Comparison of propofol-based sedation and midazolam sedation in pediatric bidirectional endoscopy conducted by pediatric gastroenterologists.

Objectives: The effectiveness and safety of propofol-based sedation and midazolam sedation in pediatric bidirectional endoscopy were compared. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the cases of pediatric patients (≤15 years old) who had undergone bidirectional endoscopy, esophagogastroduodenoscopy, and colonoscopy by pediatric gastroenterologists. Demographic data, indications, sedatives/dosages, clinical outcomes, endoscopic findings, adverse events, and total patient time requirements (total time in which patients stay in our hospital) were compared in the two sedation groups. Results: Ninety-one children (51 boys, 40 girls, mean age 13 years, range 9-15) treated at our hospital were enrolled. Propofol alone or in combination with midazolam and/or pentazocine was administered to 51 patients (propofol-based sedation group). Midazolam alone or in combination with pentazocine was administered to the other 40 patients (midazolam sedation group). In the propofol group, the following mean doses were used: propofol, 96 mg (range 40-145 mg); midazolam, 4.9 mg (range 3-5 mg); and pentazocine, 7.5 mg. In the midazolam group, the mean doses of midazolam and pentazocine were 6.2 mg (range 4-10 mg) and 15 mg, respectively. All procedures were successfully completed by pediatric gastroenterologists. The total procedure times and endoscopic findings were similar in the two groups, but the median patient time requirement in the propofol group was significantly shorter versus the midazolam group (7.3 h vs. 8.4 h, p < 0.001). No adverse events occurred in either group. Conclusions: Propofol-based sedation in pediatric bidirectional endoscopy was safely and effectively performed by pediatric gastroenterologists, and its patient time requirement was shorter than that for midazolam sedation.

Successful Use of Propofol After Failed Palliative Sedation in Patients With Refractory Symptoms.

Context: Propofol is a general anesthetic used in multiple clinical scenarios. Despite growing evidence supporting its use in palliative care, propofol is rarely used in palliative sedation. Reluctance toward the adoption of propofol as a sedative agent is often associated with fear of adverse events such as respiratory arrest. Objectives: We aimed to describe efficacy and safety of palliative sedation in refractory sedation with propofol using a protocol based on low, incremental dosing. Methods: A retrospective observational study featuring inpatients receiving sedative treatment with propofol in our palliative care unit in Madrid (Spain) between March 1, 2018 and February 28, 2023, following a newly developed protocol. Results: During the study period, 22 patients underwent sedation with propofol. Propofol was used successfully to control different refractory symptoms, mainly psychoexistential suffering and delirium. All patients had undergone previous failed attempts at sedation with other medications (midazolam or lemovepromazine) and presented risk factors for complicated sedation. All patients achieved satisfactory (profound) levels of sedation measured with the Ramsay Sedation Scale, but total doses varied greatly between patients. Most patients (17, 77%) received combined therapy with propofol and other sedative medications to harness synergies. The median time between start of sedation with propofol and death was 26.0 hours. No cases of apnea or death during induction were recorded. Conclusion: A protocol for palliative sedation with propofol based on low, incremental dosing, with the option of administering an initial induction bolus, shows excellent results regarding adequate levels of sedation, without observing apnea or respiratory depression. Our results promote the use of propofol to achieve palliative sedation in patients with refractory symptoms and risk factors for complicated sedation at the end of life.

Analysis of Oxygen Concentration in the Oral Cavity During Intravenous Sedation with Intranasal Oxygen Administration for Dental Treatment.

