Effects of Esmolol on the Prevention of Haemodynamic Responses to Tracheal Extubation after Craniotomy Operations

Comparative study of the effect of two different doses of intravenous labetalol on the cardiovascular response to endotracheal extubation

Introduction

Providing a stable hemodynamic in extubation is important. We aimed to compare the effect of two different doses of intravenous labetalol on the cardiovascular response to endotracheal extubation.

Methods

This double-blind randomized trial was performed in 2019-2020 in Isfahan on 72 patients under general anesthesia. Patients using Random Allocation software were divided into three groups and received 0.1 mg/ kg or 0.2 mg/kg labetalol and normal saline intravenously 10 min before extubation. Hemodynamic variables including heart rate (HR), Systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), and peripheral blood oxygen saturation(SPO2) was measured for each patient before induction of anesthesia and 1, 3, 5 and 10 minutes after extubation.

Results

SBP changes were significantly different between the three groups at 1, 3, 5 minutes after extubation (P=0.036, P=0.009, P=0.005 respectively) unlike the other two groups, patients who received 0.2 mg/kg labetalol did not have an increase in DBP after extubation (P>0.05). DBP was significantly different between the three groups one minute after extubation (P=0.03). At minutes 1 and 3 following extubation, there was a significant difference in the MAP between the three groups. (P=0.029 and P=0.012 respectively). There was no significant difference between the three groups regarding heart rate (P>0.05).

Conclusion

Tracheal extubation is usually associated with an increase in hemodynamic variables. Both doses of labetalol attenuate the hemodynamic response accompanying tracheal extubation. But labetalol 0.2 mg/kg in reducing hemodynamic response to extubation acted more effectively than labetalol 0.1mg/kg.

Efficacy of a single dose of esmolol to prevent extubation-related complications during emergence from anesthesia: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Few trials have examined the efficacy of esmolol to attenuate hemodynamic and respiratory responses during extubation. However, the most appropriate dose of esmolol and an optimal protocol for administering this beta-blocker are uncertain.

METHODS

Ninety patients ASA physical status I, II, and III (aged 18-60 years) scheduled to procedures with general anesthesia and tracheal extubation were selected. Patients were randomized into esmolol and placebo group to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a single bolus dose of esmolol (2 mg.kg^-1) on cardiorespiratory responses during the peri-extubation period. The primary outcome was the rate of tachycardia during extubation.

RESULTS

The rate of tachycardia was significantly lower in esmolol-treated patients compared to placebo-treated patients (2.2% vs. 48.9%, relative risk (RR): 0.04, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = 0.01 to 0.32, p = 0.002). The rate of hypertension was also significantly lower in the esmolol group (4.4% vs. 31.1%, RR: 0.14, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.6, p = 0.004). Esmolol-treated patients were associated with higher extubation quality compared to patients who received placebo (p < 0.001), with an approximately two-fold increase in the rate of patients without cough (91.1%) in the esmolol group compared to the placebo group (46.7%). The rate of bucking was approximately 5-fold lower in the esmolol group (8.9% vs. 44.5%, respectively, RR: 0.20 (95% CI, 0.1 to 0.5, p = 0.002, with an NNT of 2.8).

CONCLUSION

A single bolus dose of esmolol is an effective and safe therapeutic strategy to attenuate cardiorespiratory responses during the peri-extubation period.

Esmolol as an adjunct to general balanced anaesthesia in neurosurgery

Background/Aim: In surgery, and especially in the neurosurgical operations, maintenance of cardiovascular stability during and in the phase of the immediate postoperative recovery is of vital importance. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of continuous esmolol infusion on the values of cardiovascular parameters and quality of the emergence from anaesthesia in neurosurgical patients. Methods: A total of 40 patients of both sexes scheduled for elective supratentorial surgery were randomly assigned to two groups. Esmolol group received intravenous (iv) infusion of esmolol dissolved in 5 % glucose solution (during the first 5 min at a rate of 0.3 mg/kg/min and thereafter at a rate of 0.1 mg/kg/min), while the ones from the control group received a 5 % glucose solution without esmolol at the same volume and rate. Cardiovascular parameters were registered at critical phases of anaesthesia and operation (induction, intubation, placement of Mayfield frame, craniotomy, skull closure, extubation). Recovery after anaesthesia was assessed based on times of eye opening on command, spontaneous eye opening and regaining of full orientation. Results: Values of systolic blood pressure and heart rate were significantly lower in the esmolol than in the control group of patients. Although the durations of anaesthesia did not differ, patients from the esmolol group required significantly less opioids and isoflurane and recovered after the anaesthesia significantly faster than the patients in the control group. Conclusion: Ultrashort-acting beta-adrenergic receptor antagonist esmolol, administered as a continuous iv infusion, assures better cardiovascular stability and smoother emergence from the balanced inhalation general anaesthesia than the control glucose infusion in elective neurosurgical patients.

