Group D and Group L. The target mean arterial pressure (MAP) was 55–65 mmHg during hypotensive period. Group D patients received an increasing concentration of desflurane alone. Group L patients received 3% desflurane plus labetalol (loading dose 0.3 mg/kg intravenously, followed by 10 mg increments every 10 min). Student's t-test and paired t-test were used to compare the hemodynamic parameters. Visibility of the operative field, anesthetic and rescue drug requirement, partial pressure of oxygen in arterial blood, time taken for induction and reversal of hypotension and recovery characteristics were noted.

Results:

Target MAP was achieved in both the groups. Group D was associated with a higher mean heart rate compared with Group L (77.3 ± 11.0/min vs. 70.5 ± 2.5/min, respectively; P < 0.001) during the hypotensive period, along with a higher requirement for desflurane (P = 0.000) and metoprolol (P = 0.01). Time taken to achieve target MAP was lesser in Group L compared with Group D (33.7 ± 7.1 vs. 39.8 ± 6.2 min, respectively; P = 0.000). Time taken to return to baseline MAP was faster in Group D (P = 0.03). Emergence time was longer with desflurane alone (P = 0.000) resulting in greater sedation (P = 0.000) in the immediate postoperative period.

Conclusion:

Although desflurane is effective for inducing deliberate hypotension in middle ear microsurgery, the combination of desflurane with labetalol is associated with decreased requirement of desflurane, absence of reflex tachycardia, faster induction of hypotension, faster recovery from anesthesia, and less postoperative sedation.

Isoflurane versus sevoflurane with interscalene block for shoulder arthroscopic procedures: Value of process capability indices as an additional tool for data analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Hypotensive anaesthesia reduces intra-articular bleed and promotes visualisation during arthroscopy. The haemodynamic effects of inhalational agents isoflurane and sevoflurane were studied extensively, and both were found to reduce mean arterial pressures (MBP) to an equivalent magnitude. We investigated the relative ability of isoflurane vis-a-vis sevoflurane to maintain the target systolic blood pressure (SBP) in patients undergoing shoulder arthroscopic procedures.

METHODS

In a prospective randomised study, 59 patients in two groups of 30 and 29 patients each received concomitant general anaesthesia (1.2-1.5 MAC of isoflurane and sevoflurane) and interscalene brachial plexus block. Nitrous oxide was used in both groups. Intraoperatively, serial blood pressure recordings of SBP, diastolic blood pressure (DBP), MBP and heart rates were done at every 3^rd min intervals. The manipulations needed to achieve target SBP (T = 90 mmHg) for optimal arthroscopic visualisation and treat unacceptable hypotensive episodes were noted. Conventional statistical tests and process capability index (PCI) evaluation were both deployed for data analysis.

RESULTS

Lower mean SBP and DBPs were recorded for isoflurane patients as compared to sevoflurane (P < 0.05, for mean, maximum and minimum recordings). Higher mean heart rates were recorded for isoflurane (P < 0.05). PCIs indicated that isoflurane was superior to sevoflurane in the ease of achieving target SBP of 90 mmHg as well as maintaining blood pressures in the range of 80-100 mmHg.

CONCLUSION

Isoflurane provides better intraoperative haemodynamic status vis-a-vis sevoflurane in patients undergoing shoulder arthroscopic surgery with preliminary interscalene blockade. The PCI can be a useful additional medical data analysis tool.

A comparison of three methods for postoperative pain control in patients undergoing arthroscopic shoulder surgery

Background

Arthroscopic shoulder operations (ASS) are often associated with severe postoperative pain. Nerve blocks have been studied for pain in shoulder surgeries. Interscalene brachial plexus blocks (ISB) and an intra-articular injection (IA) have been reported in many studies. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the effect of ISB, a continuous cervical epidural block (CCE) and IA as a means of postoperative pain control and to study the influence of these procedures on postoperative analgesic consumption and after ASS.

Methods

Fifty seven patients who underwent ASS under general anesthesia were randomly assigned to one of three groups: the ISB group (n = 19), the CCE group (n = 19), and the IA group (n = 19). Patients in each group were evaluated on a postoperative numerical rating scale (NRS), their rescue opioid dosage (ROD), and side effects.

Results

Postoperative NRSs were found to be higher in the IA group than in the ISB and CCE groups both at rest and on movement. The ROD were 1.6 ± 2.3, 3.0 ± 4.9 and 7.1 ± 7.9 mg morphine equivalent dose in groups CCE, ISB, and IA groups (P = 0.001), respectively, and statistically significant differences were noted between the CCE and IA groups (P = 0.01) but not in between the ISB and CCE groups.

Conclusions

This prospective, randomized study demonstrated that ISB is as effective analgesic technique as a CCE for postoperative pain control in patients undergoing ASS.