Purpose: Intravenous sedation (IVS) with propofol (PPF) is commonly performed in dental treatment, particular in patients with dentophobia, with gag reflex, or undergoing implant surgeries, as PPF has the advantages of rapid induction and recovery. However, PPF and other intravenous sedatives may cause respiratory depression. Thus, IVS with PPF requires oxygen administration. But airway burn may occur when high-concentration oxygen is stored in the oral cavity and catches fire. For these reasons, the present study aimed to elucidate the changes in oxygen concentration (OC) under IVS with PPF and oxygen administration. Patients and methods: Nineteen healthy male volunteers participated in the study. None of them had missing teeth, nasal congestion, or temporomandibular joint dysfunction. They were sedated with a continuous PPF infusion dose of 6 mg/kg/hr for 25 min, followed by administration of 3 L/min oxygen via a nasal cannula. The OC was measured at two sites, namely, the median maxillary anterior teeth (MMAT) and median maxillary soft palate (MMSP), before PPF infusion (baseline) and 14, 15-18 (Term 1), 19, and 20-23 (Term 2) min after the start of infusion. Results: Compared with the values at baseline, the OC in the MMSP significantly increased at each time point, whereas the OC in the MMAT significantly increased at Term 2. Furthermore, in the comparison of the OC before and after the use of a mouth prop, the OC exhibited an upward trend, but no statistically significant differences were observed between the two time points in the MMAT and MMSP. In IVS with PPF and oxygen administration, the OC in the pharynx increases as the sedative level deepens. Conclusion: Oxygen administration should be temporarily discontinued, and suction should be performed to decrease the OC in the oral cavity when sparking procedures during IVS with PPF and oxygen administration are performed.

Propofol-sparing and hemodynamic effects of guaifenesin in sheep.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the propofol-sparing and hemodynamic effects of guaifenesin administered for co-induction of anesthesia in sheep. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, blinded, two-way crossover experimental study. ANIMALS: Thirteen healthy adult female sheep. METHODS: Anesthesia was induced without premedication with intravenous (IV) guaifenesin 5% at 100 mg kg-1 (GGE) or an equivalent volume of physiologic saline (SAL), followed by IV propofol at a controlled rate (1 mg kg-1 min-1). Heart rate (HR), respiratory rate and oscillometric noninvasive arterial blood pressure (NIBP) were recorded at baseline after co-induction administration, following endotracheal intubation and every 2 minutes thereafter for 10 minutes. Propofol doses required to achieve intubation after each co-induction treatment were compared by independent Student's t-test. Values of p < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The propofol dose required (mean ± standard deviation) to achieve intubation was significantly lower (p = 0.001) in the GGE treatment (3.40 ± 0.74 mg kg-1) than in the SAL treatment (5.94 ± 1.09 mg kg-1). HR was increased after anesthetic induction compared with baseline in both treatments. HR was generally lower in the GGE treatment than in the SAL treatment. NIBP did not vary between GGE and SAL treatments. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Guaifenesin, when administered as a co-induction agent with propofol in sheep, reduces propofol dose requirements and maintains hemodynamic variables within a clinically acceptable range.

Comparative Effects of Target-Controlled Infusion of Propofol Versus Spinal and Thiopental-Sevoflurane Anesthesia on Lipid Peroxidation in Elective Cesarean Section: A Prospective, Open-Label Study.

BACKGROUND: During pregnancy, physiological changes can increase oxidative stress (OS) in both mothers and fetuses. The use of anesthesia for cesarean sections (CSs) could exacerbate this stress due to its impact on the ischemia-reperfusion effect. Our study aimed to explore the effects of target-controlled infusion of propofol on OS during CSs, and to compare these effects with those of spinal and thiopental-sevoflurane anesthesia. METHODS: The study included ninety parturients undergoing elective CS, allocated into three groups: Group S (spinal) (n = 30), Group P (propofol) (n = 30), and Group TS (thiopental-sevoflurane) (n = 30). Venous blood samples were taken from mothers at three time points, before, during, and after surgery, and one sample was taken from the umbilical vein after delivery. Blood samples were analyzed with the thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS) assay and blood gas analysis. A statistical comparison between groups was obtained by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the Wilcoxon test where appropriate. RESULTS: Levels of TBARS after the induction of anesthesia were lower in all groups compared to values preoperatively. In Group P, TBARS levels started to decrease in the first five minutes after the induction (1.90 ± 0.47; P < 0.001) and had significantly lower values compared to Group S (2.22 ± 0.21) and Group TS (2.40 ± 0.20). Two hours after surgery, TBARS values were the lowest in Group P (1.76 ± 0.15, P<0.001), compared to Group S (2.18 ± 0.24) and Group TS (2.41 ± 0.21). TBARS value in umbilical venous blood was significantly lower in Group P (1.56 ± 0.16, P < 0.001) compared to Group S (2.18 ± 0.17) and Group TS (2.09 ± 0.09). Umbilical cord venous blood gas values (pH, PCO2, HCO3, lactates, and base excess (BE)) were not different between the groups, except for PO2, which was significantly lower in Group S (20.5 ± 5.0; P < 0.001) compared to Group P (36.5 ± 19.2) and Group TS (33.5 ± 10.1). CONCLUSION: Target-controlled infusion of propofol anesthesia could be advantageous for parturients with compromised oxidative status, especially those undergoing emergency CSs when general anesthesia is required.