Effects of the ultra-short-acting beta-blocker Esmolol infusion on cardiovascular parameters and quality of postoperative recovery in patients scheduled for elective plastic surgery

Background/Aim: Esmolol is an ultra-short-acting, easily titratable b-adrenergic receptor antagonist used for urgent treatment of hypertension and tachycardia in non-surgical and surgical settings. Aim of this clinical study was to investigate its cardiovascular effects and quality of the emergence from anaesthesia in patients scheduled for elective plastic surgery under general balanced anaesthesia. Methods: A total of 30 ASA I/II patients were randomised in two groups of similar demographic characteristics and baseline values of cardiovascular parameters. Esmolol group received esmolol dissolved in glucose 5 % as an intravenous infusion, 0.3 mg/kg/min during the first 5 min and at a rate of 0.1 mg/kg/ min thereafter. Control patients received the solvent only, at the same rate and volume. General balanced anaesthesia was induced with thiopentone sodium and fentanyl and maintained with nitrous oxide and oxygen. Neuromuscular relaxation was assured with pancuronium bromide and was antagonised at the end of operation with atropine and neostigmine. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure and heart rate were registered at all critical phases: (1) immediately prior to the induction (baseline value), (2) induction to anaesthesia, (3) tracheal intubation, (4) first skin incision, (5) surgical manipulation with organs, (6) suture of the surgical wound and (7) tracheal extubation. Drug consumption and quality of postoperative recovery were monitored. Results: In most of the critical phases of anaesthesia and operation, patients from the Esmolol group had significantly lower values of cardiovascular parameters than the patients from the Control group. Esmolol-treated patients needed less fentanyl, droperidol and pancuronium and had faster and smoother emergence from anaesthesia than the control patients. Conclusion: Esmolol improved haemodynamics and post-anaesthesia recovery in patients undergoing elective plastic surgery under general balanced anaesthesia.

Perioperative beta-blockers for preventing surgery-related mortality and morbidity in adults undergoing non-cardiac surgery

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have yielded conflicting results regarding the ability of beta-blockers to influence perioperative cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Thus routine prescription of these drugs in an unselected population remains a controversial issue. A previous version of this review assessing the effectiveness of perioperative beta-blockers in cardiac and non-cardiac surgery was last published in 2018. The previous review has now been split into two reviews according to type of surgery. This is an update, and assesses the evidence in non-cardiac surgery only.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of perioperatively administered beta-blockers for the prevention of surgery-related mortality and morbidity in adults undergoing non-cardiac surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Biosis Previews and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science on 28 June 2019. We searched clinical trials registers and grey literature, and conducted backward- and forward-citation searching of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs and quasi-randomized studies comparing beta-blockers with a control (placebo or standard care) administered during the perioperative period to adults undergoing non-cardiac surgery. If studies included surgery with different types of anaesthesia, we included them if 70% participants, or at least 100 participants, received general anaesthesia. We excluded studies in which all participants in the standard care control group were given a pharmacological agent that was not given to participants in the intervention group, studies in which all participants in the control group were given a beta-blocker, and studies in which beta-blockers were given with an additional agent (e.g. magnesium). We excluded studies that did not measure or report review outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risks of bias. We assessed the certainty of evidence with GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 83 RCTs with 14,967 participants; we found no quasi-randomized studies. All participants were undergoing non-cardiac surgery, and types of surgery ranged from low to high risk. Types of beta-blockers were: propranolol, metoprolol, esmolol, landiolol, nadolol, atenolol, labetalol, oxprenolol, and pindolol. In nine studies, beta-blockers were titrated according to heart rate or blood pressure. Duration of administration varied between studies, as did the time at which drugs were administered; in most studies, it was intraoperatively, but in 18 studies it was before surgery, in six postoperatively, one multi-arm study included groups of different timings, and one study did not report timing of drug administration. Overall, we found that more than half of the studies did not sufficiently report methods used for randomization. All studies in which the control was standard care were at high risk of performance bias because of the open-label study design. Only two studies were prospectively registered with clinical trials registers, which limited the assessment of reporting bias. In six studies, participants in the control group were given beta-blockers as rescue therapy during the study period.The evidence for all-cause mortality at 30 days was uncertain; based on the risk of death in the control group of 25 per 1000, the effect with beta-blockers was between two fewer and 13 more per 1000 (risk ratio (RR) 1.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89 to 1.54; 16 studies, 11,446 participants; low-certainty evidence). Beta-blockers may reduce the incidence of myocardial infarction by 13 fewer incidences per 1000 (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.87; 12 studies, 10,520 participants; low-certainty evidence). We found no evidence of a difference in cerebrovascular events (RR 1.65, 95% CI 0.97 to 2.81; 6 studies, 9460 participants; low-certainty evidence), or in ventricular arrhythmias (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.47; 5 studies, 476 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Beta-blockers may reduce atrial fibrillation or flutter by 26 fewer incidences per 1000 (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.79; 9 studies, 9080 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, beta-blockers may increase bradycardia by 55 more incidences per 1000 (RR 2.49, 95% CI 1.74 to 3.56; 49 studies, 12,239 participants; low-certainty evidence), and hypotension by 44 more per 1000 (RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.51; 49 studies, 12,304 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).We downgraded the certainty of the evidence owing to study limitations; some studies had high risks of bias, and the effects were sometimes altered when we excluded studies with a standard care control group (including only placebo-controlled trials showed an increase in early mortality and cerebrovascular events with beta-blockers). We also downgraded for inconsistency; one large, well-conducted, international study found a reduction in myocardial infarction, and an increase in cerebrovascular events and all-cause mortality, when beta-blockers were used, but other studies showed no evidence of a difference. We could not explain the reason for the inconsistency in the evidence for ventricular arrhythmias, and we also downgraded this outcome for imprecision because we found few studies with few participants.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence for early all-cause mortality with perioperative beta-blockers was uncertain. We found no evidence of a difference in cerebrovascular events or ventricular arrhythmias, and the certainty of the evidence for these outcomes was low and very low. We found low-certainty evidence that beta-blockers may reduce atrial fibrillation and myocardial infarctions. However, beta-blockers may increase bradycardia (low-certainty evidence) and probably increase hypotension (moderate-certainty evidence). Further evidence from large placebo-controlled trials is likely to increase the certainty of these findings, and we recommend the assessment of impact on quality of life. We found 18 studies awaiting classification; inclusion of these studies in future updates may also increase the certainty of the evidence.