Intravenous esketamine as an adjuvant for sedation/analgesia outside the operating room: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: This study was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intravenous esketamine as an adjuvant for sedation or analgesia outside the operating room in adults and children. Method: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science, and Scopus were searched for potential randomized controlled studies randomized controlled trials comparing drug combinations of esketamine to any other single or combination drug regimens for sedation or analgesia outside the operating room. Results: Twenty-five studies with a total of 3,455 participants were included in this review. The pooled results of adults showed that compared with drug regimens of the control group, intravenous esketamine combinations were significantly associated with decreased risk of oxygen desaturation (RR = 0.49, 95% CI = [0.34, 0.70]); hypotension (RR = 0.38, 95% CI = [0.31, 0.46]); bradycardia (RR = 0.23, 95% CI = [0.12, 0.43]); injection pain (RR = 0.37, 95% CI = [0.25, 0.53]); body movement (RR = 0.60, 95% CI = [0.41, 0.88]); and propofol consumption (SMD = -1.38, 95% CI = [-2.64, -0.11]), but an increased risk of psychiatric symptoms (RR = 3.10, 95% CI = [2.11, 4.54]) (RR = relative risk; CI = confidence intervals; SMD = standardized mean difference). Subgroup analysis showed that only the combination of esketamine and propofol significantly reduced the above incidence of respiratory and cardiovascular adverse events in adults. In addition, the pooled results of children showed that compared with drug regimens of the control group, esketamine and propofol co-administration significantly reduced the risk of hypotension (RR = 0.59, 95% CI = [0.37, 0.95]) but increased the risk of visual disturbance (RR = 6.62, 95% CI = [2.18, 20.13]) and dizziness (RR = 1.99, 95% CI = [1.17, 3,37]). Subgroup analysis indicated that esketamine>0.5 mg/kg significantly reduced the incidence of hypotension, but increased the risk of dizziness in children. Conclusion: Intravenous use of esketamine, particularly in combination with propofol, may improve the safety and efficacy of sedation and analgesia outside the operating room, although the potential for psychiatric side effects warrants attention. Future research is recommended to investigate the role of esketamine with agents other than propofol.

Propofol Protects the Blood-Brain Barrier After Traumatic Brain Injury by Stabilizing the Extracellular Matrix via Prrx1: From Neuroglioma to Neurotrauma.

The purpose of this study is to explore the shared molecular pathogenesis of traumatic brain injury (TBI) and high-grade glioma and investigate the mechanism of propofol (PF) as a potential protective agent. By analyzing the Chinese glioma genome atlas (CGGA) and The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) databases, we compared the transcriptomic data of high-grade glioma and TBI patients to identify common pathological mechanisms. Through bioinformatics analysis, in vitro experiments and in vivo TBI model, we investigated the regulatory effect of PF on extracellular matrix (ECM)-related genes through Prrx1 under oxidative stress. The impact of PF on BBB integrity under oxidative stress was investigated using a dual-layer BBB model, and we explored the protective effect of PF on tight junction proteins and ECM-related genes in mice after TBI. The study found that high-grade glioma and TBI share ECM instability as an important molecular pathological mechanism. PF stabilizes the ECM and protects the BBB by directly binding to Prrx1 or indirectly regulating Prrx1 through miRNAs. In addition, PF reduces intracellular calcium ions and ROS levels under oxidative stress, thereby preserving BBB integrity. In a TBI mouse model, PF protected BBB integrity through up-regulated tight junction proteins and stabilized the expression of ECM-related genes. Our study reveals the shared molecular pathogenesis between TBI and glioblastoma and demonstrate the potential of PF as a protective agent of BBB. This provides new targets and approaches for the development of novel neurotrauma therapeutic drugs.

Targeted drug release from stable and safe ultrasound-sensitive nanocarriers.

Targeted delivery of medication has the promise of increasing the effectiveness and safety of current systemic drug treatments. Focused ultrasound is emerging as noninvasive and practical energy for targeted drug release. However, it has yet to be determined which nanocarriers and ultrasound parameters can provide both effective and safe release. Perfluorocarbon nanodroplets have the potential to achieve these goals, but current approaches have either been effective or safe, but not both. We found that nanocarriers with highly stable perfluorocarbon cores mediate effective drug release so long as they are activated by ultrasound of sufficiently low frequency. We demonstrate a favorable safety profile of this formulation in a non-human primate. To facilitate translation of this approach into humans, we provide an optimized method for manufacturing the nanocarriers. This study provides a recipe and release parameters for effective and safe drug release from nanoparticle carriers in the body part specified by focused ultrasonic waves.

Comparison of Propofol-Based Total Intravenous Anesthesia versus Volatile Anesthesia with Sevoflurane for Postoperative Delirium in Adult Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Surgery: A Prospective Randomized Single-Blinded Study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the incidence of delirium and early (at 1 week) postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) between propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) and volatile anesthesia with sevoflurane in adult patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). DESIGN: This was a prospective randomized single-blinded study. SETTING: The study was conducted at a single institution, the Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical Sciences and Technology, a tertiary care institution and university-level teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Seventy-two patients undergoing elective CABG under CPB participated in this study. INTERVENTIONS: This study was conducted on 72 adult patients (>18 years) undergoing elective CABG under CPB who were randomized to receive propofol or sevoflurane. Anesthetic depth was monitored to maintain the bispectral index between 40 and 60. Delirium was assessed using the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit. Early POCD was diagnosed when there was a reduction of >2 points in the Montreal Cognitive Assessment score compared to baseline. Cerebral oximetry changes using near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS), atheroma grades, and intraoperative variables were compared between the 2 groups. MEASUREMENTS & MAIN RESULTS: Seventy-two patients were randomized to receive propofol (n = 36) or sevoflurane (n = 36). The mean patient age was 59.4 ± 8.6 years. The baseline and intraoperative variables, including atheroma grades, NIRS values, hemoglobin, glycemic control, and oxygenation, were comparable in the 2 groups. Fifteen patients (21.7%) patients developed delirium, and 31 patients (44.9%) had early POCD. The incidence of delirium was higher with sevoflurane (n = 12; 34.2%) compared to propofol (n = 3; 8.8%) (odds ratio [OR], 1.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13-2.62; p = 0.027)*. POCD was higher with sevoflurane (n = 20; 57.1%) compared to propofol (n = 11; 32.3%) (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.01-2.62; p = 0.038)*. In patients aged >65 years, delirium was higher with sevoflurane (7/11; 63.6%) compared to propofol (1/7; 14.2%) (p = 0.03)*. CONCLUSIONS: Propofol-based TIVA was associated with a lower incidence of delirium and POCD compared to sevoflurane in this cohort of patients undergoing CABG under CPB. Large-scale, multicenter randomized trials with longer follow-up are needed to substantiate the clinical relevance of this observation.

Comparison of Two Intravenous Propofol Doses after Jugular Administration for Short Non-Surgical Procedures in Red-Eared Sliders (Trachemys scripta elegans).

This study compares the effects of two different doses of propofol administered intravenously (IV), in the jugular vein, to red-eared sliders (Trachemys scripta elegans). In this crossover study, 5 or 10 mg/kg propofol was administered to six Trachemys scripta elegans after cannulation of the jugular vein. Each turtle received each dose, G1 (5 mg/kg IV) and G2 (10 mg/kg IV), after a 7-day washout period. The parameters evaluated were heart rate, palpebral reflex, cloacal reflex, muscle relaxation, ease of handling, sensitivity to anterior and posterior pinch stimuli, and possibility of intubation. Additionally, respiratory rate was measured when possible, and the times from propofol administration to full recovery and from intubation to extubation were recorded. None of the turtles in G1 could be intubated, and this dose provided little relaxation and ease of handling, with a duration of effect until full recovery of 12.16 ± 8.32 (SD) min for this group. In G2, five out of the six turtles could be intubated, and the duration of effect was 32.33 ± 5.85 (SD) min. Heart rates were influenced by manipulation for catheter placement. There were statistically significant differences (p value ≤ 0.05) between the two groups in muscle relaxation degree, handling, cloacal reflex, and possibility of intubation. The 5 mg/kg propofol dose was not sufficient to induce anesthesia, even when administered in the jugular vein, in red-eared sliders. A dose of 10 mg/kg IV or higher should be used.