Anaesthesiologist's Approach to Awake Craniotomy

Awake craniotomy, which was initially used for the surgical treatment of epilepsy, is performed for the resection of tumours in the vicinity of some eloquent areas of the cerebral cortex which is essential for language and motor functions. It is also performed for stereotactic brain biopsy, ventriculostomy, and supratentorial tumour resections. In some institutions, avoiding risks of general anaesthesia, shortened hospitalization and reduced use of hospital resources may be the other indications for awake craniotomy. Anaesthesiologists aim to provide safe and effective surgical status, maintaining a comfortable and pain-free condition for the patient during surgical procedure and prolonged stationary position and maintaining patient cooperation during intradural interventions. Providing anaesthesia for awake craniotomy require scalp blockage, specific sedation protocols and airway management. Long-acting local anaesthetic agents like bupivacaine or levobupivacaine are preferred. More commonly, propofol, dexmedetomidine and remifentanyl are used as sedative agents. A successful anaesthesia for awake craniotomy depends on the personal experience and detailed planning of the anaesthetic procedure. The aim of this review was to present an anaesthetic technique for awake craniotomy under the light of the literature.

Attenuation of Hemodynamic Response to Tracheal Extubation: A Comparative Study between Esmolol and Labetalol

Background and Aims

Cardiovascular stress response to extubation can result in elevated heart rate (HR) and mean arterial blood pressures which can be detrimental in high-risk patients.

Settings and Design

The objective of this study is to compare the esmolol and labetalol efficacy in attenuating hemodynamic response to tracheal extubation.

Materials and Methods

Sixty patients scheduled for elective surgical procedures were selected randomly and divided into two groups of thirty each. Group I - esmolol 1.5 mg/kg and Group II - labetalol 0.25 mg/kg were administered 2 min before extubation after following a standard perioperative anesthetic management. Hemodynamic parameters recorded include HR, systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP) at baseline, reversal, study drug, 1 min after study drug, extubation, and at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 15 min postextubation.

Statistical Analysis

Student's t-test and analysis of variance have been used to find the significance of study parameters between groups of patients. P <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Both esmolol and labetalol obtunded extubation response throughout the extubation and postextubation period. At extubation and immediately postextubation at 1^st and 2^nd min, there was statistical significance (P < 0.05) in SBP, DBP, and MAP which showed esmolol was better than labetalol. Whereas labetalol was more efficient in controlling HR at 5^th and 15^th min postextubation having statistical significance.

Conclusions

Both esmolol and labetalol attenuated hemodynamic response. Esmolol was more efficient than labetalol at extubation and immediately postextubation. If patient has tachycardia at extubation, labetalol is preferred. If patient has raised blood pressure, then esmolol is a good option in blunting the response.