Research progress of propofol in alleviating cerebral ischemia/reperfusion injury.

Ischemic stroke is a leading cause of adult disability and death worldwide. The primary treatment for cerebral ischemia patients is to restore blood supply to the ischemic region as quickly as possible. However, in most cases, more severe tissue damage occurs, which is known as cerebral ischemia/reperfusion (I/R) injury. The pathological mechanisms of brain I/R injury include mitochondrial dysfunction, oxidative stress, excitotoxicity, calcium overload, neuroinflammation, programmed cell death and others. Propofol (2,6-diisopropylphenol), a short-acting intravenous anesthetic, possesses not only sedative and hypnotic effects but also immunomodulatory and neuroprotective effects. Numerous studies have reported the protective properties of propofol during brain I/R injury. In this review, we summarize the potential protective mechanisms of propofol to provide insights for its better clinical application in alleviating cerebral I/R injury.

Remimazolam has similar anesthetic effect and superior safety compared to propofol in elderly patients: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: The superiority between remimazolam and propofol for anesthesia is controversial in elderly patients (≥60 years). This meta-analysis aimed to systematically compare anesthetic effect and safety profile between remimazolam and propofol in elderly patients under any surgery. METHODS: Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and PubMed were searched until December 25, 2023 for relevant randomized controlled trials. RESULTS: Ten studies with 806 patients receiving remimazolam (experimental group) and 813 patients receiving propofol (control group) were included. Time to loss of consciousness [standard mean difference (SMD) (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.347 (-0.362, 3.055), p = 0.122] and recovery time [SMD (95% CI): -0.022 (-0.300, 0.257), p = 0.879] were similar between experimental and control groups. Mean arterial pressure at baseline minus 1 min after induction [SMD (95% CI): -1.800 (-3.250, -0.349), p = 0.015], heart rate at baseline minus 1 min after induction [SMD (95% CI): -1.041 (-1.537, -0.545), p < 0.001], incidences of hypoxemia [relative risk (RR) (95% CI): 0.247 (0.138, 0.444), p < 0.001], respiratory depression [RR (95% CI): 0.458 (0.300, 0.700), p < 0.001], bradycardia [RR (95% CI): 0.409 (0.176, 0.954), p = 0.043], hypotension [RR (95% CI): 0.415 (0.241, 0.714), p = 0.007], and injection pain [RR (95% CI): 0.172 (0.113, 0.263), p < 0.001] were lower in the experimental group compared to the control group. Postoperative nausea and vomiting was not different between groups [RR (95% CI): 1.194 (0.829, 1.718), p = 0.341]. Moreover, this meta-analysis displayed a low risk of bias, minimal publication bias, and good robustness. CONCLUSION: Remimazolam shows comparative anesthetic effect and better safety profile than propofol in elderly patients under any surgery.

Successful Second Awake Craniotomy Reoperation With Dexmedetomidine After an Initial Abandonment Case Due to Restlessness.

Awake craniotomy (AC) is sometimes aborted due to poor arousal and restlessness. Dexmedetomidine (DEX), an α2-adrenoreceptor agonist, has sedative, analgesic, and anesthetic-sparing effects, with a low risk of respiratory depression, making it effective for intraoperative pain and agitation during the awake phase. We report a case in which AC was successfully performed in combination with low-dose continuous administration of DEX during reoperation in a patient who experienced poor arousal and restlessness during their first surgery, leading to the abandonment of AC. The patient is a 48-year-old male who is scheduled for AC reoperation. Two years ago, the first AC was scheduled and performed under anesthesia with propofol and remifentanil. However, AC was abandoned due to poor intraoperative arousal and restlessness. At reoperation, general anesthesia was induced with propofol and continuous administration of remifentanil (0.1 µg/kg/min); following anesthesia induction (continuous infusion of propofol, remifentanil, and a bolus infusion of fentanyl), DEX was also administered (0.2 µg/kg/hour). We performed a scalp nerve block. Before the awake phase, the propofol dose was decreased as was DEX to 0.1 µg/kg/hour, and propofol and remifentanil were discontinued. The patient gradually awoke without any agitation and restlessness 24 min after stopping propofol and remifentanil and could perform language tasks without any complications. In this case, AC was successfully performed in combination with continuous low-dose administration of DEX at the time of reoperation in a patient who experienced poor arousal and restlessness during their first operation and had to discontinue AC.

Study on the preventive effect of dexmedetomidine on anesthetic associated sleep disturbance in young to middle-aged female patients undergoing hysteroscopy: a study protocol for a crossover randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative sleep disturbance has a potentially detrimental effect on postoperative recovery. Perioperative patients are affected by several factors. General anesthesia induces a non-physiological state that does not resemble natural sleep. Exposure to propofol/sevoflurane can lead to desynchronization of the circadian rhythm, which may result in postoperative sleep disturbance characterized by mid-cycle advancement of sleep and daytime sleepiness. Dexmedetomidine is a highly selective α2-adrenoceptor agonist with a unique sedative effect that facilitates the transition from sleep to wakefulness. Basic research has shown that dexmedetomidine induces deep sedation, similar to physical sleep, and helps maintain forebrain connectivity, which is likely to reduce delirium after surgery. The aim of this study is to evaluate the influence of exposure to the mono-anesthetic propofol on the development of postoperative sleep disturbance in young and middle-aged female patients undergoing hysteroscopy and whether prophylactic administration of dexmedetomidine influences reducing postoperative sleep disturbance. METHODS: This prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) will include 150 patients undergoing hysteroscopy at the First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University. Participants will be randomly assigned to three groups in a 1:1:1 ratio. The dexmedetomidine group will have two subgroups and will receive a nasal spray of 0.2 µg/kg or 0.5 µg/kg 25 min before surgery, while the control group will receive a saline nasal spray. Three groups will undergo hysteroscopy with propofol-based TIVA according to the same scheme. Sleep quality will be measured using a wearable device and double-blind sleep assessments will be performed before surgery and 1, 3, and 7 days after surgery. SPSS 2.0 is used for statistical analysis. A χ2 test is used to compare groups, and t-test is used to determine statistical the significance of continuous variables. DISCUSSION: The purpose of this study is to investigate the incidence of propofol-associated sleep disorders and to test a combination of dexmedetomidine anesthesia regimen for the prevention of postoperative sleep disorders. This study will help to improve patients' postoperative satisfaction and provide a new strategy for comfortable perioperative medical treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06281561. Registered on February 24, 2024.

Survival benefits of propofol-based versus inhalational anesthesia in non-metastatic breast cancer patients: a comprehensive meta-analysis.

Whether the anesthesia technique, inhalational general anesthesia (IGA) or propofol-based anesthesia (PBA), influences the long-term survival of non-metastatic breast cancer (eBC) remain unclear and controversial. We carried out a literature search on 16thJuly, 2022 for studies comparing IGA and PBA in eBC undergoing standard surgery, according to PRISMA 2020. The major endpoint in our study was overall survival (OS). Seventeen studies including four randomized clinical trials and thirteen retrospective cohort studies were included in the meta-analysis. Ten studies provided data for crude OS in unweighted eBC patients (imbalance in baseline characteristics). The summarized estimate HRs of the PBA group versus the IGA group (ten studies, N = 127,774, IGA group: 92,592, PBA group: 35,182.) was 0.83 (95%CI: 0.78-0.89). Compared with IGA, PBA was associated with both better 1-year OS (two studies, N = 104,083, IGA group: 84,074, PBA group: 20,009. Pooled HR = 0.80, 0.73-0.89) and 5-year OS (six studies, N = 121,580, IGA group: 89,472, PBA group: 32,108. HR = 0.80, 0.74-0.87). Ten studies applied PSM method to balance the baseline characteristics. In these weighted patients, PBA still showed a better OS (ten studies, N = 105,459, IGA group: 79,095, PBA group: 26,364. HR = 0.93, 0.87-1.00), a better 1-year OS (two studies, N = 83,007, IGA group: 67,609, PBA group: 15,398. HR = 0.88, 0.78-0.98) and a trend towards a better 5-year OS (nine studies, N = 121,580, IGA group: 76,797, PBA group: 24,066. HR = 0.95, 0.88-1.03). Loco-regional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS) was also better in PBA group (HR = 0.73, 0.61-0.86). The present study is the first comprehensive meta-analysis to demonstrate that propofol-based anesthesia could significantly improve OS and LRRFS in non-metastatic breast cancer patients, compared with inhalational anesthesia.

A Comparative Study of Fixed-Dose Dexmedetomidine and Propofol Infusions on Intraoperative Desflurane Consumption During Bispectral Index-Guided Laparoscopic Surgeries: A Randomized Controlled Study.

Background Desflurane is an excellent but expensive volatile anesthetic agent. Dexmedetomidine and propofol may decrease intraoperative desflurane consumption. This study aimed to compare the desflurane-sparing effect of dexmedetomidine and propofol in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries under bispectral index (BIS)-guided general anesthesia (GA). Methods Sixty-two adult patients, ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) physical status I or II, of either sex, aged between 18 and 60 years, were randomly allocated into group D or group P. Only group D patients received an intravenous (IV) bolus of dexmedetomidine (1 mcg/kg) over 15 minutes before induction. In both groups, GA was induced following the standard protocol with propofol infusion (0.5 mg/kg/min) until the BIS value dropped below 60. For maintenance, group D and group P patients received IV dexmedetomidine infusion (0.5 mcg/kg/h) and propofol infusion (50 mcg/kg/min), respectively. In both groups, desflurane dial concentration was adjusted between 3 and 8% to maintain the BIS within the range of 45-55. An hourly bolus of IV fentanyl (0.5 mcg/kg) and a half-hourly bolus of IV vecuronium (0.02 mg/kg) were administered. The total amount of desflurane consumed, duration of pneumoperitoneum, extra aliquots of propofol used during maintenance, number of boluses of IV atropine, fentanyl, and esmolol, time to attain Ramsay Sedation Score of 2 after extubation, time to first postoperative analgesic request at Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) score ≥ 4, time to reach a Modified Aldrete Score of ≥9, and incidence of any side effects were recorded. All the data were analyzed and compared using appropriate statistical tests, and a p-value of <0.05 was considered significant. Results The final data analysis was performed on 60 patients. The mean desflurane consumption was clinically higher in group P patients than in group D, but the difference was statistically insignificant (p-value > 0.05). The mean induction dose of propofol was significantly less in group D than in group P (p-value < 0.05). After extubation, the difference in time to the first analgesic request (NRS ≥ 4) between the groups was statistically significant (p-value < 0.05). Group D patients had a residual intraoperative analgesic effect. Conclusion The effects of dexmedetomidine and propofol infusions on desflurane consumption in laparoscopic surgeries are comparable, with minimal effects on intraoperative hemodynamics and postoperative recovery profiles.

Comparison of remimazolam tosilate and propofol during induction and maintenance of general anesthesia in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective, single center, randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Remimazolam tosilate (RT) is a new, ultrashort-acting benzodiazepine. Here, we investigated the efficacy and safety of RT for general anesthesia in patients undergoing Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy (LC). METHODS: In this study, 122 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomly allocated to receive either remimazolam tosilate (Group RT) or propofol group (Group P). RT was administered as a slow bolus of 0.3 mg kg- 1 for induction, followed by 1.0-2.0 mg kg- 1 h- 1 for maintenance of general anesthesia. Propofol was started at 2 mg kg- 1 and followed by 4-10 mg kg- 1 h- 1 until the end of surgery. The primary outcome was the time to bispectral index (BIS) ≤ 60. The secondary outcome included the time to loss of consciousness (LoC), and the time to extubation. Adverse events were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 112 patients were recruited for study participation. Among them, the time to BIS ≤ 60 in Group RT was longer than that in Group P (Group RT: 89.3 ± 10.7 s; Group P: 85.9 ± 9.7 s, P > 0.05). While the time to LoC comparing remimazolam and propofol showed no statistical significance (Group RT: 74.4 ± 10.3 s; Group P: 74.7 ± 9.3 s, P > 0.05). The time to extubation in Group RT was significantly longer than that in Group P (Group RT: 16.0 ± 2.6 min; Group P: 8.8 ± 4.3 min, P < 0.001). Remimazolam tosilate had more stable hemodynamics and a lower incidence of hypotension during general anesthesia. CONCLUSIONS: Remimazolam tosilate can be safely and effectively used for general anesthesia in patients undergoing Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy. It maintains stable hemodynamics during induction and maintenance of general anesthesia compared with propofol. Further studies are needed to validate the findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chictr.org.cn ChiCTR2300071256 (date of registration: 09/05/2023).

Etomidate Combined with Propofol versus Remimazolam for Sedation in Elderly Patients During Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Randomized Prospective Clinical Trial.

Purpose: Remimazolam is a novel short-acting benzodiazepine used for sedation and general anesthesia. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of remimazolam besylate in elderly patients who underwent diagnostic gastrointestinal endoscopy. Patients and Methods: A total of 120 patients aged 60-75 years were randomly allocated to one of two groups. Remifentanil 0.3µg/kg was used for analgesia. Patients were administered remimazolam besylate 7 mg (R group) or etomidate 0.1 mg/kg combined with 1% propofol 0.5 mg/kg (EP group) for induction, supplemental repeated doses were given as needed. Some time metrics, vital signs, adverse events were evaluated. Patients' Mini-cog score and recovery questionnaires were compared. Results: Compared to the EP group, the induction time was slightly longer in the R group (1.50 VS 1.15 minutes) (P<0.05), the time spent in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) was shorter (15.17 VS 17.40 minutes) (P<0.05). Compare with EP group, SBP was lower in R group at T15 and T25 time point, but heart rate was higher in T2, T3, T5 (P< 0.05). The Mini-Cog score was higher after the procedure (2.83 VS 2.58) (P<0.05). The incidence of respiratory adverse events was higher in the EP group than R group (18.3% VS 5.0%, P < 0.05). The most common adverse event in R group was hiccups. The sedation satisfaction rate and degree of amnesia were higher in the R group (66.7% VS 11.7%) (P < 0.05), and the effect on patient's life within 24 hours was lower (12.0% VS 30.5%) (P < 0.05). Conclusion: The safety and efficacy of remimazolam besylate are not inferior to those of etomidate combined with propofol, rendering it a safe option for sedation during gastrointestinal endoscopy in ASA I-II elderly patients, but care should be taken to monitor the occurrence of hiccups.

Comparison of Propofol and Sevoflurane Anaesthesia in Terms of Postoperative Nausea-Vomiting Complication in Cardiac Surgery Patients Undergoing Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol: A Prospective Randomized Study.

Objective: Postoperative nausea (PN) and vomiting (PONV) in cardiac surgery increases adrenergic stimulation, limits mobilization and oral intake, and can be distressing for patients. The primary aim of our study was to investigate the effect of sevoflurane and propofol anaesthesia on the incidence of PONV in cardiac surgery patients undergoing Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol. Methods: Following ethics committee approval, 62 patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass surgery with ERAS protocol were included in this prospective randomized study. After standard induction of anaesthesia, Group S received 1.5-2% sevoflurane and Group P received 50-100 µg kg-1 min-1 propofol infusion as maintenance anaesthetic agent with a bispectral index of 40-50. The incidence of PN and PONV between 0-6 hours (early) and 6-24 hours (late) after extubation was compared as the primary outcome. The incidence of delirium was analyzed as a secondary outcome for similar periods. Results: In the propofol group, 3 patients were excluded due to postoperative tamponade revision and prolonged mechanical ventilation. PN in the early post-extubation period (29% vs. 7.1%, P=0.031) was significantly higher in Group S. The incidence of delirium was similar between the groups in both periods. Conclusion: Propofol may reduce the incidence of PN in the first 6 hours after extubation compared with sevoflurane. We believe that this period will be beneficial for gastrointestinal tolerance as it is the period when oral intake is initiated in patients. In conclusion, propofol maintenance in cardiac surgery patients may facilitate patient rehabilitation as part of the ERAS protocol.